The URL can be used to link to this page

2010-76-Minutes for Meeting January 25,2010 Recorded 2/16/2010DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS yJ NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK v~l COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 02/16/2010 11:44:55 AM I II II I IIIIIIIIIIIIIII III -T 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 at the request of [give reason] previously recorded in Book _ or as Fee Number to correct and Page 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 DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MONDAY, JANUARY 25, 2010 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel; Kevin Harrison, Peter Gutowsky, Will Groves and Nick Lelack, Community Development; Dan Despotopulos and Roxia Todoroff, Fair & Expo; David Givans, Internal Auditor; and five other citizens. Chair Luke opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. 1. Before the Board was Citizen Input. The Board pointed out that the Fair & Expo was awarded Business of the Year by the Redmond Chamber of Commerce. Dan Despotopulos said that they will have the Annual Fair five days this year rather than four like last year. 2. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2010- 057, an Oregon Department of Land Conservation & Development Technical Assistance Grant for a Regional Economic Opportunities Analysis. Peter Gutowsky stated that this grant does two things. It establishes the need for large lot industrial land in Central Oregon (including cities and the three counties); and identifying sites that qualify. The opportunity will then be available for cities to expand their urban growth boundary. Once land is included, complex requirements will be in place for no further zone change until another zone change process is followed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 1 of 11 Pages Commissioner Unger Discussion occurred regarding the need for identifying this property, along with a clear definition of what is to be considered large lot industrial land. BANEY: Move approval. UNGER: Second VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 3. Before the Board were Deliberations on Appeals of the Hearings Officer's Decision Reversing the Planning Division's Decision to Issue a Land Use Compatibility Statement and Building Permit for the Remodel of an Existing Dwelling (Dowell). Will Groves reminded the Board that this is not a hearing, but deliberations, and no testimony will be taken. In regard to Sisemore Road being in the proper location and its right of way, it has been determined that it is inconsistent, through maps, surveys in the past and other means. This is part of the record. Commissioner Luke said that most properties have pins, and the properties generally own to the center of the road. He wondered if this is the case. Mr. Groves said that the 400 feet on the plat is shown as a survey line. He is not sure from where the measurement would come from. The setback is from Sisemore Road; it is not clear whether this would be from the center line or the paved surface. In CUP 80-22, there was supposed to be a written agreement in place prior to the sale of any property, establishing a homeowners' association or agreement to assure the maintenance of common property. There has been discussion as to whether deed restrictions constitute this agreement. One has to do with dog ownership, one for utilities, one for fencing, one for target practice and one addressing the deer winter range. There is nothing specific regarding property maintenance. Laurie Craghead said that there was a Circuit Court proceeding in the past. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 2 of 11 Pages Commissioner Luke asked if a straight measurement off Sisemore Road was used for any other property in the subdivision. Mr. Groves stated that it is unclear. For the purposes of the Kuhn's property, they were concerned about the 400 foot distance and undertook a lot line adjustment to add more frontage on Sisemore Road. Staff is unclear as to whether this lot line adjustment voided the requirement on the map. Commissioner Luke stated that Code requires certain side yard measurements as well. Mr. Groves said that the hearings office spoke to this. Commissioner Luke stated that he thought it was a 40-foot side yard setback, instead of 100. In 2011, it was found that the setback must be no more than 40 feet, and not less than 25 feet. An appeal was made by the Dowells but later pulled. Laurie Craghead said the declaratory ruling indicated 40 feet. Mr. Groves said the record was extended to January 31, 2010 for a decision from the Board. Commissioner