2007-387-Minutes for Meeting February 26,2007 Recorded 3/29/2007COUNTY
NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,F000NTY CLERKS
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 44;24;14 PM
IIIIIIII III IIIIIIIIIIIII 11111103/29/2007 2007-$
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
E
G
0 { Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING - LAND USE
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2007
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Michael M. Daly, Dennis R. Luke and Tammy Baney.
Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Tom Anderson, Terri
Payne and Paul Blikstad, Community Development; Mark Pilliod and Laurie
Craghead, Legal Counsel; Doug Seator, Sunriver Service District; media
representatives Keith Chu of The Bulletin; Barney Lerten and Keisha Burns of
News Channel 21; and approximately twenty other citizens.
Chair Daly 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 Signature of Document No. 2007-
069, an Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of La Pine regarding
the Administration of Land Use Applications.
Tom Anderson explained that this agreement will allow the County to process
land use applications within the City of La Pine. It does not address Code
Enforcement or other services. The fees are the existing fee schedule, as
adopted by the City of La Pine. There is one section that the City would like to
hold any hearings in La Pine, which would be an additional cost. The City
would be invoiced to cover the additional expense. The City Council will
assume the role that the Board has had, which is the appeal body.
Commissioner Luke said he received an e-mail from the Mayor, who said he
appreciates the work being done by Community Development.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 1 of 13 Pages
Mr. Anderson said that the City has jurisdiction over all land use and solid
waste code issues until the City applies to the State and receives approval to
handle these issues. If a land use issue is controversial, it would usually go to a
hearing; the City Council would decide if they want to hold a hearing.
Commissioner Baney asked if the transportation fees are already established.
Mr. Anderson said that it would be the established mileage amount.
LUKE: Move approval.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
3. Before the Board was Consideration of Whether to Hear an Appeal of the
Hearings Officer's Decision on a Tentative Plan for a 41-Lot Measure 37
Subdivision (Applicant: C Corp Homes).
Paul Blikstad said that this is in regard to an appeal of the Hearings Officer's
denial of the tentative plat for this subdivision. The property was part of a
Measure 37 waiver from the County and State, with the acquisition date in
1969. The Hearings Officer denied it based on water supply and two traffic
issues. Staff recommends that the Board hear the appeal. It is an important
decision because it is a Measure 37 subdivision.
Laurie Craghead said that the hydrologist's report was mentioned during the
hearing but the Hearings Officer did not have the documents. In the appeal, the
applicant feels it was a part of the record. However, she feels it is a good idea
for the Board to hear this based on the traffic issues. The time has been
continued into April.
Commissioner Luke said that he feels the applicant already had the opportunity
to give the Hearings Officer information on the traffic issues. However, they
did not bring it up at the time. He stated he is not sure this is a policy issue for
the Board; they can appeal to LUBA or go through the process again to get the
information into the record.
Ms. Craghead said that the original traffic information was there; an appeal
would allow them to submit further information. The hydrologist information
was in the hearings documents but the Hearings Officer didn't receive it. The
question whether the traffic flow situation is part of the safety issue.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 2 of 13 Pages
Commissioner Luke said that the Courts have not yet been able to determine
this. Commissioner Baney stated that she didn't see why this can't be heard by
the Board.
BANEY: Move that the Board hear this appeal.
LUKE: I am going to vote "no" to letting them have a second bite of the
apple since they didn't get the information into the Hearings Officer.
DALY: I think they stated that it was already there, but it just didn't get
disseminated to the Hearings Officer. I will second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: No. (Split vote)
DALY: Chair votes yes.
4. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order
No. 2007-045, a Measure 37 Claim (Glover).
Tom Anderson explained that this claim was continued from February 13, and
has to do with a twenty-acre parcel zoned EFU. The ownership was put at
February 20, 1979, based on Mr. Glover's initial purchase of a larger piece at
that point. There was some discussion at the hearing regarding irrigated versus
non-irrigated land. The staff report remains the same.
The Board will not approve a specific land use; this still must go through the
land use process, which has a different set of rules, based on the date in the
Order. In this case, based the acquisition date, PL-5 was in effect and a five-
acre size lot was allowed. In that period of time, the County did process land
use subdivisions with five-acre minimums. It is possible under the application
of those rules it would be allowed.
