Loading...
2006-147-Minutes for Meeting February 01,2006 Recorded 2/23/2006DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS CJ 2006'141 NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 02/23/2006 04;39;10 PM II II III I IIIIIIIIIIIIII II III Z0-3 DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK CERTIFICATE PAGE - C7 - This page must be included if document is re-recorded. Do Not remove from original document. Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.desehutes.org MINUTES OF MEETING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2006 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St.., Bend Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Bev Clarno and Michael M. Daly. Also present was Mike Maier, County Administrator; Anna Johnson, Commissioners' Office; George Read, Will Groves, Kevin Harrison, Tom Anderson, Cathy White and Catherine Morrow, Community Development Department; Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel; Karen Tamminga, Mental Health Department; media representatives Mike Van Meter of KLCC Radio, Eugene; Jeff Mullins of KBND Radio; Chris Barker of The Bulletin; Molly Hendrickson of News Channel 21; and approximately thirty other citizens. Chair Dennis Luke opened the meeting at 10: 00 a.m. 1. Before the Board was Citizen Input. None was offered. 2. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Documents No. 2006- 041 through 2006-045, Subcontracts for Chemical Dependency Treatment Services with Pfeifer & Associates, Serenity Lane, Integrated Health Management, Central Oregon Extended Unit for Recovery, and BestCare. Karen Tamminga gave a brief overview of the item. DALY: Move approval. CLARNO: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 1 of 7 Pages VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 3. Before the Board was Consideration of the First and Second Readings and Adoption, by Emergency, of Ordinance No. 2006-013, Changing the Zoning Designation on Property Located in the Industrial Zone of the Tumalo Rural Community Zoning District. Cathy White gave an overview of the item, referring to a map of the area. The change is a reflection of a text amendment approved by the Board in 2005. The area has never been used for residential purposes; it has historically been utilized for industrial purposes. Commissioner Luke noted that there were hearings held on this but no appeals to the change were received. DALY: Move first and second readings of Ordinance No. 2006-013, by title only, declaring an emergency. CLARNO: Second. VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Chair Luke then conducted the first and second readings by title only. DALY: Move adoption of Ordinance No. 2006-013. CLARNO: Second. VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 4. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Documents No. 2006- 015 and No. 2006-016, Improvement Agreements for Infrastructure and Phase I Amenities in Caldera Springs Destination Resort. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Page 2 of 7 Pages Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Will Groves explained the applicant has applied for bonding on the development and the improvement agreements are required. The bonding amount is $10.5 million and $16.2 million, which in total are 125% of the estimated cost of the improvements. CLARNO: Move approval of Document No. 2006-015. DALY: Second. VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. CLARNO: Move approval of Document No. 2006-016. DALY: Second. VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 5. Before the Board was a Decision on an Appeal of the Hearings Officer's Denial of Application No. CU-05-20, Thornburgh Destination Resort's Application for Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Conceptual Master Plan. Catherine Morrow explained that the decision on this issue is due today. She noted that she presented a memo to the Board this morning giving an overview of the discussion points. Commissioner Luke said that one of the work sessions held earlier included some disagreement between attorneys regarding mitigation of water use. It is important to him to emphasize this aspect of the decision. Laurie Craghead said it needs to be part of the decision, and that the Board needs to find whether the feasibility of having the water should be a condition of approval for the conceptual master plan. Commissioner Clamo said this was discussed thoroughly at the various work sessions and she feels it has been properly addressed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 3 of 7 Pages Commissioner Luke disclosed that members of the DeLashmutt family were at a meeting of the Fair Board that he attended, but that he did not discuss this issue with them. Commissioners Clamo and Daly said that they also attended the dinner, along with at least 100 others, but did not speak with the DeLashmutts. Commissioner Luke read a prepared statement to the audience. (A copy of his statement is attached as Exhibit A.) Commissioner Daly said he disagrees with Commissioner Luke's statement, since this is a conceptual master plan. He added that there has been extensive discussion regarding access and there is a great deal of time between conceptual master plan and final master plan, and feels all of these issues can be addressed during that time period. He then read a prepared statement (a copy of which is attached as Exhibit B). Commissioner Clarno read a prepared statement to the audience. (A copy of this statement is attached as Exhibit C.) Commissioner Luke said the Board wants to thank staff for all of their work on this. In regard to Commissioner Clarno's statement, he stated that he agrees that the information was short of what has been required by other applicants. This lowered the standards, and he hopes that future applications are a lot more complete than this one was. Catherine Morrow said that Commissioner Daly referred to conditions as proposed by staff, and Commissioner Clamo asked for more specificity regarding overnight accommodations. She asked if staff should draft the conditions that Commissioner Clarno suggested. She added that staff needs direction to draft the findings and conditions regarding that issue. Staff and the applicant will be working together to draft the findings, but the Board has final approval of the document. Commissioner Clarno emphasized that she wants to see the 2:1 ratio consistent throughout the development process. Ms. Craghead added that a determination needs to be made as to whether the overnight accommodations can be moved to a different phase later, as long as the ratio is kept at 2:1. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 4 of 7 Pages Ms. Morrow said that per condition #22 on page 3 of 5, each phase will have overnight units to meet the ratio (A copy of her memo is attached as Exhibit D.) The question is how the County can make sure the ratio is maintained. Commissioner Daly stated that this is confusing, as it is hard to understand the difference between the conditions detailed by Community Development and the conditions Commissioner Clarno wants. Ms. Craghead said that it is possible as the development is done, some units in Phase A could be moved to another. The applicant has proposed to take some of the first ones and move them, but it is unclear where they would be moved. Ms. Morrow advised that staff can give the applicant directions on how to address this, either stated now or as a condition of approval of the final master plan. Ms. Craghead added that the conditions as drafted by staff will assure the ratio will be maintained. Commissioner Clarno said that she is comfortable with what has been suggested in this regard. Ms. Morrow stated that the Order approved by the Board was that the matter would be taken under advisement and a decision would be announced no later than February 1. The Board will have to adopt the findings and conditions when they are drafted. Statute requires that the 2:1 ration is maintained, and a condition can be written as it is required in this regard. She added that it appears that at least two Commissioners agree with this proposal. CLARNO: Move approval of the application with the conditions as substantially submitted by staff. DALY: Second. VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes no. (Split vote.) 6. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Letter Appointing Bev Clarno to the Board of Directors for Central Oregon Community Action Agency Network through December 31, 2006. DALY: Move approval. LUKE: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Page 5 of 7 Pages Wednesday, February 1, 2006 VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 7. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the Amount of $5,250.33. DALY: Move approval, subject to review. CLARNO: Second. VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-11 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 8. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-11 County Service District in the Amount of $6,939.78. DALY: Move approval, subject to review. CLARNO: Second. VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 9. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of $335,430.94. DALY: Move approval, subject to review. CLARNO: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Page 6 of 7 Pages Wednesday, February 1, 2006 VOTE: DALY: Yes. CLARNO: Aye. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 10. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA None were offered. Being no further items coming before the Board, Chair Luke adjourned the meeting at 10:50 a.m. DATED this 1St Day of February 2006 for t Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. R. Luke, h Bev Cl mo, Vice Chair Jz" 1,11411 ATTEST: chael . Daly, Co missioner Recording Secretary Attachments Exhibit A: Commissioner Luke's written statement regarding the Thornburgh Destination Resort appeal. Exhibit B: Commissioner Daly's written statement regarding the Thornburgh Destination Resort appeal. Exhibit C: Commissioner Clamo's written statement regarding the Thornburgh Destination Resort appeal. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Meeting Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 7 of 7 Pages Decision on Thornburgh First on the issue of having mitigation credits in hand before approval is granted for the conceptual master plan. I agree with the reasoning brought forth by the Central Oregon Irrigation District and the Oregon Water Resources Staff that this requirement would result is unnecessary water speculation and the moving of water rights before they were needed. I believe that the applicant, or any applicant, needs only to demonstrate that it is feasible to get the mitigation credits that would be necessary for the project at the conceptual master plan stage. The mitigation credits would have to be obtained before final approval of each phase. Access Roads; 1. The primary access road for the Southern phase of the project (Tribute) is the Cline Falls Highway. That is adequately documented in the proposal. The possible secondary access road for the Southern phase of the project is identified in the proposal but there is nothing in the record that identifies the current condition of the road, if it can be brought up to County standards, or if it is suitable for emergency vehicle or evacuation traffic. The record indicates that the Applicant has amended its right-of-way application with the BLM (serial number OR61170) to include this southern access. According to the MOU between the Applicant and the BLM, dated 28 September 2005, Thornburgh may use this roadway up to the resort boundary in Section 29, "...in its current condition and configuration." The applicant has not provided any evidence as to what the current condition and configuration is; there is no evidence that this road meets any county standard at this time. There is no evidence to suggest that the Applicant, absent a grant of right-of-way from the BLM, can make any needed improvements to this road. The outcome of the right-of-way application is subject to NEPA review. Since the criteria for this review are not part of the record, and since the decision-making body for the NEPA review is other than the county, it is entirely speculative at this point whether approval will be granted. 