Loading...
2006-960-Order No. 2006-115 Recorded 9/29/2006ANCY NUBLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK DS yJ ~Y0~-960 COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL „1„„„ ,.1„1.,1 I,,,.,, 11 , all 09/19/1006 11:18:19 AM 2006-960 Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes County Clerk Certificate Page If this instrument is being re-recorded, please complete the following statement, in accordance with ORS 205.244: Re-recorded to correct [give reason] previously recorded in Book or as Fee Number and Page , REVIE D DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS 1006'65559 NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK LEGAL COUNSEL 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 NO FEE 00497763200600655590090091 09/28/2006 09:08:14 AM D-M37 Cntal Stn=4 TM This is a nofss document BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON An Order Approving a Waiver of Land Use Regulations to Authorize Thomas and Sally Foster * ORDER NO. 2006-115 to Use the Subject Property as Allowed When They Acquired the Property 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, Thomas and Sally Foster made a timely demand for compensation under Measure 37 for a reduction in value to her property at 64635 Old Bend Redmond Hwy., Bend, 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; On May 3, 2006, Thomas and Sally Foster filed a Measure 37 claim with the Community Development Department. 2. The property is located at 64635 Old Bend Redmond Hwy., Bend, Oregon and is within Deschutes County. 3. The County Administrator has recommended that the zoning regulations for the subject property that were not already in effect until after May 16, 1974 as to Tax Lots 309 and 310 and November 16, 1976 as to Tax Lot 313 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 Thomas and Sally Foster are present owners of the subject property described in Exhibit "B," having acquired an interest in it and continuously owned it since May 16, 1974 as to Tax Lot 309 and 310 and November 3, 1976 as to Tax Lot 313. The County finds and concludes as set forth below. PAGE 1 of 3- ORDER No. 2006-115 (09/25/06) The Board concurs with the Administrator's report that the current land use regulations, Exclusive Farm Use, Tumalo/Redmond/Bend subzone„ if applied to the subject property, would not permit a residential subdivision on this subject property. The current regulation is a land use regulation which is not exempt from Measure 37 claims. 6. The Board concurs with the Administrator's report that an application for a residential subdivision 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 have reduced the value of the subject property. 8. The Board concurs with the Administrator's report that Claimants have demonstrated that domestic water and access for the desired use on the subject property are feasible. However, these matters can and would be evaluated in connection with a development application. Despite the lack of a precise amount of reduction in value, the loss of the ability to develop a residential subdivision on 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 claim is eligible under DCC 14.10.100. Section 2. The Board hereby elects to not apply nonexempt County land use regulations, to the subject properties described in Exhibit "B" in lieu of payment of just compensation under Ballot Measure 37. Claimants may apply for a use of the subject property consistent with the substantive land use regulations in effect at the time they first acquired the property. That land use shall be permitted if the subject property fully complies with all substantive land use regulations in effect on May 16, 1974 as to Tax Lots 309 and 310 and November 3, 1976 as to Tax Lot 313. The Community Development Director is hereby authorized to determine the effects that any exempt land use regulations, as listed in ORS 197.352(3)(A)-(D), would have on Claimants' proposed use. As used in this section, "land use regulations" refer to those listed in ORS 197.352(11) (B). The Board does not waive current procedural regulations. Procedural regulations are those which set forth the system, method, or way of processing land use applications, such as the requirement to submit a certain form. Substantive land use regulations which are waived are those which regulate the actual use of the land, including those listed in ORS 197.352(11)(B), and including regulations such as minimum lot sizes, density restrictions, setbacks not protecting public safety, and height limits. The Board does not waive exempt regulations which include those described in ORS 197.352(3), but the provisions of ORS 197.352(3)(E) is subject to this Board's order as to date of acquisition for Thomas and Sally Foster. 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). PACE 2 of 3- ORDER No. 2006-115 (09/25/06) 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. Section 7. 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 September, 2006. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCH~JES COUNTY, OREGON R. LUKE, ATTEST: (51~ (6~ Recording Secretary PAGE 3 of 3- ORDER No. 2006-115 (09/25/06) 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.org TO: Board of County Commissioners From: David Kanner, County Administrator RE: Measure 37 Claim - Thomas and Sally Foster (Claimant) 64635 Old Bend Redmond Hwy, Bend, OR Introduction DATE: September 14, 2006 The County processed the initial Measure 37 claims using its brief claim form, evaluating the submission, and preparing this report and 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 which 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 May 3, 2006, when Measure 37 was in lawful effect. Claimants have paid the filing fee and submitted the County's official demand form. The property is about 25 acres. The current zoning is Exclusive Farm Use, EFU - TRB Tumalo/Redmond/Bend subzone with a farm use minimum lot size. The Claimants' desired use is a residential subdivision and Claimants allege a reduction in value of approximately $450,000 due to the Page 1 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-115 inability to develop the property as desired. The following is an analysis of the evidence in the record on the elements of this Measure 37 claim. Current Owner - Thomas and Sally Foster The property was initially acquired by Thomas and Sally Foster in two separate transactions. First, on May 16, 1974 they acquired what is identified in the claims as Tax Lots 309 and 310. They acquired additional property, Tax Lot 313 on November 3, 1976. The property which is the subject of this claim was transferred by Claimants into a revocable trust on April 28, 1995. The County has previously taken the position that the creators of a revocable trust have the authority to dissolve the trust and retake title to trust property and that for Measure 37 purposes are treated as the owners of such property. Based upon the foregoing, it appears that Claimants have had an interest in the subject property since 1974, as to Tax Lots 309 and 310 and 1976 as to Tax Lot 313.. Owner Date of Acquisition - May 16, 1974, November 3, 1976. 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. The first date that Thomas and Sally Foster acquired an interest is the date of the two deeds submitted with the claim, May 16, 1974 and November 3, 1976. Thus Claimant has "an interest" for Measure 37 purposes and such interest first arose in 1974 and 1976. Restrictive Regulation - Exclusive Farm Use - EFU - TRB Tumalo/Redmond/Bend subzone with 23 irrigated acre minimum lot size. 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 he or she otherwise could have used the property at the time the property was acquired, and thus reduce the value of the claimant's property. Page 2 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-115 The Claimants have identified the County's EFU-TRB zoning, Tumalo/Redmond/Bend subzone, as restricting Claimants' ability to develop the property as a residential subdivision. Pursuant to PL-5, the County's original zoning ordinance, adopted in 1971, these properties could have been divided into lots as small as five acres under the A-1 zone. Subsequently, a new County zoning ordinance, PL-15, was adopted in 1979, together with associated zoning maps, which designated the subject property as exclusive farm use with a 20-acres minimum lot size. While the county would need to evaluate any land use application that may be submitted pursuant to regulations in effect at the time Claimants first acquired an interest in the property, based upon zoning in effect in 1974 and 1976, development of the property for a residential subdivision would have been allowed. Enforcement of County Regulation - futile DCC 14.10.040(G). Measure 37 requires that an ordinance which restricts the current owner's use be "enforced" against them. There is no evidence that Claimants have applied for a residential subdivision on the property resulting in the current zoning being enforced on the subject property. Claimants have not demonstrated that submitting an application today for a residential subdivision would be futile.. However, this report confirms that such an application for such a development 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 - $450,000 alleged on Claim Form 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 a County's land use regulation that was first adopted or applied after the claimant first acquired the property. • Claimants have asserted that domestic water by means of individual wells is available for the desired subdivision. • Claimants have also asserted that individual septic systems would be feasible for each new lot for siting residential dwellings. • Claimants have asserted that access could be obtained from Old Bend Redmond Hwy. • Claimants have submitted no evidence of reduction in value based upon application of County land use regulations. Claimants' alleged reduction in value appears to be based upon the assumption that a