The other issue is the fact that a waiver is needed from the State as well. For a
future subdivision to be developed, a decision from the State would be
analyzed.
Mark Pilliod said that the Board was allowing the claimant to submit additional
evidence regarding the matter of valuation and the septic and water feasibility.
A letter also has been received from Paul Dewey, and is now a part of the
record. The claimants should be allowed to furnish additional material if they
desire.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 3 of 13 Pages
Commissioner Baney asked if anything is needed on the septic and water issue.
Mr. Anderson stated there were several opposing parties to this claim. The idea
was four or five acre lots. Commissioner Daly asked why the Board is looking
at the septic issue. Mr. Pilliod stated that this ties into the evidence of value. In
Code the appraisal includes the feasibility of the development. Code has since
been amended and those details have been modified. Valuation evidence is still
important but the issue of feasibility is addressed when the development
application is submitted.
Commissioner Luke observed that the Board isn't making a land use decision; it
is just determining the date of acquisition.
Mark Pilliod stated that testimony was provided at the last hearing from an
opponent. There has been no further information provided by the tenant and
does not believe additional testimony is necessary. Nothing further has been
received in writing except the letter from Paul Dewey, which talks about the
irrigated and non-irrigated issue. (A copy is attached.) A state waiver is also
needed for the County to move forward.
No further testimony was given.
LUKE: Move approval of the Order.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
5. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order
No. 2007-041, a Measure 37 Claim (Bradley).
Tom Anderson stated this claim was continued from February 13, and is in
regard to a two-parcel claim, for 200 acres located outside of Sisters. This had
been continued to allow staff time to add language pointing out that about a
third of the claim is within the flood plain zone. Some elements may be exempt
due to health and safety reasons. Otherwise the report hasn't changed and the
acquisition date remains the same.
No testimony was offered.
LUKE: Move approval.
BANEY: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 4 of 13 Pages
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
6. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order
No. 2007-115, a Measure 37 Claim (Tye).
Tom Anderson explained that William Tye owns two adjacent parcels in Alfalfa
near Dodds Road. Lot 1300 is 40 acres zoned EFU, Alfalfa subzone. The
second parcel is lot 1302 and consists of 17 acres with the same zoning. The
claimant wishes to subdivide it for subdivision use, a total of six lots between
five and fifteen acres. The amount of damage claimed is $2,538,000.
Both were acquired by Mr. Tye via a sales agreement on June 7, 1979. The
actual land sale contract was finalized on December 3, 1979, and title was
obtained in 1981. He has owned it continuously; thus the acquisition date
would be June 7, 1979.
A-1 zoning with a five-acre minimum lot size was in place at that time. A state
waiver is also required. No letters of opposition have been received.
Commissioner Luke disclosed that he has known Mr. Tye through the
construction business for over thirty years. Commissioner Daly noted that he
also has known Mr. Tye for a number of years and worked on some of the same
construction projects with him.
Bob Lovlien, attorney for the claimant, said that the Order is satisfactory to his
client.
BANEY: Move approval.
LUKE: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
7. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order
No. 2007-046, a Measure 37 Claim (Burnside).
Tom Anderson stated that Robert Burnside owns two parcels located east of
Bend on Alfalfa Market Road, near the Powell Butte Highway intersection.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 5 of 13 Pages
The first parcel, lot #1000, is 40 acres zoned EFU-Tumalo-Redmond-Bend
subzone with an airport safety overlay. The other lot is #10 1, consisting of 19
acres with the same zoning. About half of the combined acreage is irrigated.
The claimant wishes to subdivide the property into approximately eleven five-
acre parcels. The damage claim amount is $2,178,000.
A land sales contract was entered into on the first parcel on October 3, 1973,
and the property was conveyed via warranty deed in 1981. The second parcel
was acquired via land sale contracts on March 8, 1977, but has not yet been
formally deeded; Mr. Burnside appears as the contract buyer. For both, PL-5
zoning was in effect, with a five-acre minimum lot size. A state waiver is also
required. There was one letter of opposition from Central Oregon Land Watch,
which is in the record.