2. The applicant has stated that this is one project broken into two parts, the Northern (Pinnacle) and Southern (Tribute). While the applicant has identified possible access roads for the Northern part of the development, there is nothing in the file that shows that final agreements have been reached on these roads. 3. The BLM is in the process of reviewing right-of-way application for the roads providing access to the northern (Pinnacle) portion of the property via a connection to Eagle Road and, ultimately, Hwy 126. (See: serial number OR61170). This right-of-way application also includes a road across federal lands in sections 29 and 30 (T15S, R12E) to provide a connection between the northern and southern portions of the property. These connections are integral to the development of the resort as they provide primary access to the northern (Pinnacle) portion of the property, emergency secondary access and needed linkages between the southern (Tribute) and northern (Pinnacle) portions of the Exhibit Page / of 5 property. Additionally, the Applicant's traffic analysis relies on these roads being in place. Again, the outcome of the right-of-way application is subject to NEPA review. As stated above, since the criteria for this review are not part of the record, and since the decision-making body for the NEPA review is outside of the county, it is entirely speculative as to whether this Applicant can obtain the needed approvals. It is the expectation of the Board that an Applicant would be able to provide greater assurance of needed transportation access at the Conceptual Master Plan stage of a destination resort. I find that the applicant has not met their burden of proof on the secondary access road for the Southern portion of the resort. I also find that they have not met their burden of proof on the main access road for the Northern portion of the resort. I also find that a condition of approval that would allow the Applicant to prove up access at a later stage would be speculative and represent a deferred decision. Until the NEPA process is completed, there is no way of knowing if the proposed roads would even fit into the findings of the BLM or if an alternative route would better to protect the natural resources of this area. Prior applications for resorts have had the grants of right of way in place at the time of Conceptual Master Plan. I find that having agreements in place as part of the Conceptual Master Plan is necessary to establish the feasibility for the development to use these roads. 2:1 Ratio and Phasing I find that the application is not consistent with DCC 18.113.060(D)(2) and (E)(2) because the applicant has failed to show how the 2:1 ratio of individually owned residential units to visitor-oriented overnight lodging will be achieved. The applicant submitted a Corrected Table of Overnight and Density Calculations for the Conceptual Master Plan (RM Ex.2, A-1.4) and the Phasing Map (RM Ex. 13, B-1.8) that shows 150 overnight units that will consist of 50 cottages that will be built in the Tribute that will be designed with /for lockoffs. According to the Applicant, these 50 cottages could accommodate 150 overnights. The Applicant also states that, in later phases, "It is likely that these Phase A buildings will be modified so that the lockoffs will not be used on a long term basis. Thus these will only account for 50 ovemights." However, in the Table the Applicant does not subtract these lost 100 overnight units and, thus, the 2:1 ratio is not maintained. Since the Board does not know how, if or where these units could be replaced, the Board finds the applicant has not met their burden in showing consistency with this criterion. Additionally, the Table shows 25 hotel units in Phase F and 25 hotel units in Phase G, but the Phasing Plan Map (Revised B-1.8) shows no hotel in those phases. The 475 units, which are supposedly overnight units, apparently consist of 50 hotel rooms, 150 overnight units contained in 50 cottages and then another unidentified 275 units. According to the Table, the 50 hotel rooms are to be built in the last two phases of the resort (Phases F and G) in the Pinnacle Area and in the southwest corner of the Tribute along Barr Road. The maps, though, show all the hotel rooms in the Pinnacle. Because Exhibit- ---,/4-Page -7- of 3 of the apparent confusion in the Applicant's materials, I find that the Applicant has failed to meet the 2:1 lodging ratio. The phasing criterion of 18.113.060(D)(2) states that if the resort is to be developed in phases, each phase shall be as described in the Conceptual Master Plan (CMP). The applicant has failed to provide a phasing plan and map that will allow the Board and staff to review the final master plan to determine consistency with the CMP. As described above, the phasing plan table does not show in which phase the units to replace the 100 overnights would be and the hotel units shown in the table are not consistent with the phasing map. Staff is obligated to determine if future land use approvals are consistent with the Conceptual Master Plan. There is insufficient specificity in the phasing and 2:1 ratio proposal for the Board and staff to determine if a future Final Master Plan will be consistent with the Conceptual Master Plan. I find that it is not the Board's obligation to create conditions that would determine the applicant's phasing plan. It is the applicant's burden of proof to create a detailed Conceptual Master Plan that will be the basis for future land use approvals. The applicant also submitted in its final argument a revised Table that changes the phases for the various overnight lodging units. The Board finds that the table is new evidence that was not allowed by the agreed upon schedule and, therefore, cannot be considered. Dennis R. Luke Deschutes County Commissioner Exhibit Page of Decision on the Thornburg Destination Resort application Feb. 1, 2006 After having reviewed the extensive record on this application I feel the applicants have done a remarkable