Loading...
2015-96-Minutes for Meeting March 04,2015 Recorded 3/13/2015 DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS CJ 105"9Y NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK 1rd 1 COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 03/13/2015 08'17'51 AM II II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II III 21 _96 v-rES c °C1 O 2 f/ Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 ;y\w; (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 2015 Commissioners'Hearing Room-Administration Building- 1300 NW Wall St.,Bend Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney. Also present were Torn Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; David Doyle and Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; Nick Lelack, Peter Gutowsky, Anthony Raguine, Paul Blikstad and Will Groves, Community Development; and about twenty other citizens including Ted Shorack of The Bulletin. Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. CITIZEN INPUT None was offered. 3. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Document No. 2015- 118, an Improvement Agreement between Deschutes County and Tetherow Rim LLC, for Roads and Utilities in the 29-Lot Single Family Subdivision Granted Approval under TP-14-1023. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 1 of 13 Will Groves gave a brief overview of the item. The request is for an extension of time to complete the roads and utilities, and provide security for same through a bond. The improvements have to be completed no later than one year from the recording of the subdivision plat. This will allow them to proceed. The final bond, Exhibit D, has not been received but is required before recording. Commissioner Baney said that on page 5 of the improvement agreement, the dollar amount is not the same as on the memo. Mr. Groves said there were some small changes and the new version is now ready for signature. UNGER: Move signature BANEY: Second. VOTE: UNGER: Yes. BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. 4. Before the Board was a Public Hearing and Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 2015-002, a Code Amendment to Allow a New Manufactured Home/RV Park in the MUA-10 Zone. Chair DeBone read the opening statement for the hearing. Paul Blikstad outlined the hearings process and gave an overview of the proposed Ordinance. In regard to conflicts of interest, Commissioner Baney said she only discussed this item at a work session, as did the other two Commissioners. There were no conflicts of interest to disclose and there were no challenges from the audience. Mr. Blikstad said the applicant was not required to address the transportation planning rule. It has been 29 years since a new manufactured home park has been established here, as the criteria is very exact. It would have a minor impact on traffic but could also help with low-cost housing needs. Tom Anderson asked if adjacent means a common lot line or the street. Mr. Blikstad stated that the existing zone goes to the middle of the street. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 2 of 13 Commissioner Unger asked about road access other than Highway 97. The property is against the railroad tracks and appears no other road is possible. Mr. Blikstad said this is the case. Commissioner Baney said that the number of units does not trigger the transportation planning rule, but there does not appear to be much information from ODOT about any potential traffic implications. Gary Knight said he has owned the property for many years. Commissioner Baney asked what the interactions with ODOT have been. Access to Highway 97 is a potential issue. Mr. Knight stated he has talked with representatives of ODOT and the • g p they proposed a stoplight on the southern end of the property. Four plots have been combined into one. (He referred to an oversized map.) He will be entitled to another access point and one will be right in, right out only. ODOT is purchasing some property to continue a sidewalk. Commissioner Baney asked if this is in the record at this point. Commissioner Unger said this is new information to him, and he has been involved in planning the north end of town, regarding the Cooley Road area, and he is unfamiliar with this. Mr. Knight stated they are moving from south to north on this and told him it might be five years. There will be minimally increased traffic there. Commissioner Baney said she is on the Oregon Transportation Commission and she wants to be sure this has been addressed. She is supportive of limited additional use but wants to be clear about what can be done. Commissioner Unger stated he spoke with an ODOT representative and was told the project is so small that it does not trigger ODOT involvement. Access onto the highway is a concern due to the amount of traffic and speed. Mr. Knight stated that there has not been an accident there since he has owned the property. Nunzie Gould, citizen, said there is an interesting model established by Brooks Resources regarding keeping housing affordable, in conjunction with NeighborImpact. It involves a deed restriction having no escalation on the land, to keep the affordable housing project in inventory even after it is sold. It is important if it is said that something is to be affordable housing to identify how it will stay that way. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 3 of 13 It is not just this property but how the broader picture is handled. Affordable housing is needed and how it relates to transportation models is an important part of planning. The City of Bend and Bend Metro Park and Recreation District staff have talked about reducing SDC's to keep property affordable. Instead, this needs to be viewed as how to achieve this goal and what will it be in fifty years. This applicant may not be planning this, but there is a lot to consider. Everyone needs to know the facts. Commissioner Baney stated that no tax abatement or waiver of SDC's has been mentioned. Concerns are mostly how this impacts Highway 97. Mr. Blikstad said they could leave the record open for two weeks to get written information from ODOT. Commissioner Unger wants to get some kind of response from ODOT to figure out how this will be addressed. Commissioner Baney said that there are some assumptions being made on improvements and use, and she would like to hear from ODOT on phasing and funding. Commissioner Unger stated the text amendment talks about no more than ten dwellings. The Oregon Department of State Lands property also falls under this amendment; he asked if this would also limit them to ten units. He is concerned. that the limit would be applicable to both. Mr. Blikstad said that the amendment could require findings regarding the TPR as well. Commissioner Baney noted that this would be a significant expense to the applicant. Peter Gutowsky said that to clarify, the applicant chose to submit a text amendment to allow this. Two properties fit this description. The trip cap is the applicant's choice since he did not want to address the TPR. If the Board contemplated this, staff would advise the findings would not comply with Goal 12. There has to be consistency. The questions regarding Highway 97 might best be addressed by ODOT in person. Commissioner Baney noted that some are assuming that the manufactured homes are affordable housing, but that relationship is not in question. This is privately owned property, and what is before the Board is not a request to add affordable housing stock. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 4 of 13 Mr. Gutowsky said that this is just a text amendment, that if approved would allow the applicant to apply for a Goal 14 exception, a conditional use and a site review. Orientation and access would be considered at that point. This would be the first of several steps to be able to put in six units. The hearing will remain open and staff will invite ODOT representatives to participate in a discussion. The hearing was continued to Monday, March 16 at 10 a.m. 5. Before the Board were Deliberations towards a Decision regarding Tumalo Irrigation District's Request for Approval of a Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) to Transfer Water Rights from Tumalo Creek to Reservoirs on Private Property (Owner: KC Development Group, LLC). Anthony Raguine provided an overview of the issue. He clarified for the record that on February 20, TID submitted its final legal argument. There was new evidence in Exhibit B of that submittal, which was not allowed. That new evidence was redacted from that review and a statement in Exhibit C that references Exhibit B. However, two other statements referenced Exhibit B. The Board can affirm the redaction and remove from consideration references to the redacted information. Chair DeBone said he disregarded this information; the other Commissioners said the same. BANEY: Move to not consider Exhibit B, statement of reference in Exhibit C, and not consider those references shown on page 4, paragraph 6. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Mr. Lelack clarified that the water does not come from Tumalo Creek but rather from the Tumalo Reservoir. Mr. Raguine referred to the matrix provided to the Board. The decision for the Board is whether the LUCS is a development action or a land use action. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 5 of 13 Commissioner Baney asked about permitting for surface mining and for a recreation facility. There was information regarding the amount of material that would trigger a permit for surface mining. Mr. Raguine said there was not a minimum or maximum yardage, but the Hearings Officer felt that either outright permitted or conditional uses and related activities met that threshold for surface mining. Commissioner Unger considers this a development action. Chair DeBone feels that it is more a land use issue. Commissioner Baney said that at its initial face value, she understands how they got to this being a development action and for water conservation. However, the record is strong that this is a land use action. To isolate this part of it is a disservice to the opportunities that are afforded through a conditional use versus an outright use. Mr. Raguine said that if it is a development action, the question is whether the Planning Director have the authority to treat it as such. Commissioner Baney feels the record as a whole lends itself to a land use action. Mr. Raguine said the Curl v. Deschutes County case simply said that categorizing the use makes it a development action. They differ with the applicant, with the Planning Director treating it as a development action. But the Board can consider it a land use action for processing its review. Chair DeBone indicated he thinks it is a land use action. Commissioner Unger feels the transfer of water and the reservoir is a development action and the reservoir itself will be addressed down the road. Mr. Raguine reiterated that the Board agrees the initial action of the LUCS is a development action. They confirmed. The next question was whether the Planning Director had the authority to treat the development action as a land use action during the review process. Therefore, they would go to question 3. The next question is if the LUCS only identified the water rights transfer. The Hearings Officer brought up whether the LUCS should identify the creation of the reservoirs. Staff feels yes, that you can't have one without the other. The Board agreed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 6 of 13 Chair DeBone said the scope includes moving dirt and putting in a liner. Commissioner Baney stated that it was not just water going into an existing reservoir. There was a lot of work to be done to facilitate the reservoir