Bob Lovlien, attorney for the applicant, stated that Dr. Burnside was in
attendance, but concurs with the staff report.
Commissioner Daly disclosed that he has known Dr. Burnside for many years.
He asked if Lot 1000 was previously landlocked. Dr. Burnside stated that it
was, but an easement was granted; he subsequently purchased the property
holding the easement.
BANEY: Move approval.
LUKE: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
8. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order
No. 2007-114, a Measure 37 Claim (Miltenberger).
Tom Anderson stated that after some additional information was received last
week, the staff report and Order were amended. At the request of the
claimant's attorney, they wish to postpone this item. They may end up
amending their claim. This will give the claimant additional time to consider
the options. The clock runs out on April 4, 2007.
LUKE: Move continuance to the March 19, 2007 Board meeting.
BANEY: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 6 of 13 Pages
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
9. Before the Board was a Hearing and Consideration of Signature of Order
No. 2007-047, a Measure 37 Claim (Campbell).
Tom Anderson stated that on behalf of the estate of Beverly Campbell, a letter
from the legal representative of the estate has requested this be delayed. It was
indicated that a date in March or April would work for them. They waived the
180-day clock for that period of time to allow for a continuance.
Commissioner Luke said that it appears they would like to go back to the
ownership of the previous family to establish the ownership date.
Mr. Anderson stated that the County has maintained that there was a break in
ownership. If the County were to compensate for a loss in value, it would go
back to the original ancestor. But for purposes of waiving land use ownership,
it would only go back to the current owner.
LUKE: Move continuance to April 2, waiving the clock per the applicant's
letter.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
10. Before the Board were Deliberations and Consideration of First Reading of
Ordinance No. 2007-005, a Proposed Text Amendment regarding
Destination Resort Zoning.
Terri Payne gave an overview of the issues to be decided in regard to this
Ordinance. Her February 5, 2007 memo highlighted the decision points, and
copies are available. Commissioner Luke added that the Board recently had a
work session and discussed these items at that time.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 7 of 13 Pages
Chair Daly said that someone has asked to testify at this time. Laurie Craghead
explained that this was not noticed as a public hearing, just deliberations of the
Board. Commissioner Luke stated that he received e-mails from Central
Oregon Land Watch on this issue; Ms. Payne indicated that they are a part of
the record.
Issue #I proposes to increase the required resort investment from $4 million in
adjustment 1984 dollars to $7 million in adjusted 1993 dollars. This would
bring Code into compliance with Statute.
LUKE: Move approval to amend Code 18.04.030 and 18.113.060(A)(3) and
(4) to increase the required resort investment as proposed.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
Issue #2 proposes to add language requiring a conservation easement for
specified Goal 5 resources located at destination resorts. This change would
bring Code into compliance with Statute. No opposition has been voiced.
LUKE: Move to amend Code by adding a new section, 18.113.120 to
require conservation easements.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
Issue #3 would add a requirement for an annual report on resort
accommodation. This would bring Code into compliance with the State. There
has been no opposition voiced.
Commissioner Luke said the local newspaper had mentioned Sunriver and
Black Butte Ranch, but they are not destination resorts and do not fall under this
Ordinance.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 8 of 13 Pages
LUKE: Move to amend Code 18.113.070(U) to add language to require an
annual accommodation report as required by Statute.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
Citizen Nunzie Gould (off the microphone, from the audience) asked why the
Board won't take further public testimony at this time.
Laurie Craghead reiterated that the hearing was already closed to public
testimony; but written testimony has been allowed and becomes part of the
record. This meeting was posted as deliberations only; previous hearings have
been held to obtain oral testimony.
Terri Payne said that in regard to issues #4 through 6, the current impact of
resorts is not known so it is hard to determine future numbers. There are also
concerns about destination resorts vs. rural subdivisions.
Issue #4 relates to modifying the definition of overnight lodging units to lower
the number of weeks that individually-owned units counted as overnight
lodging are required to be available for rent, from 45 weeks per year to 38
weeks per year. Currently the County is more restrictive. Staff recommends
the change, but the Planning commission opposes it.