job of addressing the concerns brought up by the appellants. This property was mapped for a destination resort in 1992. The Original zoning decision was made through a very public process. As long as the applicants comply with the law, then we have no basis to deny this request based on a zoning issue. My vote will be to approve the proposed resort subject to the applicant being able to comply with the Conditions of approval proposed by the staff of the Deschutes County Planning department. Mike Daly Deschutes County Commissioner Exhibit 46 Page of } STATEMENT RE: THORNBURGH RESORT February 1, 2006 Bev Clarno Under the issue of water I find that the applicants have shown that they can meet these criteria due to evidence given by the applicants at the hearing and because of the applicant's final argument that they have acquired sufficient water rights that can be converted to sufficient mitigation credits to develop and maintain this resort. The feasibility is attainable by the condition of approval as proposed by staff. My findings on the southern temporary emergency access are that the applicants have shown that they have the necessary access grant from the BLM. The evidence for this is the 1979 letter in the record to the Bennetts from the BLM that shows that the road is a public right of way. I also find that it is feasible for them to comply with the roads standards for emergency vehicles with the condition of approval as proposed by staff. My finding on the issue of the northern access is that the applicants have shown that it is feasible for the applicants to get that access based on the BLM letter stating that the access appears to be reasonable and will balance the BLM goals for public lands. However it is feasible only with the condition that they must submit all BLM access grants, including approval allowing the road construction to county standards, at the time of Final Master Plan application. I find that the applicants have met the requirement to keep open space requirements in perpetuity based on the applicant's submission of the CC&R's, a condition that the open space must be designated on the plat and their arguments regarding the necessity for county approval for any changes to the open space as submitted. I find that, with the conditions proposed by staff, that the applicants can meet the 2 to 1 ratio in each phase cumulatively with all previous phases. This ratio is feasible if a a condition is imposed whereby the initial 150 lockout units in phase A remain throughout the development of the resort and are not changed as the applicant indicates indicates on its phasing chart. Although the phasing map and phasing chart submitted by the applicant do not match, both show that phasing and the 2 to 1 ratio is possible. This is because a condition of approval can be included that requires the chart be altered to match the map and because the chart showed that at final build out the 2 to 1 ratio is met. Thus, it is merely a matter of moving the overnight lodging numbers around in the phases. It is not necessary to show what type of housing units will meet the overnight lodging requirement as long as they are designated on the tentative and final plats for each phase and designated in the land use approval at the time of tentative plan approval. The approval of the 2:1 ratio was most difficult to arrive at simply because the applicant submitted inconsistent information, which was pointed out by the opponents, and applicants failed to see their error until staff directed the applicant's attention to it. The applicants did not admit to the error until their final argument. Exhibit Page / of. As this was my first goal 8 destination resort application I found it difficult to arrive at a final determination on the issues due to the applicants incomplete and inconsistent submittals. Because ORS 197.522 requires local governments to approve an application if appropriate conditions of approval can be drafted, therefore I must approve this application, with these conditions and other conditions as may be suggested by staff.. Therefore as stated above I will support approval of this application with these conditions and conditions as imposed by staff. Exhibit C Page 7 of Chapter 197 - Comprehensive Land Use Planning Coordination Page 55 of 92 (a) For urban or urbanizable land: (A) That application of existing development ordinances or regulations and other applicable law is inadequate to prevent irrevocable public harm from development in affected geographical areas; (B) That the moratorium is sufficiently limited to ensure that a needed supply of affected housing types and the supply of commercial and industrial facilities within or in proximity to the city, county or special district are not unreasonably restricted by the adoption of the moratorium; (C) Stating the reasons alternative methods of achieving the objectives of the moratorium are unsatisfactory; (D) That the city, county or special district has determined that the public harm which would be caused by failure to impose a moratorium outweighs the adverse effects on other affected local governments, including shifts in demand for housing or economic development, public facilities and services and buildable lands, and the overall impact of the moratorium on population distribution; and (E) That the city, county or special district proposing the moratorium has determined that sufficient resources are available to complete the development of needed interim or permanent changes in plans, regulations or procedures within the period of effectiveness of the moratorium. (b) For rural land: (A) That application of existing development ordinances or regulations and other applicable law is inadequate to prevent irrevocable public harm from development in affected geographical areas; (B) Stating the reasons alternative methods of achieving the objectives of the moratorium are unsatisfactory; (C) That the moratorium is sufficiently limited to ensure that lots or parcels outside the affected geographical areas are not unreasonably restricted by the adoption of the moratorium; and (D) That the city, county or