itself. Mr. Raguine referred to question #4. In the RR-10 zone, there is an outright use for irrigation district purposes. The Hearings Officer disagreed in this case, and felt the scope of the work met the threshold for surface mining for legislative review, referencing Squaw Creek Irrigation District. The question is whether the creation of those reservoirs an outright permitted use or does it rise above that. Commissioner Unger feels they have a right to operate reservoirs and canals, and this is a complement of this system, outside of the County' outright authority. They created a new reservoir. Commissioner Baney said that the word `existing' does not apply as these did not exist at the time. Chair DeBone feels this is a valuable asset for the District, but this is an existing surface mine area. They just redefined the use. He is leaning the other way. Mr. Raguine said there are reservoirs and the water rights transfer to consider. If this rises to the level of surface mining, they needed a conditional use permit. Commissioner Baney feels this is a noble idea to fill a need, but it is a matter of how they get there. The majority of the Board felt this rises to the level of needing a conditional use permit for mining. This is because it was not part of an existing system. The reservoir was not there before. Mr. Raguine went to #8, the use of the reservoirs as a recreational facility. The Hearings Officer felt that this also requires a conditional use permit for a recreational use requiring large acreage. The applicant thinks this is accessory and no CUP is needed. Commissioner Baney said it needs a CUP. Commissioner Unger feels recreation is a historic use for reservoirs, but there has been a change in use in this case. Chair DeBone thinks this is a very different use than surface mining. Commissioner Baney said there is a path there, but it needs to be done properly. Impacts need to be mitigated. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 7 of 13 Regarding question #9, the argument by appellants is that the wells and road construction are part of a plan to put in a cluster development. The applicant argues that this is not correct, and that a conditional use permit and plat review would be required later. The appellant states that this is the first phase of the development and needs a CUP. Commissioner Unger feels that there is a lot that has to happen for a cluster development and they are not there yet. Commissioner Baney stated that the applicant is at risk making improvements without this being clear. If they invest in this, they may still not get what they want. Chair DeBone agreed. Mr. Raguine said the Board appears to be affirming the Hearings Officer's decision. The Board can affirm this and can also add additional findings. Mr. Lelack stated that the Board can do this today or address it later. Commissioner Baney did not look at all of the Hearings Officer's decision points,just the basics on the matrix, so is not ready to make that blanket statement. Commissioner Unger agreed. Mr. Lelack said they can prepare findings for the Board to review. Mr. Raguine stated the applicant has tolled the clock to March 31. Commissioner Baney does not feel a work session is necessary prior to deliberations on the final decision. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda. BANEY: Move approval of the Consent Agenda, with the exception of the minutes which are still to be reviewed. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Consent Agenda Items 6. Board Signature of Letters regarding Howell's Hilltop Acres Special Road District: Accepting the Resignation of Gary 011erenshaw and Thanking him for his Service; and appointing Bill Welch, through December 31, 2015 Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 8 of 13 7. Approval of Minutes: • Business Meeting of February 25, 2015 • Work Sessions of February 23 and 25, 2015 CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 8. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the Amount of $28,015.19. UNGER: Move approval, subject to review. BANEY: Second. VOTE: UNGER: Yes. BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-H COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 9. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District in the Amount of$2,187.70. UNGER: Move approval, subject to review. BANEY: Second. VOTE: UNGER: Yes. BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 10. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of$566,062.60. UNGER: Move approval, subject to review. BANEY: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 9 of 13 VOTE: UNGER: Yes. BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Mr. Anderson noted that this included $24,000 paid to the Humane Society of Central Oregon regarding a dog seizure issue, out of the Sheriff's Office fund, since the dogs had to remain in custody. David Doyle is trying to coordinate a better process with the D.A. so a sizeable bill does not result from situations like this. 11. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA A. Chair Baney said that Carol Stiles has asked that the American Free University, which is celebrating its 20th anniversary, receive a letter of support to celebrate this relationship. The Board was agreeable. B. John Huddle, Vice President of the Citizens Action Group, and Wendall Evers, 2nd Vice President, said that CAG was to pick up the matching funds for public transportation. He showed a check for $3,125 to satisfy the total of$5,000. Commissioner Baney commended them on helping to provide a service to local residents. Most was raised by senior volunteers. Andrew Spreadborough, Executive Director of Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council/Cascades East is pleased for the support of CAG. They recognize the work that went into this. It is consistent with the spirit of a rural system that needs a lot of different funding sources. The other piece is this has a very favorable match rate. Karen Friend, the COIC Transportation Manager, said she appreciates the CAG stepping up to do this. It is fairly unique that a community organization would do this. She hopes the community recognizes this effort. Mr. Huddle said that Molly Ray put in a lot of time and effort and he wished she could be present. He presented the check to COIC. Chair Baney said that Deschutes County matched the $5,000 as well. It all helps. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 10 of 13 Commissioner Unger noted that if CAG had not stepped up to do what the City would not, it would have been much more difficult. Mr. Huddle said that he is trying to find out if OSU-Cascades has a graduate student who can take on the organizational portion of this project. Judith Ure said the cycle is corning to an end and the Board approved $5,000 as a match for a two-year period. This was paid out of video lottery funds. The question is what level of support, if any, the Board wants to support dial-a-ride services. This application is due March 11. Commissioner Unger stated it should not be just the County paying, but someone has to. He wants to know who will step up as well, whether the City of La Pine or CAG. They want more discussion, but the timing is not right for that. Commissioner Unger asked if the Board should put the funds in and then find partners to participate. CET needs to know what figure to put in the application. Ms. Ure said that the match drives the total request. The total project is $44,000. The requirement is 10.27%. If the Board wants to fund it at $10,000 this drives the grant amount of$87,000. A total of$1.12 million comes to the County and the cities apply for part of this. The City of La Pine does not feel it can come up with $5,000 for its citizens. Commissioner Baney asked if they did not just consider La Pine, would this secure funds for the other cities. Mr. Spreadborough said there are four communities tapping in, as well as other organizations. Chair DeBone asked if this is just dial-a-ride Ms. Friend said there is the connector service and services within La Pine. It is about half of each. The amount applied for is about 20% of the budget for La Pine services. It is mostly for seniors and people with disabilities. The service area is well beyond the UGB there because so much of the needed services are in the rural area. About 1/3 is within the city. This is unique to La Pine. Commissioner Unger said it is up to the community as well as the Board on how the residents are to be supported. Chair DeBone stated this is discretionary and may not be a core role for the County. Commissioner Baney feels there is an economic impact and necessary service. There is a cost savings to helping those who need this assistance get to their jobs or whatever. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 11 of 13 Commissioner Unger agreed. It is critical to the users. He hopes to continue discussions with the City of La Pine, as they have partnered with them on many things. Chair DeBone stated that they are still a young city and they are not experiencing a lot of growth. Commissioner Baney suggested that the City at least support this at 10% of the total, with the County picking up the rest of the $10,000. Commissioner Baney hopes that the City feels this is important to its citizens. It is well leveraged and very necessary for the people there. Chair DeBone said there are a lot of rural neighborhoods and marginal roads. He agrees they should partner. Commissioner Unger feels the City needs to understand the need as well, and recognize the County's expectations of them. Commissioner Baney knows there is a lot of struggles with affordable housing, which tends to be on the outskirts, but those people also need transportation. Chair DeBone supports $10,000 for a two-year period but not have it become a core responsibility of the County. BANEY: Move submittal of$10,000 into the grant application, with the City matching it at $2,500 per year. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Commissioner Baney wants to put pressure on the City to come up with funds to participate. Being no other items brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:35 p.m. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 12 of 13 2015 for the DATED this Day o f��(/ Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. d7rodady"-0--- Anthony DeBone, Chair Alan Unger, Vice Chair c ATTEST: �-�— (r2O1/1"--1---- Tammy Baney, Coral;ssioner Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 13 of 13 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT FOR A LEGISLATIVE PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS • The applicants have the burden of proving that they are entitled to the approval requested. • Testimony and evidence at this hearing must be directed toward the approval criteria, as well as toward any other criteria in the comprehensive land use plan of the County or land use regulations which any person believes apply to this decision. • Failure on the part of any person to raise an issue with sufficient specificity to afford the Board of County Commissioners and parties to this proceeding an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals on that issue. Additionally, failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to the approval with sufficient specificity to allow the Board to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court. • The Board's decision on this application will be based upon the record and the Staff Report and the testimony and evidence presented at this hearing. • The hearing will be conducted in the following order. 1. The staff will give a report. 2. The applicant presents testimony and evidence. 3. Proponents and opponents testify and present evidence. 