Commissioner Baney asked that with the changes to Code just approved, would
this help tighten this up. Ms. Payne indicated yes, and that the reporting ahs
been tightened up over the past year.
Commissioner Luke stated that the changes he has supported thus far are part of
Statute. He feels that the rules should be uniform throughout the State and there
shouldn't be different rules for different areas. Change needs to come from
Salem in this regard.
Commissioner Daly agreed, stating he doesn't think there should be two sets of
land use rules.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 9 of 13 Pages
LUKE: Move to Amend County Code 18.04.030 and 18.113.060(D)(2),
18.113.070(0) and 18.113.090(J) to lower the number of weeks
individually-owned units counted as overnight lodging are available
for rent, as permitted by Statute.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
Issue #5 would modify the definition of overnight lodging units to allow
individually-owned units counted as overnight lodging to be rented by a
property manager as well as by the resort.
Commissioner Luke stated that Sunriver is not a destination resort. He asked if
the proposal could be amended to include a future or current destination resort
using private companies to use the same form. There needs to be a way to track
this. Ms. Payne replied that there is a requirement in Code to provide this
information.
Ms. Craghead reiterated that there is already a requirement in Code for this to
be provided. To make it clear, the Board could put a requirement into Code that
tracking be a part of the application criteria.
Commissioner Luke said that it seems if a private party were going to manage
rental units, it would be to their advantage to actually rent them out since that's
how they derive their income.
Commissioner Baney stated she prefers to vote on the language as written in the
current report. They recommended that if the language is going to change, this
item should be removed from consideration at this time.
Commissioner Daly said that it appears the Board would prefer this wording be
changed. Since this is a legislative matter, comments can be submitted in
writing.
This issue will be addressed at a future date.
Issue #6 proposes allowing phasing of the required 150 overnight lodging units
over a maximum of fourteen years. This would match the language contained
in Statute.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 10 of 13 Pages
There are legal questions as to whether the County is more restrictive. Staff
recommends the amendment, but the Planning Commission opposes it, voicing
concerns about compliance and the amount of time allowed to build the units.
Commissioner Luke said that if the Board assumes that bonding is more
restrictive than Statute requires, what are the options. Ms. Payne stated that it
would require building or bonding all of the 150 units up front.
Commissioner Luke stated that the change would take away some assurances
that the units would be built. He said he likes the idea of bonding, but the
County can't sell the units if it has to take them over. Ms. Craghead noted that
the bonding would have to be in place prior to recording the final plat, and that
they can't build without it being recorded. This only applies if they choose to
phase. Under current code they have to build or bond it all first. The bond
could allow up to four years.
Commissioner Luke stated that the houses would not be built until the rental
units are built or bonded, since the ratio needs to stay in place. Commissioner
Baney noted that they could bond the first fifty, and technically go over
fourteen years to complete the rest.
At this time, Ms. Payne went over the various options. (See attached staff
memo, page 3)
Commissioner Daly said that leaving the Code the same may conflict with
Statute. Commissioner Luke stated that he feels the first fifty should be built,
and he would like to see a bond in place. There need to be some rental units on
the ground. The question becomes when buildings have to tie into the ratio.
Commissioner Daly asked what would happen if they are unable to fill up the
rental units that they build. Ms. Craghead explained that they have to have at
least 150 overnight lodging units, and the ratio needs to be in place.
Commissioner Daly noted that they could build 300 houses if they put up the
bond, without building the rental units first.
Commissioner Luke said it is a policy question whether this is more or less
restrictive than Statute. It's a huge financial investment for the developer. If
they can't sell any lots, they can't build units. That's where the bonding money
comes from. It is asking a lot for them to not be able to sell lots while they are
constructing the fifty units. He said he would like to see some kind of fix that
sets the ratio. Perhaps some of the houses would help with the ratio.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 11 of 13 Pages
Ms. Craghead said that the way it works now, if there is an improvement
agreement, they ask for partial releases of the bonds as they build. The amount
is released proportionately. The ratio is not relative regarding the bond, but
they won't get approval if they aren't meeting the ratios.