special district proposing the moratorium has developed a work plan and time schedule for achieving the objectives of the moratorium. (4) No moratorium adopted under subsection (3)(a) of this section shall be effective for a period longer than 120 days, but such a moratorium may be extended provided the city, county or special district adopting the moratorium holds a public hearing on the proposed extension and adopts written findings that: (a) Verify the problem giving rise to the need for a moratorium still exists; (b) Demonstrate that reasonable progress is being made to alleviate the problem giving rise to the moratorium; and (c) Set a specific duration for the renewal of the moratorium. No extension may be for a period longer than six months. (5) Any city, county or special district considering an extension of a moratorium shall give the department at least 14 days' notice of the time and date of the public hearing on the extension. [1980 c.2 §3; 1991 c.839 §3; 1995 c.463 §3] 197.522 Local government to approve subdivision, partition or construction; conditions. A local government shall approve an application for a permit, authorization or other approval necessary for the subdivision or partitioning of, or construction on, any land that is consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable land use regulations or shall impose reasonable conditions on the application to make the proposed activity consistent with the plan and applicable regulations. A local government may deny an application that is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable land use regulations and that cannot be made consistent through the imposition of reasonable conditions of approval. [1999 c.838 §4] 197.524 Local government to adopt moratorium or public facilities strategy following pattern or practice of delaying or stopping issuance of permits. (1) When a local government engages in a pattern or practice of delaying or stopping the issuance of permits, authorizations or approvals necessary for the subdivision or partitioning of, or construction on, any land, including delaying or stopping issuance based on a shortage of public facilities, the local government shall: Exhibit G Page 3 of http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/197.html 2/l/2006 Community Development Department f y Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division t t 4;~ is }q, 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925 (541)388-6575 FAX(541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ MEMORANDUM DATE: February 1, 2006 TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Catherine Morrow, Kevin Harrison, Devin Hearing RE: Thornburgh Destination Resort - Suggested Conditions of Approval Based on information obtained at the Board of County Commissioners public hearing of December 20, 2005 and through subsequent rebuttal, applicant final argument submittals and discussions with the Board and legal staff, the Planning Division Staff amends our recommendations for conditions of approval to include the following. The changes in bold are to the proposed conditions that were presented to the Board in Memorandum Number 5 dated January 6, 2006. Approval is based upon the submitted plan. Any substantial change to the approved plan will require a new application. 2. All development in the resort shall require tentative plat approval through Title 17 of the County Code, the County Subdivision/Partition Ordinance, and/or Site Plan Review through Title 18 of the County Code, the Subdivision Ordinance. 3. The applicant shall provide a signed grant of right-of-way from the U. S. Department of the Interior - Bureau of Land Management for an access easement connection to U.S. Highway 126, prior to submission of a Final Master Plan application. 4. Subject to U. S. Department of the Interior - Bureau of Land Management (BLM) approval, any secondary emergency ingress/egress across the BLM owned land or roadways shall be improved to a minimum width of 20 feet with an all weather surface capable of supporting a 60,000 lb. fire vehicle. Emergency secondary resort access roads shall be improved before any Final Plat approval or issuance of a building permit, whichever comes first. 5. The applicant shall submit a copy of the Final Archeological Report for land within each phase of the development, as part of any application for Tentative Subdivision Plat or Site Plan Review, whichever is appropriate. 6. The developer will design and construct the road system in accordance with Title 17 of the Deschutes County Code (DCC). Road improvement plans shall be approved by the Road Department prior to construction. 7. All easements of record or right-of-ways shall be shown on any final plat. 8. All new proposed road names must be reviewed and approved by the Property Quality Services Performed with Pride Exhibit e-- Page of _ Address Coordinator, prior to final plat approval. 9. Plan review and approval of water supply plans for phase 1 will be required by Oregon Department of Human Services-Drinking Water Program (DHS-DWP) prior to Final Master Plan approval. 10. The applicant shall designate the location of all utility lines and easements that burden the property on the FMP. 11. The Resort shall comply with the appropriate and current water regulations as defined in state law and administered by the OWRD and receive a groundwater permit from OWRD. The applicant shall provide at the time of tentative plat/site plan review for each individual phase of the resort development, an updated documentation of established state water right and an accounting of the full amount of mitigation, as required under the water right, for that individual phase. 12. At the time of submission for Final Master Plan (FMP), the applicant shall include a written plan for entering into cooperative agreements with owners of existing wells within a two mile radius of the applicant's wells. The plan shall include a description of how the applicant will provide notice to affected well owners and of the terms and conditions of an option for well owners to enter into a written agreement with the applicant under which the applicant will provide indemnification to well owners in the event of actual well interference as a result of the applicants water use. The plan shall remain in effect for a period of five years following full water development by the applicant. Specific terms and conditions of the plan shall be developed in cooperation with County staff and the Oregon Water Resources Department. 