buildable lot for nonfarm residential use would be fully marketable and useable by others for such use. Referring to a recent Opinion of the Oregon Attorney General, rights obtained under Measure 37 are personal to the Page 3 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-115 present property owner. Assuming an owner, having obtained the necessary "waivers" from the County and the State, could develop the property for a nonfarm dwelling, future owners would, according to the Attorney General, be precluded from using the property in a manner inconsistent with land use regulations in effect at the time of the transfer. Thus, the amount of reduction in value asserted by the Claimants may be unreliable, if the resulting dwelling is unusable by future owners, based on their having to comply with zoning regulations in place when such future owners acquire the property. Assuming without deciding Claimants could have obtained approval of a residential subdivision on the property on the date they first acquired an interest in the property, but not under zoning restrictions adopted after Claimants' acquisition date, and the resulting lots are fully marketable and useable by future owners, then the value of Claimants' property for Measure 37 purposes would be reduced. Consistent with the County's procedural ordinance, Chapter 14.10, this report takes no position on whether a waiver obtained by a claimant and any resulting development approval are fully transferable with the property. 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 owners, 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 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, Thomas and Sally Foster have continuously owned an interest in Tax Lots 309 and 310 since 1974 and in Tax Lot 313 since 1976. 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 owners 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 Page 4 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-115 The present owner of the property has submitted a claim pursuant to Measure 37 which demonstrates eligibility for its use of the subject property based on nonexempt land use regulations in effect on May 16, 1974 as to Tax Lots 309 and 310 and November 3, 1976 as to Tax Lot 313, the dates when Claimants first acquired interests in the properties. There is evidence in the record that some additional development on the subject property would be feasible for available domestic water, sanitary waste disposal and road access. Feasibility of the desired use for a residential subdivision for water, septic and access would be determined in connection with a development application. The zoning that was in effect at the time the owner acquired the property would be applied to a development 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 nonexempt County land use regulations which were not in effect until after May 16, 1974 as to Tax Lots 309 and 310 and November 3, 1976 as to Tax Lot 313, to allow the owner to use the property in a manner permitted at the time the owner acquired the property. In essence, the County would not apply any land use regulations to the property which were not in effect when the particular Claimants acquired the property. This waiver is not a development permit. By granting a waiver, the County does not commit itself to approving Claimants' residential subdivision. Cautionary Note on Measure 37 Claimant should understand that a decision by Deschutes County may not enable her to proceed with future development or construction unless the State of Oregon approves a waiver of 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 and the Department of Administrative Services. Page 5 of 5 - Exhibit A - Order No. 2006-115 TAX LOTS 309 AND 310 PURCHASED ON MAY 16. 1974 EXHIBIT B ow rs-0 "A t F s~ iii t?e. 7 TAX TOT 313 PURCHASED ON NOVFMBER 3. 1976 A tract of laved cwtainin I.i7 Betas lying to the 3M1/49 Section 32, T. 16 S.t R. 12 1.0 W.H.9 Bascbutes County Oredescribed as follmm: emmainf att a i/0" isoa sod in= the North- west corner of the 3tl/4s 10114 o said Section $2; thence 3 00' 14' 34" N sloe the north-soutb center line of said section 32 71.50 feet to the point of beS aS marW by a 5/3" iron rod, said pasrit bola the 16rthnst corner of that tract of land described in look 2069 Page 346, Deschutes County Deed Records: 'thence is 730 40' S4" a 170.39 feet, thence 14 S410 041 02" B 190#27 feet: tMmee s 494 391 43" B 112-86 feet- thence S $0' 449 04" B 202.60 feet; thsnee 5 $99 35. 56" B 123.76 feet to the Werth line of the oeorty described Ilk Book 306, e 3460 ~Chlttts linty be" Recot*- t~ce S~• $5 17" x slogg the said north 11" 4!09.69 feet to the point of biginninS. . Order No. 2006-115; Foster DOCUMENT POOR QUALITY AT TIME OF RECORDING, pf the Gt o _2 cer d„ }~e -SouthWost Quarter uI th Z1or ?past Quar COi 4,4 XVis zEE3 ; R f.) ~erk~nd 7fzi~ -twq,, ' 5$)" 'r ,t ash" SS t ~n t120 sg4ih, - ~uWIVA (Ii-)-;i~6-st e=€ the, m 1,14mctte ~t rxdi ; .ties~hux~~ ~nuncy, Ut~~~;~: t~es~rih¢d .~s. ~o136v~ss