Luke said that "Groundhog Day" is one of his favorite movies. This situation has been around for a long time. The Homeowners' agreement should have been required before the plat was in place. By having it upon the sale of property, the County does not usually track sales and the County relies on good faith. There is some responsibility on those who buy property as well, to make sure things are in place before they buy. There is no question it could have been done better. If it is found that the homeowners' agreement had to be in place before any lots were sold, does this make both residences illegal? Ms. Craghead said yes. Commissioner Luke noted that building permits were issued and a lot line adjustment approved as well. The other question was whether there a survey in the record. Mr. Groves said there is, but nowhere in the record does one say whether the Dowell residence is a specific distance from the road. Based on materials in the record, it appears to him that it is beyond the 400 feet. If all homes were measured the same, one would be. However, there could be a measurement not done that would make this different. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 3 of 11 Pages Mr. Groves stated that the Hearings Officer found it is illegal because of the measurement. Commissioner Luke said that if the homeowner's agreement is not in place, that makes both residences illegal. Ms. Craghead stated that the homeowners' agreement may not make a difference because of the distance. Commissioner Luke said in general, if a home was in the wrong location but was moved, or if it was made smaller, would it still be legal. Mr. Craghead said that it would still be outside the 400 foot measurement. Mr. Groves said that to correct the code enforcement, one way is to remove the violation. Commissioner Unger stated that the measurement from the road is to keep the home off the winter deer range, and this requirement has been satisfied. Commissioner Luke said that it is the best interest of all to get the homeowners' agreement issue fixed. He wondered if a mediator could meet with the parties to get this accomplished. Ms. Craghead said the record would have to be reopened to include this. Commissioner Unger asked about the deed restrictions and whether landscape requirements or the deer winter range protection apply. Mr. Groves stated that there are some requirements for fencing as well. The agreement would address the maintenance of the property, including brush maintenance and how taxes are being paid. Commissioner Unger asked about the tax situation and what happens if one party does not pay. Mr. Craghead stated that each is paying half. If not paid, the County would foreclose on the property Mr. Groves said that the first question is, is the County bound by the Circuit Court case. The County's opinion is that it is not. The ruling was that a homeowners' association agreement was to be in place. Commissioner Tammy asked about the LUBA case, which found there was not enough information. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 4 of 11 Pages Mr. Groves asked if the Dowell dwelling is lawful due to final building permit. A building permit by itself does not establish a lawful dwelling. Land is not surveyed to determine this. Chair Luke said that the measurement is key. Government has some responsibility in issuing a permit to make sure all the conditions were met. The County could have erred on both properties. Ms. Craghead stated that the County might have determined that the deed restrictions were enough. Mr. Groves said that prior to sale of any lot, the hearings Officer found that a homeowners' agreement should be in place. Chair Luke said this is one County requirement that was not addressed, and this is no better than ignoring other conditions. Commissioner Baney said that there should have been a closer examination of the setback distance by the County. Ms. Craghead stated that a building permit does not allow for non compliance. Mr. Groves said that in the future this has to be more closely established. Mr. Groves referred to a matrix established by his department for options in this decision-making process. Commissioner Baney asked about the staff-generated composite figure (map). Mr. Groves said this encompasses available material. The two properties are outlined solidly. The eastern boundary is Sisemore Road as shown, but it is not known if it is exactly as it is. The homes are shown on the lots, as is the 400 foot plat lines. Commissioner Luke said this if the second house is measured using the criteria the County used for the first house, then it would be within the 400 feet. Ms. Craghead agreed. Commissioner Luke asked if an extension could be requested to make a decision. Ms. Craghead said that a decision of some kind needs to be done quickly, or a writ of mandamus could be filed at the court and the County would have to bear the burden of proof. Commissioner Unger said that he thought the Board was to add clarity to the decision. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 5 of 11 Pages Ms. Craghead asked if the County wants to allow time for the parties to mediate regarding the homeowners' agreement. The record would have to be reopened if this is the case. This would still leave the setback issue unresolved unless the parties agree to drop that part. Commissioner Unger said that there are separate issues and they would both have to be resolved eventually. Commissioner Luke stated that based on the measurements of the one dwelling, both would be within the setback area. Commissioner Baney said that there appears to be a discrepancy on how things were measured. Mr. Groves said that the Forest Service did not have clear language when this was done and there were a variety of measurements. There is no clear answer in the record. The Hearings Officer said that reasonable people could come to different opinions. Ms. Craghead said that if there is mediation, it could be offered after a decision to put any LUBA appeal in abeyance. Commissioner Baney feels that it is unfortunate this moved forward like it did. Without the homeowners' agreement in place, it will be hard to resolve. She is in favor of the mediation if the parties are willing. She feels both properties could be unlawful. Given the discrepancies on the measurements, she feels the Dowell property is lawful. Commissioner Unger agreed. If the parties were encouraged to mediate, would this include deed restrictions plus maintenance and taxes. Chair Luke said it is up to the property owners. Mr. Groves said there are requirements in current Code that are a basis for establishing homeowners' associations and he would hope they would use them. The Chair called for a five-minute recess at this time. Ms. Craghead said that the record could be opened for a summary of her conversation with the parties at this time. BANEY: Move that the record be opened to allow this summary for potential mediation purposes. UNGER: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 6 of 11 Pages VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Ms. Craighead indicated the Dowell's representative indicated they would agree to mediation if the 400 foot issue is dropped, if the Kuhn's will agree. The representative for the Kuhn's said they want to be able to further litigate that 400 foot setback issue. It is a matter if the Board wants to pay for mediation knowing that there will be further litigation. Both parties feel skeptical whether mediation would be helpful, as it was tried before and did not work, but a lot more issues were discussed. Commissioner Baney said it would be for the homeowners' agreement only, using current templates. They have signed on with deed restrictions with certain uses that should remain in place; so the maintenance component would need to be added. Chair Luke said that most Commissioners seem to feel that because of the precedence of measurements in the past, that the setbacks are okay. But the homeowners' agreement would affect any house in the platted area. Therefore, no permit could be granted for any property, and a notation would be on the record as to future uses or changes. He agreed there is only one issue to go to mediation, and that is the homeowners' agreement. He is willing to delay the decision to see if there is an agreement to mediate this. Commissioner Unger agreed, and said that the payment of taxes would need to be included. Dave Kanner said that the County pays Central Oregon Mediation as needed, at an agreed-upon rate. Commissioner Baney expressed that she would like to give as much direction as possible. Commissioner Luke stated that perhaps the County be a party to the mediation, to make sure that this falls within the County's rules and regulations. Ms. Craghead said that Mr. Lovlien agreed that the 400 foot issue may still be litigated on appeal. He would leave the record open for 45 days to allow for the mediation. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 7 of 11 Pages Ms. Hardie, representing the Kuhns, said that she does not feel that this would be helpful. If the County is so inclined after the decision, it can be set up then. Commissioner Like said that if both parties are not wiling to cooperate, it is a waste of time. Chair Luke closed the record on the mediation. He suggested that the Hearings Officer's decision on the 400 feet setback be overturned, due to precedence established earlier. He also agrees with Circuit Court that a homeowners' agreement on a common area needs to be in place for a sale. Because it was not in place, any building permits issues for dwellings in this plat are unlawful. Commission Baney agreed. Commissioner Unger said that one party wants to move forward with a remodeling permit and one does not. It does not seem fair, as one could wait out the other. Commissioner Luke stated that neither party would be able to do anything. Commissioner Baney said that what makes sense is for the owners to cooperate. The most legally defensible thing is to do this. But the parties are not willing and will not be boxed into an agreement. Equity would be best but it has to be legally defensible. Commissioner Unger asked if it could be tied just to a sale. Commissioner Baney said the County erred at the time or could have done it better. Commissioner Luke feels there was not an error, but did not track things that well. Planning was in its early days at the time and there were no resources to track sales. Commissioner Baney retracted her opinion that they erred but feels that buyers need to be responsible. BANEY: Move that the Board find that the residence was established within the 400 foot setback as set by precedence at the time, but failed to have the homeowners' agreement in place prior to sale that was required in regard to maintenance. UNGER: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 8 of 11 Pages VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Chair Luke said there could be other homes in the County that were not lawfully established. He would like to discuss how this can be examined to make sure health and safety issues can be addressed regarding these types of situations. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda. Item #7, Minutes, were removed from the agenda as they have not yet been reviewed by the Board. UNGER: Move approval of the minutes, except for item #7. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Consent Agenda Items 4. Signature of Letters Appointing Steve Johnson (through February 28, 2011) and Derek Staab (through February 28, 2013) to the Deschutes River Mitigation and Enhancement Committee. Steve Johnson gave an overview of what the Committee does, how it is funded, and current projects. 5. Signature of a Letter Reappointing Charlie Jones to the Beaver Special Road District Board, through December 31, 2012 6. Signature of a Letter Appointing Ken Cooper to the Deschutes County Historic Landmarks Commission as an Ex-officio County Representative 7. Approval of Minutes: • Business Meeting: January 20 • Work Session: January 20 Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 9 of 11 Pages CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE BLACK BUTTE RANCH COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 8. Before the Board was Discussion of an Amendment to a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Operation of the Black Butte Ranch County Service District. BANEY: Move approval. UNGER: Second VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 911 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 9. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 911 County Service District in the Amount of $46,658.96. BANEY: Move approval, subject to review. UNGER: Second VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION AND 4- H COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 10. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-11 County Service District in the Amount of $2,162.86. BANEY: Move approval. UNGER: Second VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 10 of 11 Pages RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 11. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of $648,124.22. BANEY: Move approval. UNGER: Second VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 12. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA None were offered. Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned at 11:45 a. m. DATED this 25th Day of January 2010 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. ATTEST: Recording Secretary Dennis R. Luke, Chair &d,~ a~~ Alan Unger, Vice Chair (50(27~~ Tammy Baney, Com ' sioner Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 11 of 11 Pages but Es Q O G Z{ Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT For Board Business Meeting of January 25, 2010 DATE: January 5, 2010 FROM: Will Groves Community Development Department 388-6518 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Board deliberation and decision on appeals (A-09-4, A-09-5) of a Hearings Officer decision reversing the Planning Division's decision to issue a LUCS and building permit to remodel the Dowells' existing dwelling on the subject property (A-07-9). PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS DATE? No. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: On August 17, 2009, the Hearings Officer issued a decision on remand reversing the Planning Division's decision to issue a LUCS and building permit to remodel the Dowells' existing dwelling on the subject property. The Hearings Officer found that the Dowells' dwelling was subject to a 400-foot maximum setback from Sisemore Road identified on the original partition plat and on the Dowells' 1992 Landscape Management site plan. There is no dispute the dwelling was constructed outside that setback. Therefore, the Hearings Officer found that the Dowells' dwelling was not "lawfully established" for purposes of obtaining approval for an alteration of the dwelling under Section 18.40.020(M). Accordingly, the Hearings Officer found that the county erred in issuing a LUCS and building permit for an interior remodel of the Dowells' dwelling. In Order 2009-061 the Board agreed to hear appeals (A-09-4, A-09-5) of a Hearings Officer decision reversing the Planning Division's decision to issue a LUCS and building permit to remodel the Dowells' existing dwelling on the subject property (A-07-9). In that order, the Board specified that the appeals would be heard limited de novo and that certain written evidence could be submitted by specified dates. These dates have passed and Staff has assembled the submitted written materials. A number of key issues have been raised in these appeals. • -Is the County bound by the Kuhn v. Dowell circuit court case? • -Is the Dowell dwelling lawfully established by issuance, inspection, and finalization of a County building permit, even though the dwelling is not in the location approved in the building permit and land use decision? • -Is the Dowell dwelling unlawfully established because of the lack of a homeowner's agreement, required in the original conditional use approval for a dwelling on the property? • -Is the Dowell dwelling unlawfully established because it is not placed in accordance with the Landscape Management site plan approval for the dwelling (LM-92-9)? For each of these issues the Board may decide to uphold the Hearings Officer's decision, reverse that decision, or amend that decision. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Whichever way the Board decides in this case, the decision is likely to be appealed. Thus, the County may incur costs to defend its decision on appeal. RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REOUESTED: Staff attached a decision matrix outlining the key issues and the positions of the Hearings Officer, Applicant, Opponent, and Staff on these issues. In this matrix, Staff has also suggestion possible options to resolve these issues. ATTENDANCE: Will Groves DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS: Will Groves Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925 (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ MEMORANDUM January 5, 2010 To: Deschutes Board of County Commissioners From: Will Groves, Senior Planner Subject: Board deliberation and decision on appeals (A-09-4, A-09-5) of a Hearings Officer decision reversing the Planning Division's decision to issue a LUCS and building permit to remodel the Dowells' existing dwelling on the subject property (A-07-9). BACKGROUND On August 17, 2009, the Hearings Officer issued a decision on remand reversing the Planning Division's decision to issue a LUCS and building permit to remodel the Dowells' existing dwelling on the subject property. The Hearings Officer found that the Dowells' dwelling was subject to a 400-foot maximum setback from Sisemore Road identified on the original partition plat and on the Dowells' 1992 Landscape Management site plan. There is no dispute the dwelling was constructed outside that setback. Therefore, the Hearings Officer found that the Dowells' dwelling was not "lawfully established" for purposes of obtaining approval for an alteration of the dwelling under Section 18.40.020(M). Accordingly, the Hearings Officer found that the county erred in issuing a LUCS and building permit for an interior remodel of the Dowel Is' dwelling. In Order 2009-061 the Board agreed to hear appeals (A-09-4, A-09-5) of a Hearings Officer decision reversing the Planning Division's decision to issue a LUCS and building permit to remodel the Dowells' existing dwelling on the subject property (A-07-9). In that