13. All portions of the proposed resort must be managed and operated in an integrated manner. Failure to comply with this standard will void resort approval. 14. Commercial, cultural, entertainment or accessory uses provided as part of the destination resort shall be contained within the development and shall not be oriented to public roadways. Commercial, cultural and entertainment uses allowed within the destination resort shall be incidental to the resort itself. As such, these ancillary uses shall be permitted only at a scale suited to serve visitors to the resort. Compliance with this requirement shall also be included as a condition of FMP approval. 15. The applicant shall specify all recreational facilities within the proposed resort as part of final master plan submittal. 16. The applicant and its successors shall guarantee that all open space used to meet the 50% open space requirement of Section 18.113.060(D)(1). To ensure compliance with this section, the applicant shall complete the following: A. The applicant shall submit for approval, as part of Final Master Plan approval, a delineation of the Open Space that is substantially similar to the area delineated in the Open Space Plan submitted as Ex. 9, B-14 to the " Memorandum of Applicant, in response to public comments dated September 28, 2005, Open Space shall be used and maintained as "open space areas" that term is used in DCC 18.113.030(E). B. The CC&Rs, as modified and submitted to the County on December 20, 2005, shall be further revised as follows: BOCC Conditions-memo-draft-2-1.doc Page 2 of 5 Exhibit C Page ' of r In Section 3.4, retain the first two sentences, but then replace the balance of 3.4 with the following: At all times, the Open Space shall be used and maintained as "open space areas". The foregoing sentence is a covenant and equitable servitude which runs with the land in perpetuity and is for the benefit of all of the Property, each Owner, the Declarant, the Association, and the Golf Club. All of the foregoing entities shall have the right to enforce covenant and equitable servitude. This Section 3.4 may not be amended except if approved by an affirmative vote of all Owners, the declarant, the Golf Club and the Association. C. All deeds conveying all or any part of the subject property shall include the following restriction: This property is part of the Thornburgh Resort and is subject to the provisions of the Master Plan for Thornburgh Resort and the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of Thornburgh Resort. The Master Plan and the Declaration contain a delineation of open space areas which shall be maintained as open space areas in perpetuity. D. All open space areas shall be clearly delineated and labeled on the Final Plat. E. Any substantial change to the open space approved under this decision, will require a new land use permit. 17. The applicant shall obtain an approved Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) permit (as described in DCC 18.113.070(L)), prior to application for Final Master Plan. 18. All temporary structures shall be limited to a maximum of 18 months on the resort site. 19. All development within the proposed resort shall meet all fire protection requirements of the Redmond Fire Department. Fire protection requirements shall include all minimum emergency ingress/egress roadway improvements. 20. No development shall be allowed on slopes of 25% or more on the site. 21. Applicant shall implement a "Wildfire/Natural Hazard Protection Plan" for the resort, as identified in Ex. 15, 8-29 of the burden of proof statement. 22. Each phase of the development shall construct overnight lodging units to meet the 150 overnight lodging unit and 2:1 ratio of individually owned units to overnight lodging units standards set out in DCC 18.113.060(A)(1) and 18.113.060(D)(2). Individually owned units shall be considered visitor oriented lodging if they are available for overnight rental use by the general public for at least 45 weeks per calendar year through one or more central reservation and check-in services. In lieu of construction, the applicant may provide financial assurance for construction of the required overnight lodging. In addition to complying with the specific requirements of DCC 18.113.050(U), 1- 5, the applicant, its successors and assigns shall at all times maintain (1) a registry of the individually owned units subject to deed restriction under DCC 18.113.070 (U)(2), requiring they be available for overnight lodging purposes, (2) BOCC Conditions-memo-draft-2-1.doc Page 3 of 5 Exhibit Page of _ X an office in a location reasonably convenient to resort visitors as a reservation and check-in facility at the resort, (3) a separate telephone reservation line and a website in the name of "Thornburgh Resort:, to be used by members of the public to make reservations. As an alternative to or in addition to (3), the applicant may enter into an agreement with a firm (booking agent) that specializes in the rental or time-sharing of resort property, providing that the applicant will share the information in the registry required by (1) and cooperate with the booking agent to solicit reservations for available overnight lodging at the resort. If the applicant contracts with a booking agent, the applicant and the booking agent shall cooperate to ensure compliance with the requirements of DCC 18.113.070(0)(5), by filing a report on January 1 of each year with the Deschutes County Planning Division. 23. The applicant shall submit complete covenants, conditions and restrictions to the county prior to Final Master Plan approval. The final covenants, conditions and restrictions adopted by the developer and amendments therto shall conform in all material respects to this decision and the requirements of the DCC. 24. No permission to use or improve Barr Road as access to the Resort is given or implied by this decision. 