Loading...
2006-389-Order No. 2006-047 Recorded 4/7/2006COUNTY OFFICIAL NANCYUBLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERKOS CJ 1006389 COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 11111111 111111111 04/01/2006 02;29;14 PM 2006=38-0 DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK CERTIFICATE PAGE This page must be included if document is re-recorded. Do Not remove from original document. REVIE D L zI~' LEGAL C UNSEL DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK 11111111111 IN 111111 00482731200600237270080084 04/06/2006 D-M37 Cntm1 Stnm23 BECKEY This is a no fee document 2006.23727 NO FEE 04;05;31 PM BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON An Order Approving a Waiver of Land Use Regulations to Authorize Stanley and Donna Peterson to Use the Subject Property as Allowed When They Acquired the Property * ORDER NO. 2006-047 * WHEREAS, On November 2, 2004, the voters of the State of Oregon approved Ballot Measure 37 which added provisions to Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) Chapter 197 to require, under certain circumstances, payment of just compensation to landowners if a government land use regulation reduces property value. In lieu of just compensation, Ballot Measure 37 authorizes the governing body of a local government to modify, remove or not apply the land use regulation, and WHEREAS, Stanley and Donna Peterson made a timely demand for compensation under Measure 37 for a reduction in value to their property at 3848 Northwest Way, Redmond, Oregon due to regulations which took effect after they acquired this property, and WHEREAS, Section 8 of Measure 37 authorizes the Board, as the governing body responsible for adoption and enforcement of County regulations, to not apply the identified land use regulation that restricts the owner's use and reduces the value of the property in lieu of payment of compensation; and WHEREAS, the Board has received the report and recommendation of the County Administrator as required by DCC 14.10.090; and WHEREAS, the Board has considered the Administrator's report and the evidence presented by the parties at a Board meeting as required by DCC 14.10.090; and WHEREAS, the Board makes the following findings of facts and conclusions; 1. On November 1, 2005, Stanley and Donna Peterson filed a Measure 37 claim with the Community Development Department. 2. Claimants' property at 3848 Northwest Way, Redmond, Oregon is within Deschutes County. 3. The County Administrator has recommended that the zoning regulations for the subject property at 3848 Northwest Way, Redmond, Oregon that were not already in effect until after December 21, 1972 not be enforced in lieu of payment of just compensation to Claimant. The Administrator's report is attached and incorporated by reference into this Order as Exhibit "A." 4. The Board concurs with the Administrator's report that Stanley and Donna Peterson are the present owners of the subject property described in Exhibit "B," having acquired an interest in it and continuously owned it since December 21, 1972. The Board concurs with the Administrator's report that the current regulation, EFU-TRB zoning, if applied to the subject property, would not permit a partition on this subject property. The current regulation is a land use regulation which is not exempt from Measure 37 claims. PAGE 1 OF 3 - ORDER No. 2006-047 (04/05/06) 6. The Board concurs with the Administrator's report that an application for a partition on the subject property would be denied if the current zoning were applied. Therefore, such an application to determine enforcement of the current zoning to the Claimants' property would be futile. 7. The Board concurs with the Administrator's report that there is no evidence which demonstrates that the current procedural regulations for land divisions and development applications and approvals have reduced the value of the subject property. The Board concurs with the Administrator's report that Claimants have demonstrated that domestic water, and septic for the desired use on the subject property are feasible. Despite the lack of a precise amount of reduction in value, the loss of the ability to add an additional buildable lots from the subject property would be a substantial amount of reduction in fair market value if the regulations at the time Claimants acquired the property allowed that development; now, therefore, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, HEREBY ORDERS as follows: Section 1. The Board hereby determines, based on these findings, conclusions, and the Administrator's report in Exhibit "A," that the Peterson's claim is eligible under DCC 14.10.100. Section 2. The Board hereby elects to not apply zoning and nonexempt land use regulations to the subject properties described in Exhibit "B" in lieu of payment of just compensation under Ballot Measure 37. Claimants are hereby authorized to use the subject property as permitted at the time they acquired the property. Claimants may apply for a use of the subject property consistent with the zoning and regulations in effect at the time they acquired the property. That use shall be permitted if the subject property fully complies with all regulations in effect on December 21, 1972. The Community Development Director is hereby authorized to determine the effects that any other non-exempt regulations in effect on this date would have on Claimants' proposed development differently than current non-exempt regulations. However, the current procedural regulations for land division and development applications and approval, including, but not limited to setbacks, access, height, and landscaping requirements shall be applied. Section 3. To the extent that any law, order, deed, agreement or other legally enforceable public or private requirement provides that the subject property may not be used without a permit, license, or other form of authorization or consent, this order does not authorize the use of the subject property unless the Claimants first obtain