order the Board specified that the appeals would be heard limited de novo and that certain written evidence could be submitted by specified dates. These dates have passed and Staff has assembled the submitted written materials. Quality Services Performed zvith Pride A number of key issues have been raised in these appeals. • Is the County bound by the Kuhn v. Dowell circuit court case? • Is the Dowell dwelling lawfully established by issuance, inspection, and finalization of a County building permit, even though the dwelling is not in the location approved in the building permit and land use decision? • Is the Dowell dwelling unlawfully established because of the lack of a homeowner's agreement, required in the original conditional use approval for a dwelling on the property? • Is the Dowell dwelling unlawfully established because it is not placed in accordance with the Landscape Management site plan approval for the dwelling (LM-92-9)? For each of these issues the Board may decide to uphold the Hearings Officer's decision, reverse that decision, or amend that decision. STAFF DISCUSSION Staff has attached a decision matrix outlining the key issues and the positions of the Hearings Officer, Applicant, Opponent, and Staff on these issues. In this matrix, Staff has also suggestion possible options to resolve these issues. Staff has also attached final arguments from the Applicant and Opponent as well as a memo from Staff providing a deeper discussion of these issues. ORS 215.435(1) provides that the county has 90 days from the date of LUBA's final order on remand to issue a final local decision on the land use matter subject to the remand. Because the Dowells agreed to extend the written record from May 21 through June 18, 2009, under ORS 215.435(2)(b) the 90-day period was extended for a period of 29 days and expired on July 23, 2009. The Dowells have since agreed to extend the decision period to January 31, 2009. DOCUMENTATION Staff has previously provided complete record materials to the Board. Staff has attached key documents, including final arguments from the Applicant and Opponent as well as a memo and decision matrix from Staff to this agenda request. SCHEDULE This item is scheduled for a work session on January 20, 2010 and a Deliberation and Decision on January 25, 2010. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns. X I.f. Q LU Z 2 Y J J W O a w E Q O) C m c a) 0 E a2 a) 0 O L c c6 a) L N ca co a) ca D) c 75 a) O a a) CD N O U N C CU O w 0 a) Q 0 o ~ a)o ~.m . U U - O 3 ~ a a ~ Um 0a) 0 U a) co N cn U) L :3 L .o 0 _ U v cu ~ mc 0 a) 0 0 N -r- z >,m T -0 U O CO) 0 C CU O U N p a p O cn - O) cu cu C p C 0 L f0 cu = V W CU 0 c 0 0 (n L c4 (D U w. (D - O 0 c U3 m c - 0- > c c = cal - cu u Q E-0 0- C) 0 . ~-;6 am (D c c a)-0c - ~o u o 0 0 a) ca 0oca a)~, . -E 0=3 Q Q~ U 4- ~ 0 0 c~ C~ i N) a) N w N O C S co -0 CL 0 p a) - O L _ . 0 co - 0 a) o -Q L c C 0) C U o _ O 0~ 0 0 cm 0 0) co co L O -00 U O cL c~ O a) L) L O cu 0) cu rn O o 0 0 0~ 0 co~,o.L N U Y U p cu O p 0 0 4- -0 c6 L (u ~EcU~° aci3CU C a) 3 c O N = c 0 oa)0c i cu mu V E U~ C cu 4- N v a) C- ~ Q L N Q CU ' O Q cu a) 0 m 'a N Q c N ` C E - O c0 Q Q U O C O V N f4 U (D 75 C cd p o c 3: p r -i5 C: CY cu Ca . -0 > o L U U a J E U C U) p o C O C ~ co D) C -0 C: C r 0 0 ,0 O ~ U L o a) co L CU a) Q. L U C U E cn CC (D a) O Q~ 0 =3 0 0 p L Q. L- tt: o - _OEU 0U X00 O 0 m 0) 0 CU - 0 Q E ca C) L o O i cu O - = a) i a) p Q O (D 0) cu > V i ~ 0 C _ CD 0 (D = 0 0) > a) a i N c 0 n co CD 0 0 Co 0 I-.c~ CD 0-M U Z) .D-0 - a) C =3 -C co - p C O O 0 0 0-0 -0 CO D)-b - C C: cu 0 7 L O ~ O 0 a) O 3 ~ C ) > 'p C o n ( . cn a) CU ca > 01- c -0 Co 4-- O E E L a) a a o 0 0 w c c ) U ~ a i ~ >,U0 N rnm c rn c 3 0 C.o c O_ -C .C a) a) :3 cu :3 -0 45 (n cu 0 Z3 0Y vc`~ i a) S-- C) cocc .(n ~ n-0 co a) cn m a) 3 O ~ a) m a) C m a 0 Y C (L) N 0 ch N Q i2 U c m E y= -a t -0 c U .-C O - O m 0 ` m c p -C rn C L a) m = a)m a) a) . v cu C to (D~"= m C O E L N G U p 3 0 a) (D = 0 (D Co • 0) >,CUML j> , v a)~ 0 c:3 ra _ C 'C L p m C2 E U U cn t m C 0 N O > ~ O O .Q m U_ O C ccu ' E O) O 7 ` L C 0 r oo C C O OL : a) L am M m m~a)N = m E m . O CO) cn O O L m N w a) r p m CA y 3: C a) (D m = C m U~a) E 33- ( D a mi2(D O m a) 2 ~ L 7 O N U CL C V co a) 0) M a) M ` U) 0 ~ U a) Q U C 0 a) Q N ~ a) 1 ~ - O + " - 3 C= U CL r a) c C N N N co a) r - U - - O a) C O a) . - 0 n a) rn 0 O C a) rn a) L ~ o O Q. 2 z 2 - 0 O a) H-0 CU U-0 70 0 0 C -C CAC rn O co L m m to aj o ) 4) owcmm c aa ) E EE•2~~ 4, a) (L) -C N,cnva)mcn Q m co u) N 0 a) L- a) U O N N L O C2 O C C O m a) C = CU N L q- CU 0- m d co) m m C a) i ,O ,F C co Q, Co O 3 L- ' C Q p c O ~ O 0. 