Commissioner Daly stated that there needs to be something fair that still will
comply with Statute. Destination resorts are the only developers he knows
about that have this huge requirement for rental units. No one else would go
after a cash bond and build rental units like this. He remembers the early
1980's when the real estate market was really bad. There needs to be
something the County can live with that is fair to everyone.
Commissioner Baney agreed that there needs to be some clarity in this regard
This issue will be addressed at a future date.
Issue #7 as proposed would change the ratio between individually-owned
residential units and overnight lodging units from 2:1 to 2.5:1. There seems to
be a conflict between Statute and Goal 8, and it is hard to comply with both.
There is a question as to whether this change can be made.
Commissioner Luke said that as much as possible, the County should be in
alignment with Statute. The Goal and Statute don't agree. He said this should
be clarified at a higher level of jurisdiction.
Commissioner Baney added that she feels Deschutes County is unique and she
would prefer that the State not dictate. She would like clarification, but she
doesn't have a problem with Deschutes County generally being more restrictive
than the State.
No motion was made in this regard. The Board indicated it would call it back
up after the legislature makes the appropriate changes to correct inconsistencies.
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE SUNRIVER
SERVICE DISTRICT
11. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2007-
021 and Document No. 2007-099, an Agreement with the State of Oregon
regarding the Disposal of Surplus Property.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 12 of 13 Pages
Doug Seator explained that in 2004 the Board signed an agreement to cover the
disposal of surplus property. The State is requiring a new agreement that
reflects the changes in law over the past few years.
LUKE: Move approval of Resolution No. 2007-021 and Document No.
2007-099.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Yes.
DALY: Chair votes yes.
RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
12. Before the Board were Other Items.
None were offered.
Being no further items to come before the Board, Chair Daly adjourned the
meeting at 11:45 a. m.
DATED this 26th Day of February 2007 for the Deschutes County
Board of Commissioners.
ATTEST:
Michael . Daly, Ch r
De is R. Luke, Vice Chair
4 4, 2//~ /
Tam y aney, Com i sioner
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 13 of 13 Pages
Community Development Department
n: Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division
X
.gin..
N IM don ~M
117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
STAFF MEMO http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
To: Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners
From: Terri Hansen Payne, Associate Planner
Date: February 5, 2007
Subject: Text Amendment TA-04-4 Deliberation
1. TA 04-4
At a work session on January 29, 2007 the Board requested a brief summary of the decision points
for TA-04-4, a proposed amendment to Deschutes County Code (DCC) Title 18 regarding
destination resort zoning. The following list summarizes the main ideas that are being proposed
and provides possible motions.
II. List of Decision Points
Issue 1
Proposal Increase the required resort investment from $4 million in adjusted 1984 dollars to
$7 million in adjusted 1993 dollars
Support Proposed by Applicant, recommended by Planning Commission, Staff
Impact This would increase the required resort investment by approximately $2 million
dollars
Motion 1 Amend DCC 18.04.030 and 18.113.060(A)(3) and (4) to increase the required
resort investment as proposed (would bring County Code into compliance with
Statute)
Motion 2 Do not amend County Code regarding the required resort investment (would leave
Count Code less restrictive than Statute
Decision
Issue 2
Proposal Add language requiring a conservation easement for specified Goal 5 resources
located at destination resorts
Support Proposed by Staff, recommended by Planning Commission
Impact This would protect specified resources already identified in the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan, such as wetlands or historic resources.
Motion 1 Amend County Code by adding a new section 18.113.120 to require conservation
easements (would bring County Code into compliance with Statute)
Motion 2 Do not amend County Code to add a requirement for conservation easements
would leave Count Code less restrictive than statute
Decision
Quality Services Performed with Pride
Decision Points for TA-04-4
Issue 3
Proposal Add a requirement for an annual report on resort accommodations
Support Proposed by Staff, recommended by Planning Commission
Impact This would require resorts to report annually on the status of the required 150
overnight lodging units, the ratio between individually-owned residential and
overnight lodging units and for all individually-owned units counted as overnight
units the number of weeks they were available for rent.