that permit, license, or other form of authorization or consent. Section 4. This Order is a waiver of a non-exempt County land use regulation from a property determined to be claim eligible as defined in DCC 14.10.020(0) Section 5. A STATE OF OREGON WAIVER MAY BE REQUIRED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OR USE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. ALTHOUGH THE COUNTY WILL ACCEPT AND PROCESS SUBSEQUENT LAND USE APPLICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, APPROVAL MAY NOT BE GRANTED WITHOUT A VALID WAIVER FROM THE STATE PERTAINING TO STATE REGULATIONS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE PRECLUDE THE PROPOSED LAND USE. THIS WAIVER APPLIES ONLY TO THE LOCAL REGULATIONS SPECIFIED ABOVE. DESCHUTES COUNTY LACKS THE AUTHORITY TO WAIVE ANY STATE REGULATIONS OR LAWS. STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS MAY APPLY TO THE USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND A WAIVER OF SUCH LAWS AND REGULATIONS MUST BE SEPARATELY OBTAINED BY THE OWNERS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON. PAGE 2 OF 3 - ORDER No. 2006-047 (04/05/06) Section 6. This Order shall be recorded in the Deschutes County Deed Records together with portions from the deed or other instrument in Exhibits A and B sufficient to identify the subject property for recording purposes. DATED this day of April, 2006. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHU~'ES COUNTY, OREGON Z" ,e S R. LUKE, ATTEST: Recording Secretary BEV.CLARNO, VICE CHAIR MICHAEL M. DALY, COMMISSIONER PAGE 3 OF 3 - ORDER No. 2006-047 (04/05/06) Deschutes County Department of Administrative Services 1300 NW Wall St., Ste. 200, Bend, OR 97701-1947 (541) 388-6570 Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.orq TO: Board of County Commissioners From: Michael A. Maier, County Administrator DATE: April 5, 2006 RE: Measure 37 Claim - Stanley and Donna Peterson (Claimants) 3848 Northwest Way, Redmond, Oregon Introduction The County processed the initial Measure 37 claims using its brief claim form, evaluating the initial submission, asking that the Claimants furnish more evidence to complete or clarify the claim, and preparing this reportand recommendation under DCC 14.10, the Measure 37 ordinance. The County's claims process recognizes that less precise evidence of value may be sufficient to evaluate claims, since there are currently no County funds available for payment of compensation. Also, the ordinance provides further opportunities for affected neighbors to present evidence and testimony at the Board meeting when these claims are considered. This report and recommendation is intended to be a summary and evaluation of evidence in the record. The report may be attached to the Board's Order that decides Measure 37 claims, as a factual basis for the Order. Any factual changes or additions to this report from testimony or other evidence can be made part of the Board's Order. Claimants and affected parties have the opportunity to rebut this Report and provide additional relevant evidence to the Board. Also, under the County's process, Claimants must provide evidence that the desired use of the property, which may be allowed by a waiver of County regulations is feasible, i.e., not prevented by physical, utility or other development limitations of the site. Report and Recommendation - DCC 14.10.090 This is my report and recommendation on this Measure 37 claim received on November 1, 2005 when Measure 37 was in lawful effect. Claimants have paid the filing fee and submitted the County's official demand form. The property is estimated to be 12 acres. The current zoning is EFU-TRB. The Claimants' Page 1 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-047 (04/05/06) desired use is to partition the property into three residential parcels. The following is an analysis of the evidence in the record on the elements of this Measure 37 claim. Current Owner - Stanley and Donna Peterson Claimants presented a copy of a Warranty Deed to the property, dated November 7, 1973, showing that Claimants acquired title to the property on that date. However, Claimants have also submitted a Title Insurance Policy, dated December 21, 1972, as evidence that they acquired an interest in the property on this earlier date. County records confirm that Claimants have owned the property continuously since that date. Owner Date of Acquisition - December 21, 1972 The date of acquisition by the current owner is the relevant date for Board consideration of waivers under section (8) of Measure 37. The compensation section of Measure 37, section (6), uses the acquisition date of a family member to determine the extent of reduction in value for compensation. Since the County has no funds budgeted for payment of compensation, waivers that are issued by the County are limited by section (8) of Measure 37 to County land use regulations that were adopted after the later acquisition date of the current owner. If a waiver is granted as to County land use regulations which were adopted after the current owner's acquisition date, no compensation is due, even if the prior family member held the property for many years. While this may seem inconsistent, the measure was, evidently, written to encourage waivers of local and state land use regulations. Restrictive Regulation - EFU-TRB zoning. Under the terms of the ordinance, the claimant must identify County land use regulations that prevent the claimant from using the property in a way that the property could have been used at the time the property was acquired. The claimant must also show that these identified regulations cause a reduction of property value. The Claimants have identified the EFU-TRB zoning and several related land use regulations as restricting the desired use of a three-lot partition. These regulations are County land use regulations, which are subject to Measure 37 claims. The applicability of additional development standards will be Page 2 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-047 (04/05/06) determined consistent with the Board's Order when a specific land use application has been received. Non-exempt land use regulations will not be applied. Public safety regulations or others exempt under Subsection (3)E of the Measure cannot be waived. Enforcement of County Regulation - futile DCC 14.10.040(G). Measure 37 requires that an ordinance that restricts the current owner's use be "enforced" against them. There is no evidence that Claimants have applied for a land division of the property resulting in the current zoning being enforced on the subject property. Claimants have not demonstrated that submitting an application for such a land division would be futile. However, this Report confirms that such an application for the desired use would violate the current zoning and be denied. Therefore, the intent of DCC 14.10.040(G) has been met for this claim. Reduction in Value - $200,000 alleged in claim The ordinance requires that the claimant provide evidence of the amount of the claim in alleged reduction in the fair market value of the property resulting from the enforcement of the County's land use regulation. • Claimants have asserted that domestic water is available. • Claimants have asserted that septic approval is feasible in the area. • Claimants have identified Northwest Way, a county road from which access would be provided to any new lots to be established. Claimants have not submitted an appraisal on which they base their opinion of the value of their property if they were able to develop and sell additional residential lots. Assuming Claimants could obtain approval of a partition of the property, absent current zoning restrictions, the value of Claimant's property for Measure 37 purposes would be substantially reduced. Effect of County Waiver - Measure 37 clearly allows the County to waive its non-exempt land use regulations only back to the date the current owner, not family members, acquired the property: "(8) Notwithstanding any other state statute or the availability of funds under subsection (10) of this act, in lieu of payment of just compensation under this act, the governing body responsible for enacting the land use regulation may modify, remove, or not to apply the land use regulation or land use regulations to allow Page 3 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-047 (04/05/06) the property owner to use the property for a use permitted at the time the owner acquired the property."(emphasis added) 11(c) "Owner" is the present owner of the property, or any interest therein. " In this case, the present owner has continuously owned an interest in the property since 1972. This follows the effective date of PL-2, the 1970 subdivision ordinance, and PL-5, the County's first zoning ordinance. A claimant who receives a waiver must use the current process to seek the needed development permits based on the zoning in place at the time the current owner acquired the property. Except in a rare case, the current procedural requirements for handling permits are not regulations that reduce value. Therefore, the County's procedural regulations are not waived. Conclusion and Recommendation The present owners of the property submitted a claim pursuant to Measure 37 that demonstrates eligibility for their use of the subject property based on non-exempt land use regulations in effect on December 21, 1972, the date they acquired an interest in the property. There was zoning of the subject property at the time. There is some evidence in the record that some additional development on the subject property would be feasible for available domestic water, and sanitary waste disposal. The non- exempt County land use regulations that were in effect at the time Claimants acquired the property would be applied to a partition application for that use. My recommendation is that the Board approve a waiver in the form of Order attached. This Order would have the effect of waiving the non-exempt County land use regulations that were not in effect until after December 21, 1972, to allow the owners to use the subject property in a manner permitted at the time they acquired an interest in the property. In essence, the County would not apply the current EFU-TRB zoning to the Claimants' property which were not in effect when the Claimants acquired the property unless they are exempt from a Measure 37 waiver under Subsection (3)E of the Measure. This waiver is not a development permit. Claimants must apply for a partition under current regulations. Page 4 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-047 (04/05/06) Cautionary Note on Measure 37 Claimants should understand that a decision by Deschutes County may not enable them to proceed with future development or construction unless the State of Oregon has approved a Measure 37 Claim made against applicable State land use regulations. Claimants who wish to obtain information relative to their "State" claims under Measure 37 are advised to contact the State Department of Land Conservation and Development. Page 5 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-047 (04/05/06) EXHIBIT B The Township Fourteen (14) South, Range Thirteen (13) East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon: Section Thirty-two (32): Commencing at the Southwest corner of the northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (NE1/4SW1/4) of Section Thirty-two (32), Township Fourteen (14) south, Range Thirteen (13) East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes county, Oregon; thence North along the West side line a distance of 528 feet to the true point of beginning of the tract of land herein described; thence North along the West side line of said subdivision a distance of 396 feet; thence East on a line parallel to the South line of said subdivision to the East line thereof; thence South along the East line of said subdivision a distance of 396 feet; thence West on a line parallel to the south line of said subdivision to the point of beginning. Order No. 2006-047; Peterson