4. The applicant presents rebuttal testimony. 5. At the Board's discretion, if the applicants presented new evidence on rebuttal, opponents may be recognized for a rebuttal presentation. 6. Staff will be afforded an opportunity to make any closing comments. • The Board may limit the time period for presentations. • If anyone wishes to ask a question of a witness, the person may direct the question to the Chair. The Chair is free to decide whether or not to ask such questions of the witness. • The grant of a continuance or record extension shall be at the discretion of the Board. • If the Board grants a continuance, it shall continue the public hearing to a date certain. • If, at the conclusion of the hearing, the Board leaves the record open for additional written evidence or testimony, the record shall be left open to a date certain for submittal of new written evidence or testimony. • If the hearing is continued or the record left open, the applicant shall also be allowed a period to a date certain after the record is closed to all other parties to submit final written arguments but no new evidence in support of the application. • Commissioners must disclose any conflicts of interest. Does any commissioner have anything to disclose and, if so, please state the nature and extent? • Does any party wish to challenge any Commissioner based on conflicts of interest? Bonnie Baker From: Judith Ure Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 4:19 PM To: Judith Ure Cc: Tom Anderson; Bonnie Baker Subject: Grant for Transit Services in La Pine bcc: Board of Commissioners The following information is related to a topic that will be discussed under"other items" during tomorrow's business meeting. In 2013, Deschutes County received a two-year grant from the Oregon Department of Transportation in the amount of $87,371. The source of the grant was the Federal Transportation Agency's Section 5310 Program and it is currently being used to support demand-responsive (Dial-a Ride) services in the La Pine community, primarily for the elderly and disabled. The services are provided by Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council's(COIC) Cascades East Transit(CET) through a sub-recipient agreement with the County. The$87,371 grant required a $10,000 local match, 50%of which the Board approved from the County's video lottery funds over the two-year grant period. The remaining 50%was committed by the La Pine Community Action Group. The 2013 award will expire on June 30, 2015. However,the new 2015-17 Section 5310 solicitation is currently open with applications due to the County by March 11. COIC Director Andrew Spreadborough recently contacted Commissioner Unger and La Pine Mayor Ken Mulenex to determine if there is an interest in continuing the La Pine demand-responsive services through a new two-year grant and, if so,whether funds could be made available for the required match. Following that conversation and according to Karen Friend of CET, both the City of La Pine and the La Pine Community Action Group declined to commit match funds during the 2015-17 grant period. As a result, CET has suggested that the amount of the 2015-17 grant request be reduced to leverage just the County's portion of the local match, or approximately$44,000 in federal funds. This would allow the County, if the Board chooses,to continue to provide$5,000 ($2,500 per year for two years) as it is currently. However,the reduction in grant funds would also require a corresponding decrease in the service level currently provided to the La Pine Community. I expect a representative from COIC/CET to be present at tomorrow's meeting to answer any questions you may have about the this issue. If you would like additional information prior to the meeting though, please let me know. Judith M. Ure Management Analyst Department of Administrative Services Deschutes County 541-330-4627 1 November 24,2014 Scott Aycock,Community and Economic Development Manager Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council 334 NE Hawthorne Avenue Bend,OR 97701 Subject: PROPOSAL FOR NEUTRAL FACILITATION SERVICES DEVELOPING PARTNERSHIPS TO FUND TRANSIT EXPANSION IN BEND Dear Scott: Cogan Owens Cogan, LLC(COC) is pleased to submit this proposal to provide neutral facilitation services for the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council (COIC)for the Developing Partnerships to Fund Transit Expansion in Bend project(Bend Transit Funding Partnerships). As you know, COC is currently engaged by the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT)and the Association of Oregon Counties (AOC)to facilitate Transportation-Human Services pilot projects for Central Oregon and for Linn/Benton/Lincoln Counties. The overall goal of these projects is to improve coordination of public transit and human service transportation. An additional goal is to improve the linkages between economic development, housing and transportation by identifying opportunities to better coordinate resources available for transportation services. We believe that our pilot project work in Central Oregon perfectly dovetails with facilitation for the Bend Transit Funding Partnerships project and that we are well-positioned to provide the requested facilitation services for the following reasons: » There are time and cost efficiencies associated with the two projects occurring within the same timeframe. • The process and products for the Bend Transit Funding Partnerships project can help inform the Central Oregon pilot project. « COC specializes in public policy and local governance strategic planning and facilitation and has a long track record of successful facilitation of transportation projects, including current or recent facilitation for ConnectOregon, Portland Transportation System Plan Update,SMART Transit Integration project,Statewide Freight Route Capacity Advisory Committee, and Oregon Jobs and Transportation Act,Section 18 Implementation. O We are versant in transit funding issues through the above projects and management of a statewide study of Public Transportation—Human Services Coordination and the two pilot projects for ODOT/AOC. « We have a long history of work in Bend and Central Oregon for state and local governments. 