Motion 1 Amend County Code 18.113.070(U) to add language to require an annual
accommodation report as required by Statute (would bring County Code into
compliance with Statute)
Motion 2 Do not amend County Code to add a requirement for an annual accommodation
report would leave Count Code less restrictive than statute
Decision
Issue 4
Proposal Modify the definition of overnight lodging units to lower the number of weeks that
individually-owned units counted as overnight lodging are required to be available
for rent from 45 weeks/ ear to 38 weeks/ ear
Support Proposed by Applicant, recommended by Staff, opposed by Planning Commission
Impact This would loosen the requirements for overnight lodging units
Motion 1 Amend County Code 18.04.030 and 18.113.060(D)(2) and 18.113.070(U) and
18.113.090(J) to lower the number of weeks individually-owned units counted as
overnight lodging are available for rent (permitted by Statute, but not required)
Motion 2 Do not amend County Code to lower the number of weeks individually-owned units
counted as overnight lodging are available for rent (would retain current county
code which is more restrictive than Statute
Decision
Issue 5
Proposal Modify the definition of overnight lodging units to allow individually-owned units
counted as overnight lodging to be rented by a property manager as well as the
resort
Support Proposed by Applicant, recommended by Staff, opposed by Planning Commission
Impact This would loosen the requirements for overnight lodging units
Motion 1 Amend County Code 18.04.030 and 18.113.060(D)(2) and 18.113.070(U) and
18.113.090(J) to allow individually-owned units counted as overnight lodging to be
rented by a property manager as well as the resort (permitted by statute, but not
required, although giving them the option may be better from the SEC regulation
standpoint)
Motion 2 Do not amend County Code to allow individually-owned units counted as overnight
lodging to be rented by a property manager as well as the resort (would retain
current count code which is more restrictive than Statute
Decision
2-5-07 Page 2
Decision Points for TA-04-4
Issue 6
Proposal Allow phasing of the required 150 overnight lodging units over a maximum of 14
ears
Support Proposed by Applicant, recommended by Staff with amendment, opposed by
Planning Commission
Impact Current County Code does not allow phasing of the required 150 units. TA-04-4
allows, but not require, the phasing of those units. If phased, as proposed by the
applicant, the first 50 units would be required to be built or bonded before any
individual units or lots are sold. Statute does not allow bonding so staff
recommends bonding for the first 50 units be removed. The second 50 units would
be built or bonded within 5 years of the initial lot sales and the final 50 would be
built or bonded within 10 years of the initial lot or unit sales. If the last 100 units are
bonded, they need to be built within 4 years of bonding
Motion 1 Amend County Code 18.04.030 and 18.113.060(A)(1) and (5) to permit phasing as
proposed by Applicant (would be more lenient than Statute)
Motion 2 Amend County Code 18.04.030 and 18.113.060(A)(1) and (5) to permit phasing as
proposed by Staff (permitted by Statute, but not required)
Motion 3 Do not amend County Code to allow phasing of the 150 overnight lodging units
(would possibly be more restrictive than Statute, legal question as to whether we
need to require the first 50 units to be built
Decision
Issue 7
Proposal
Support
Impact
Motion 1
Motion 2
Decision
Vnange the ratio between individually-owned residential units and overnight lodging
units from 2:1 to 2.5:1
rroposed by Applicant, opposed by Planning Commission, Staff
This would allow more residential development in destination resorts
Amend 18.04.030 and 18.113.050(A)(21) and 18.113.060(D)(2) and 18.113.070(U)
To change the ratio between individually-owned residential and overnight lodging
from 2:1 to 2.5:1 (legally questionable, would not be more lenient than Statute, but
would be more lenient than Goal 8)
Do not amend existing code regarding destination resort ratios (would allow the
legislature to fix the code before the Count makes any changes)
III. Ordinance
Once the Board has voted on each decision point, Staff will create an ordinance reflecting the
Board's decisions
2-5-07
Page 3
IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY
Please complete this card & turn
it in to a County staff person.
Name:
Mailing Addre :
As~r
Phone
E-mail Address:
Date:
Subject: P, -Z , Q,?)N6g at,
IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY
Please complete this card & turn
it in to a County staff person.