0 -0 r- O 3. c ~ . C o 0. O 0) a) C L L - 0 0 p O > U 2 p O 0 0 0 O 2 0 0 V m p L, cn Q Q 0 L L L c) o a> O m L n O a) -C a) a+ C - U_ O m ¢ _ N m C O v - 7 N C p a) -0 'V - 0 C C C O O CL 3 0 tF- co a) 0- 6) Q Q ~U . a) cn =3 . cu 2 `S C L - a) In C CU a L (D 0 a) m c 7E a) - U = Q Q _r_ O 0 -0 C O a) C C O a) a) p a) m H) _0 O O C 6 co CD 0 v- O O U d ' ir- • n O) a) C C co a) N O L a) O L a) m C 'O a cn O - p C O L CL 0 0-0.- a) w . co c a) Q a) V p E m ca ~ V C 0 ~ m a) -0 CL O U p O O U O 0 O C a) C O L' 0 O C O -C ~ ~ C U) CM M U) C 0 L C N a) a) -0 = 0 i N~ ~ ~ 0 U (D Q a) O O O E -f- L U m a) N O p U C M 0 C O m a) a) U . o d _ ' O a) M rn a) a) O O (n m to 0 m c aa)) m m tm 0 H.rmcw.U U C3 m-0 mLU a) C -2 CD p E U 0 y _0 N a) m C - cn N O _ a) a) i O U O C ' 3 0 a) N 2 ~4 ~~m _ cu 0 m U E C 2 a) C a) O a) 7 .Q -C cn -0 m rn m O N V E o c a) a) ! - 0 c) QD Q) co a) U co N p cy c F3 co cn •c E U O U = c -o O c '3 j O ~ O rn m :3 _0 U O _ o O N Q ~ c -j CU U a) c a) a) m~•- E-a ~ CL - NL > 0).E) - m _c~ -1 -0 C M N E O O c~ C>~ a) M -0 'IT C C O C V= O M N N N o , co U L . N a) m m Y o N a) c '0 C) ) a) 0 C) - E co O O L E a) o 3 c c`" ~ O O N • .Q M M N o M L a) ~O C ~ c E a O M a) ° U ~ c . a) a) 00 m x M. c 'E -r- L~ 3 ~ - 5 EcO c > u ~ Via) a= E ) . -C . r- C c M 0 c L ~c a) o o E U -a a) m O N O ~ v i L Q Q N tM a) N M a 05 Q Q- w y N O O N a) O C N c u M M a) co 3: Z; m E w Q M N M -O - ) ~ > U Q- M N m r- p 0 -0 a) O V N ) c Q a) _c O- a -o>+ EE(Da)Em~N a) a) C OL -C0 o D m 0 0 U c Npa~° - -0 Q a) N a) N CL°- L~= C o M -o M -0 c Non -0 :3 c m a) Q O a) O - CL a) a) m _ a) t~ m m o _ ca co ' . a :3 = m N CU M o M V L Q. -C C) > N~ O . c C: CU c Q N L U F- U O a) c - Q- c U p + co 5 4- Co IT p O cn a) _ N :t- 0) N O c a) E m cn :5 O N O c O O O co co 0) 3 cu c O ~ *Cl) m E O N- 2n c O N 0 -C C c .r y+ .c .c a U c O p d N N N M 0 .N a) m _ M C M "T 3 - CO v_ O c F- m a) N M co O V y' N N E a) a.- c L o O co '-0 m to p a) c U 0 a) ~ L a3 a O cw..; o 0 c c a) c M O c rn p L M a) E c'E N O c p E Nc m c o a) a) C c c a) M~ a) H N O ` U O c a) N Q E O 2 N c pp C O U - - O a0 O m-0 N m O V a E . LL: M C L N E_ O 00 o m M O O O c E N a) a) E L N O M O co r a) m a U p) p c N -'Z a) O O C CU _ M Q U r- U -0 -E a; O c o N o 3: O c O -0 0) a) E C V _ O co -C a) a) Co CD a 0-006=5 U a) c a) m E N L c m co a) a a) L° ° Q L m E m E 3 L E -0 N -p 4-: M c N L I- s a N H n o a)cn ° o m. E ' O C M ~ O- oQ a) N 3 M-0 ° E p E m O_ c_arn -n a) L a) c O CO c C c L C p F U L o to a) m U a) M w :3 'D M mUU 0 c v ~ = a C L- < ca C IM Q - U pw ~-0 c a a) N c L c ~ . a) a) o m O . V ( 6 V m I a)~ E 0 c 3 ~c H~ L~~~ m 0) n) - o N -p ° H ~ c Q- c ~ D o a) m ~ M m m -0 -0 c-mcl) u) ~-c"Ea Egw CL O = i M aci ~O~ o ° o~ ° a) ~a CL_0> 55 04- -L~Z ~ a) c O m o m m O U m N a) H~U 3U~ 3 a~ co m-0 t+ 4- N L O a) 7L-- o N c m m m C a) 0 co ao a) C6 r- C E N - cc nu c E 30 C Q V D C 0 a) L Q N O a) c a) a) - ~ C Q N Mcvc.~o ~•oa _ a) -E (D 3:4- - N cn 0 U p L c C Q-0 0) O a) _j m U" a) c O 3 o a) m p E o Y~ - 'n in 2 D -0 )rn v ai a) 0crn :3 N N E~ N~ E2 C-) C: o c 4- 3 oY.N (Da rnp~- c a) o OJT. O L - N a) U p Q ~m c 4 o 0 o r- aa)) O Envoi a)c cca~ a~i , a) cu coo c m c I- m.N MU o.:= avoiw E ~ o ° coi coi N L. m o N >O m -p a)()odE3 c J ~ "=~o O c 0 a) N= a)c~a C - c o~ ) v Q-° M M 0) o° a L c ' C Q ~m cm)c c O. N c L C o O ti i C 0 CU (D c 5 (D O CU -0 Lr- M U) c p a) p :3 5, ` N U) W C: -0 c m Q N U M O M• V ~ a) O c c) m 3 T a) m i ~-a L v oJ- V~L M m QQ ~ m~- c 0) CD a) O, :3 c 0 0-0 O c cu a) Co , r cn -0 ti c cu E m _ 0 O O Op c r m e N Q a) N a) N 3 N C6 m zt! O Q Q O QU E.c Q.~. QML.QQ m.c m m 'a~H M 3 acn ) 3 N CD ~ C _ use nCn♦ a) v W L M a) a) O 0- N a~ ca M 9) a1 - 0 CU cu o 0) C 3 1 N N N N U m Q_j 3 Qm_ N M V C O C - 2 N 555 O - 0 C L m M O o o c 3 ca )c ic o7 L- N O.0 CU J co "p 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 DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 10:00 A.M., MONDAY, JANUARY 25, 2010 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, at the Board's discretion, regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Citizens who wish to speak should sign up prior to the beginning of the meeting on the sign-up cards provided. Please use the microphone and also state your name and address at the time the Board calls on you to speak. PLEASE NOTE: Citizen input regarding matters that are or have been the subject of a public hearing will NOT be included in the record of that hearing. 2. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Document No. 2010-057, an Oregon Department of Land Conservation & Development Technical Assistance Grant for a Regional Economic Opportunities Analysis - Peter Gutowsky, Community Development 3. A HEARING on Appeals of the Hearings Officer's Decision Reversing the Planning Division's Decision to Issue a Land Use Compatibility Statement and Building Permit for the Remodel of an Existing Dwelling (Dowell) - William Groves CONSENT AGENDA 4. Signature of Letters Appointing Steve Johnson (through February 28, 2011) and Derek Staab (through February 28, 2013) to the Deschutes River Mitigation and Enhancement Committee 5. Signature of a Letter Reappointing Charlie Jones to the Beaver Special Road District Board, through December 31, 2012 6. Signature of a Letter Appointing Ken Cooper to the Deschutes County Historic Landmarks Commission as an Ex-officio County Representative Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 1 of 6 Pages 7. Approval of Minutes: • Business Meeting: January 20 • Work Session: January 20 CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE BLACK BUTTE RANCH COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 8. DISCUSSION of an Amendment to a Memorandum of Understanding regarding the Operation of the Black Butte Ranch County Service District - Mark Pilliod, County Counsel CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 911 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 9. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 911 County Service District (two weeks) CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION AND 4-H COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 10. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District (two weeks) RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 11. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County (two weeks) 12. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 2 of 6 Pages 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) Friday, January 22 11:30 a.m. Economic Development for Central Oregon Forecast Luncheon, at Riverhouse 6:30 p.m. Redmond Chamber of Commerce Business Awards Banquet, at Eagle Crest Monday, January 25 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday, January 27 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) - possible quorum of Planning Commissioners Friday, January 29 8:00 a.m. Annual Goal Setting Retreat Monday, February l 3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council) Wednesday, February 3 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 3 of 6 Pages Monday, February 8 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday, February 10 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Monday, February 15 Most County Offices will be closed to observe Presidents' Day Wednesday, February 17 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Monday, February 22 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 12:00 noon Regular Meeting with Department Directors 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday, February 24 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Monday, March 1 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' 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 3 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 4 of 6 Pages 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, March 4 10:00 a.m. Quarterly Update with the District Attorney 11:00 a.m. Quarterly Update with Community Development 1:30 p.m. Quarterly Update with the Road Department 2:30 p.m. Quarterly Update with Solid Waste Wednesday, March 10 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, March 11 7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Redmond Council, Council Chambers, Redmond 11:00 a.m. Quarterly Update with Health and Human Services Monday, March 15 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday, March 17 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, March 18 9:00 a.m. Semi-annual Meeting with the Clerk 10:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with Community Justice Monday, March 22 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday, March 24 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 25, 2010 Page 5 of 6 Pages 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Thursday, March 25 9:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with the Fair & Expo 10:00 a.m. Semi-annual Meeting with the Assessor 11:00 a.m. Quarterly Meeting with the Commission on Children & Families 2:00 p.m. Quarterly Meeting with the Sheriff Monday, March 29 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) Wednesday, March 31 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session - could include executive session(s) 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, January 25, 2010 Page 6 of 6 Pages