6 We have a well-established reputation of providing neutral facilitation and a track-record of success in bringing together diverse stakeholders with differing views and ideas to build consensus and resolve complex issues. Neutral Facilitation Services—Developing 1 COGAN OWENS Partnerships to Fund Transit Expansion in COACOGAN C . UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH We understand that COIC is seeking facilitation of a community partner group for a short,focused process to develop agreements on high priority transit service enhancements in Bend and short-term funding mechanisms for them. Desired outcomes are a partnership framework and a series of partnership agreements. We further understand that a flexible but efficient process is desired that is more focused on outcomes than on process. In a prior meeting of the partner group, needs and desired outcomes were confirmed and potential additional partners identified. Early in December,discussion will be initiated to prioritize needs,with the focus then moving to identifying and prioritizing solutions and securing funding commitments. The goal is to complete the project within the next four months, culminating in a memorandum of understanding among the partners that identifies funding commitments and mechanisms. To take advantage of the positive momentum to date,we propose the following tasks designed to complete the project by the end of March 2015. Task 1: Project Scoping Subtasks: • Consult with the project manager and coordination team to refine project expectations, approach, roles,communication protocols and other project management considerations. • Based upon consultation with the project coordination team,consult with community partners to affirm expectations and to obtain a grounding in their specific perspectives, participation challenges and expectations,etc. • Review background materials provided by the project manager. • Advise on mechanisms to inform and involve organizations not participating as partners. • Research funding tools in use elsewhere that could be applicable to the project. • Attend the December 17 presentation to Bend City Council as an observer. Schedule: Within one week of project initiation Task 2: Facilitation Subtasks: • Organize up to seven partner meetings, including prepare agendas and assemble/distribute background materials. This includes six partner meetings and a potential additional meeting for MOU signing. • Consult with the co-chairs and project coordination team prior to all meetings;conduct meeting debriefings as appropriate. • Facilitate meetings,ensuring full and balanced participation of all participants,and prepare and distribute meeting summaries. • Assist in organizing and facilitate one public meeting if determined essential to partner commitments to funding. • Respond to partner inquiries and serve as liaison among partners and between members and the project team. • Assist COIC in documenting partner group deliberations and assembling supporting information. • Participate in presentation of project outcomes to Bend City Council Schedule: January through March 2015 Neutral Facilitation Services—Developing 2 COGAN OWENS Partnerships to Fund Transit Expansion in COGAN Task 3: Project Management Subtasks: « Hold regular project management phone calls or meetings with project staff to track progress on key tasks and deadlines,identify unanticipated issues and develop alternative approaches as needed to ensure successful project completion. • Prepare monthly progress reports and invoices that describe the activities undertaken and track expenditures and hours. Schedule: Ongoing QUALIFICATIONS Cogan Owens Cogan, LLC(COC) provides integrated services in planning,community engagement and sustainability.Our mission is engaging people to create and sustain great communities. We are a multi- disciplinary, multi-talented firm of seven planners, public process experts and other professionals with extensive experience designing, managing and facilitating planning processes that bring together diverse stakeholders with differing views and aspirations to build consensus and develop implementable plans. We work with our clients to bring the public into the process early and often to create a product that has the broadest public support possible. In addition,our firm's experience in the areas of intergovernmental relations, public policy and facilitation allows us to meet even the most complex and politically contentious challenges. Our work results in community-based solutions for clients in government, nonprofit organizations, business and industry. For more than 38 years, COC has been at the heart of the development of the land use system in Oregon,the Metro regional 2040 strategy,the Portland Plan,the Central City Plan and Portland's journey to leadership in sustainable planning and development. Our work in the US and China is cutting edge, leading to major innovations in sustainable development. COC is a recognized leader in the design and implementation of successful planning and public involvement programs. COC is located in downtown Portland and is certified as a Women Business Enterprise(WBE)and Emerging Small Business (ESB),#8015 by the State of Oregon.We can be found online at www.coganowens.com. Jim Owens, COC Principal, will be the project lead with support from COC associates as needed with meeting summaries, logistics,and other administrative tasks. Steve Faust,Senior Planner,will serve as backup facilitator in case of illness or other unforeseen circumstances. Jim