Name: Ipp,
Mailing Address: l /8
Phone
3 3
E-mail Address: on_
Date:= 1
Subject:
,O-TE S ~
6?
{ Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA - LAND USE
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
10:00 A.M., MONDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 2007
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 Signature of Document No. 2007-069, an
Intergovernmental Agreement with the City of La Pine regarding the
Administration of Land Use Applications - Tom Anderson, Community
Development
3. CONSIDERATION of Whether to Hear an Appeal of the Hearings Officer's
Decision on a Tentative Plan for a 41-Lot Measure 37 Subdivision (Applicant:
C Corp Homes) - Paul Blikstad, Community Development Department
4. A HEARING (continued from February 13) and Consideration of Signature
of Order No. 2007-045, a Measure 37 Claim (Glover) - Mark Pilliod, Legal
Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department
5. A HEARING (continued from February 13) and Consideration of Signature
of Order No. 2007-041, a Measure 37 Claim (Bradley) - Mark Pilliod, Legal
Counsel; Tom Anderson, Community Development Department
6. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-115, a
Measure 37 Claim (Tye) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson,
Community Development Department
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 1 of 6 Pages
7. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-046, a
Measure 37 Claim (Burnside) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson,
Community Development Department
8. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-114, a
Measure 37 Claim (Miltenberger) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom
Anderson, Community Development Department
9. A HEARING and Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2007-047, a
Measure 37 Claim (Campbell) - Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel; Tom Anderson,
Community Development Department
10. DELIBERATIONS and Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No.
2007-005, a Proposed Text Amendment regarding Destination Resort Zoning -
Terri Hansen Payne, Community Development Department
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE SUNRIVER SERVICE
DISTRICT
11. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Resolution No. 2007-021 and Document
No. 2007-099, an Agreement with the State of Oregon regarding the Disposal
of Surplus Property - Sharon Smith for the Sunriver Service District
RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
12. OTHER ITEMS
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' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 2 of 6 Pages
Monday, February 26, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call
Thursday, March 1, 2007
10:00 a.m. Quarterly Update - District Attorney
11:00 a.m. Quarterly Update - Community Development Department
1:30 p.m. Quarterly Update - Road Department
Monday, March 5, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Wednesday, March 7, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 8, 2007
11:00 a.m. Quarterly Update - Mental Health Department
1:00 P.M. Quarterly Update - Health Department
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting - Measure 37 Claims
6:00 p.m. Public Meeting regarding Groundwater Local Rule Issues, La Pine High School
Auditorium
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 3 of 6 Pages
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
8:30 a.m. Juvenile Community Justice Department Update
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call
Thursday, March 15, 2007
7:00 a.m. Regularly Scheduled Meeting with the Redmond City Council, Council Chambers
11:00 a.m. Parole & Probation Department Update
Monday, March 19, 2007
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee
6:00 p.m. Public Meeting regarding Groundwater Local Rule Issues, La Pine High School
Auditorium
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 22, 2007
9:00 a.m. Fair & Expo Center Update
11:00 a.m. Commission on Children & Families' Update
Monday, March 26, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
6:00 p.m. Public Meeting regarding Groundwater Local Rule Issues, La Pine High School
Auditorium
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 4 of 6 Pages
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call
Monday, April 2, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Thursda, April 5, 2007
8:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Sisters Council, Sisters City Hall
9:00 a.m. Meeting with Judge Fadeley, Justice Court, Sisters
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call
Thursday, April 12, 2007
12:00 noon Audit Committee Meeting
Monday, April 16, 2007
12:00 noon Regular Meeting with Department Heads
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 5 of 6 Pages
7:30 a.m. Bend Chamber of Commerce Breakfast Meeting - State of the County
10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Monday, Apri123, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board Land Use Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
10:30 a.m. Meeting with Black Butte Ranch County Service District Board
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s)
3:00 p.m. Legislative Update Conference Call
Thursday, April 26, 2007
1:30 p.m. Sheriff Department Update
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' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, February 26, 2007
Page 6 of 6 Pages