25. Applicant shall complete annexation of the property into Deschutes County Rural Fire Protection District No.1 before commencing combustible construction. 26. Applicant shall submit a detailed erosion control plan with the first Tentative Plat or Site Plan, whichever comes first. 27 Lot size, width, coverage, off street parking and setbacks including solar setbacks are permitted as described in Applicant's Exhibit 8, B-24a in the Burden of Proof document. All multi-family units, commercial structures, and other resort facilities are exempted from the requirements of meeting the solar setback standards. Lot frontage shall be as described in DCC 17.36. 28. The Applicant shall abide at all times with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with BLM regarding mitigation of impacts on surrounding federal lands, to include wildlife mitigation. (dated 9128105). 29. The Applicant shall abide at all times with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), regarding required improvements and contributions to improvements on ODOT administered roadways (Agreement Number 22759, dated 10110105). 30. Applicant shall submit a detailed traffic circulation plan, delineating resort access roads, resort internal circulation roads and resort secondary emergency ingress/egress roads, prior to Final Master Plan approval. 31. All exterior lighting must comply with the Deschutes County Covered Outdoor Lighting Ordinance per Section 15.10 of Title 15 of the Deschutes County Code (DCC). 32. No permission to install a helicopter landing zone (helipad) at the Resort is given or implied by this decision. BOCC Conditions-memo-draft-2-1.doc Page 4 of 5 Exhibit ` - Page of 33. The Resort shall, in the first phase, provide for the following: A. At least 150 separate rentable units for visitor-oriented lodging. B. Visitor-oriented eating establishments for at least 100 persons and meeting rooms which provide eating for at least 100 persons. C. The aggregate cost of developing the overnight lodging facilities and the eating establishments and meeting rooms required in DCC 18.113.060(A)(1) and (2) shall be at least $2,000,000 (in 1984 dollars). D. At least $2,000,000 (in 1984 dollars) shall be spent on developed recreational facilities. E. The facilities and accommodations required by DCC 18.113.060 must be physically provided or financially assured pursuant to DCC 18.113.110 prior to closure of sales, rental or lease of any residential dwellings or lots. BOCC Conditions-memo-draft-2-1.doc Page 5 of 5 Exhibit Page 0 f- Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.ory, MEETING AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 10:00 A.M., WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 2006 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building 1300 NW Wall St.., Bend 1. CITIZEN INPUT This is the time provided for individuals wishing to address the Board regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Visitors who wish to speak should sign up prior to the beginning of the meeting on the sign-up sheet provided. Please use the microphone and also state your name and address at the time the Board calls on you to speak. 2. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Documents No. 2006-041 through 2006- 045, Subcontracts for Chemical Dependency Treatment Services with Pfeifer & Associates, Serenity Lane, Integrated Health Management, Central Oregon Extended Unit for Recovery, and BestCare - Lori Hill or Karen Tamminga, Mental Health Department 3. CONSIDERATION of the First and Second Readings and Adoption, by Emergency, of Ordinance No. 2006-013, Changing the Zoning Designation on Property Located in the Industrial Zone of the Tumalo Rural Community Zoning District - Catharine White, Community Development 4. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Documents No. 2006-015 and 2006-016, Improvement Agreements for Infrastructure and Phase I Amenities in Caldera Springs Destination Resort - Will Groves, Community Development 5. A DECISION on an Appeal of the Hearings Officer's Denial of Application No. CU-05-20, Thornburgh Destination Resort's Application for Approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Conceptual Master Plan - Catherine Morrow, Community Development Department Board of Commissioners' Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 1 of 7 Pages 6. CONSIDERATION of Signature of a Letter Appointing Bev Clarno to the Board of Directors for Central Oregon Community Action Agency Network through December 31, 2006 CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 7. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the Amount of $5,250.33. CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-H COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 8. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District in the Amount of $6,939.78. RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 9. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of $335,430.94. 10. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY. Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. FUTURE MEETINGS: (Please note: Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.) Board of Commissioners' Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 2 of 7 Pages Wednesday February 1, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:00 P.M. Conference Call with Federal Lobbyist Monday, February 6, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Work Session 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:30 p.m. Local Public Safety Coordinating Council (LPSCC) Regular Meeting Tuesday February 7, 2006 1:30 p.m. Regular Update of Inside Deschutes County Video Newsmagazine Wednesday, February 8, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Forestry Specialist 1:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Road Department 2:15 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of Solid Waste 3:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Health Department 4:15 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Mental Health Department Thursday, February 9, 2006 3:00 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting of the Fair Board, at the Fair & Expo Office Monday February 13, 2006 11:30 a.m. Regularly Scheduled Update Meeting with Department Heads 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of Community Development Thursday, February 16, 2006 9:00 a.m. Public Hearing regarding Conditional Use Permit (Applicant: Lundgren) Monday February 20, 2006 Most County offices will be closed to observe Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Board of Commissioners' Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 3 of 7 Pages Tuesday, February 21, 2006 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Fair & Expo Center Wednesday, February 22, 2006 9:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the Director of Tax & Finance 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Parole & Probation Department, at Parole & Probation 2:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Juvenile Community Justice Department, at Juvenile 3:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Sheriff, at the Sheriffs Office Monday, February 27, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Work Session 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:00 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Commission on Children & Families, at CCF Wednesday, March 1, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting Thursday, March 2, 2006 1:30 p.m. Regular Update of Inside Deschutes County Video Newsmagazine Monday, March 6, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Work Session 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison Wednesday, March 8, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting Board of Commissioners' Meeting Agenda Page 4 of 7 Pages Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Thursday, March 9, 2006 7:00 a.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Redmond City Council, Redmond Fire Hall 3:00 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting of the Fair Board, at the Fair & Expo Office Monday, March 13, 2006 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of Community Development Wednesday, March 15, 2006 9:00 a.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Health Department 1:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Forestry Specialist 1:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Road Department 2:15 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of Solid Waste 3:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Mental Health Department Monday, March 20, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Work Session 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison Tuesday, March 21, 2006 3:00 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Fair & Expo Center Wednesday, March 22, 2006 9:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the Director of Tax & Finance 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with Parole & Probation 2:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Sheriff Monday, March 27, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Work Session 2:00 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:00 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Commission on Children & Families 3:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with Juvenile Community Justice Board of Commissioners' Meeting Agenda Page 5 of 7 Pages Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Wednesday, March 29, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting Monday, April 3, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Work Session 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:30 p.m. Local Public Safety Coordinating Council (LPSCC) Regular Meeting Wednesday, April 5, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting Thursday, April 6, 2006 8:00 a.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Sisters City Council, Sisters City Hall Monday, April 10, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Work Session 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of Community Development Tuesday, April 11, 2006 1:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of Information Technology Wednesday, April 12, 2006 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Forestry Specialist 1:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Road Department 2:15 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of Solid Waste 3:30 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Health Department 4:15 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Mental Health Department Thursday, April 13, 2006 12:00 noon Regular Meeting of the Audit Committee Board of Commissioners' Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 6 of 7 Pages Monday, April 17, 2006 12:00 noon Regularly Scheduled Update Meeting with Department Heads 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison Tuesday, April 18, 2006 3:00 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Director of the Fair & Expo Center Monday, April 24, 2006 9:00 a.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the District Attorney 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Work Session 1:30 p.m. Administrative Liaison 3:00 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Commission on Children & Families 3:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with Juvenile Community Justice Wednesday, April 26, 2006 9:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the Director of Tax & Finance 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with Parole & Probation 2:45 p.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Sheriff Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible. Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY. Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information. Board of Commissioners' Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 1, 2006 Page 7 of 7 Pages