is an experienced consensus-builder and facilitator of both large and small groups,specializing in land use,transportation and natural resource planning and public involvement. He is certified as a Collaborative Public Policy Practitioner and Large Group Facilitator by the Oregon Department of Justice Alternative Dispute Resolution Program and as a Senior Level Public Policy Facilitator by Oregon Consensus.Jim is also an experienced project manager and a well-recognized executive interviewer and technical writer. With more than 35 years of experience in public policy analysis and decision-making, he has developed a reputation as an impartial facilitator that helps multi-stakeholder groups get to "yes." A sampling of Jim's relevant projects includes: Portland Utility Oversight Blue Ribbon Commission,Portland City Council Facilitating the 12-member Portland Utility Oversight Blue Ribbon Commission established by City Commissioner Fish in collaboration the Mayor's Office and City Budget Office. The Commission was Neutral Facilitation Services—Developing 3 COGAN OWENS Partnerships to Fund Transit Expansion in COGAN COGAN convened as an independent review body to analyze potential reforms of the oversight and accountability of the Portland Water Bureau and Bureau of Environmental Services. The Commission recommendations,which are expected to be finalized shortly,focus on streamlining communications and transparency in the rate-making process. Tasks include project scoping,developing a proposed approach to the project, orientation with Commission members,organizing and facilitating Commission meetings and public meetings,serving as liaison among Commission members and between the Commission and City staff,and documenting Commission recommendations. Public Transportation-Human Services Coordination Pilot Projects Facilitating two Public Transportation-Human Services Coordination pilot projects in Central Oregon (Deschutes,Jefferson and Crook counties)and in mid-Willamette Valley(Linn, Benton and Lincoln counties). The project goal are to improve coordination of public transit and human service transportation and the linkages between economic development, housing and transportation by identifying opportunities to better coordinate resources available for public transportation services.Jim will be convening and facilitating stakeholders to identify needs and a limited set of key areas to focus on, based on a prioritization of issues in each of the pilot areas. Results will be documented in reports to ODOT and communicated to stakeholders. Transportation System Plan Update Facilitation,Portland Bureau of Transportation Over the past year,Jim has been facilitating a 25-member Transportation Expert Group (TEG)advising on key issues and developing recommendations for an update of the City of Portland Transportation System Plan. This stakeholder group has been reviewing all aspects of the City's transportation system and is developing policy and process recommendations for management of that system for the next 20 years. Transportation-Human Services Coordination Study,Association of Oregon Counties Provided an evidence-based analysis of coordination of transportation and human services and resources among state and local agencies and transit and human service providers.The goal of this study was to identify efficiencies in policies, programs and services that result in better access to transportation services by affected citizens. Researched the state of coordination in Oregon and nationally and developed recommended strategies to improve coordination at both the local and regional provider level and at the state agency level. Study led to the initiation of two pilot projects to assess how to best improve coordination of public transit and human service transportation at the regional level. Statewide Assessment of Public Transit Attitudes and Support,ODOT Public Transit Division COC conducted an assessment of attitudes and support of public transportation throughout Oregon. Tasks included working with ODOT to develop interview questions,conducting 147 interviews with transit providers,citizens and other stakeholders in eight diverse communities around the state,and analyzing and summarizing collected data. Transit Integration Strategies,South Metro Area Regional Transit(SMART),Wilsonville,OR Subconsultant to provide stakeholder engagement and community outreach for an assessment of strategies to better integrate SMART and TriMet transit services between Wilsonville and Portland. Also addressing options to continue to provide dial-a-ride services outside of Wilsonville in the face of rising costs. Neutral Facilitation Services--Developing 4 COGAN OWENS Partnerships to Fund Transit Expansion in COGAN ConnectOregon V and VI Final Review Committee Facilitation For the past two funding cycles,Jim facilitated the 25-member ConnectOregon V and VI Final Review Committees convened to evaluate and prioritize a list of projects for funding to be submitted to the Oregon Transportation Commission. Developed consensus process and Memorandum for Collaboration for approval by Committee members. Interviewed Committee members to identify priorities,concerns and expectations. Documented process to allocate funding and develop recommendations for future Connect°regon programs. Freight Route Advisory Committee Facilitation,ODOT Facilitated a specially appointed ODOT Freight Route Capacity Advisory Committee in rulemaking for ORS 366.215 (Freight Route Capacity Rule). Reviewed existing guidelines and background information and identified challenges to the rulemaking process.Developed process guidelines. Conducted interviews with committee members and ODOT staff to identify priorities,concerns and expectations for the rulemaking process. Facilitated committee meetings and prepared a Facilitator's Report documenting the process and the committee's recommendations. Jobs and Transportation Act,Section 18 Implementation Project,Oregon Consensus and ODOT Provided facilitation services to design a consensus-based process that will guide ODOT and other stakeholders to reach consensus on environmental performance standards and permit streamlining processes.To assist ODOT in implementing the 2009 HB2001 Jobs and Transportation Act,assessed stakeholder interests and designed a collaborative process to implement provisions in the Act requiring the incorporation of environmental performance standards and permit streamlining in state and local transportation projects.Advised on administrative rulemaking. Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan,ODFW Jim Owens provided facilitation services for four 1245 person stakeholder working groups developing recommended management programs/actions for ODFW's Coastal Species Management unit. Organized and facilitated orientation sessions, meetings of the groups within each strata and combined sessions to integrate the groups' products into a cohesive conservation and management plan.Also coordinated and facilitated public review of a draft plan and presentation to the Oregon Fish &Wildlife Commission. Regional Collaboration for Transportation Planning and Economic Development,ODOT Region 1 COC researched approaches to regional collaboration on transportation planning and economic development by other metropolitan areas. Recommended approaches for improved regional collaboration in the Portland metropolitan area.The recommended approaches were based on successful characteristics from select organizations that focused on transportation and economic development objectives in a metropolitan region.The product was a summary report of key findings from detailed case studies and a literature review of academic research and industry publications. Neutral Facilitation Services Developing 5 COGAN OWENS Partnerships to Fund Transit Expansion in COGAN COST ESTIMATES Our fees for this work, including direct expenses, will not exceed $11,840 without written consent. Costs are estimated as follows: Task v:r 1 ..Personnel and Expenses i a,, ` 'Tota ?; Jim Owens Administrative Expenses $160/hr. Support @$85/hr. Task 1: Project Scoping 4 $25 —^ Task 2: Facilitation 48 8 $1,200 Task 3: Project Management 8 4 $25 Total Hours 60 12 Total Cost $9,600 $1020 $1,250 $11,870 We are looking forward to working with COIC, project coordination team and the project partners on this project. I will out of the country until December 4,but will have intermittent email access. I will respond as quickly as possible to any questions. Thanks for your consideration. Sincerely, COGAN OWENS COGAN, LLC \sa-ered Ji Owens, Principal 8 3 SW Alder Street,Suite 320 Portland, OR 97205-3111 503-278-3452 jim.owens @coganowens.com Federal Tax Identification Number:93-0892446 State Identification Number: 10096344 WBE/ESB#8015, State of Oregon Neutral Facilitation Services—Developing 6 COGAN OWENS Partnerships to Fund Transit Expansion in COGAN LEGISLATIVE HEARING OPENING PROCESS: 1. CHAIR: "This is the time and place set for a hearing on ordinance 2014-02. The County file number is TA-14-2." 2. CHAIR to CDD staff: "Staff will outline the hearing procedures that will be followed." 3. CDD STAFF informs the audience as follows: • The hearings body—the Board of County Commissioners, in this case -will take testimony and receive written evidence concerning Ordinance 2014-02. • The ordinance proposes to amend Deschutes County Code 18.32.030 adding a new manufactured home/recreational vehicle park as a new use to the title . • All testimony shall be directed to the hearings body • At the conclusion of this hearing the hearings body will deliberate towards a decision or continue the hearing or deliberations to a date and time certain • The hearing will proceed as follows: o staff will provide a brief report o the applicant will present its testimony and evidence o the opponent (and/or proponent) will present its testimony and evidence o any other interested persons will then present testimony or evidence o the applicant, as the party bearing the burden of proof, will then be afforded an opportunity to present rebuttal testimony 4. CDD STAFF: "A full written version of the hearing procedures is available at the table at the side of the room." S. CDD STAFF: "Commissioners must disclose any conflicts of interest. Does any Commissioner have anything to disclose and, if so, please state the nature of same and whether you can proceed?" 6. BOARD: The hearings body discloses conflicts and states whether they are withdrawing from the hearing or whether they intend to continue with the hearing. 7. CDD STAFF: "Does any party wish to challenge any Commissioner (member of the hearings body) based on conflicts?" 8. CHAIR: open the hearing and direct staff to proceed with brief staff report. S Y Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division NW" P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend,Oregon 97708-6005 (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ STAFF REPORT FILE NUMBER: TA-14-2 APPLICANT: Gary Knight P.O. Box 6147 Bend, OR 97708 REQUEST: Text Amendment to Deschutes County Code (DCC), Title 18, Chapter 18.32, Multiple Use Agricultural Zone (MUA-10) to allow new manufactured home parks. STAFF CONTACT: Paul Blikstad, Senior Planner HEARING DATE: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners (Board) will hold a public hearing on March 4, 2015 at the Deschutes Service Center, starting at 10:00 a.m. to consider legislative text amendments to Deschutes County Code(DCC) Title 18.1 ISSUE: Shall the Board adopt text amendments to allow the possibility of new manufactured home parks in the MUA-10 zone (Attachment 2). RECOMMENDATION: TA-14 was reviewed by the Deschutes County Planning Commission. They recommended approval of the proposed text amendment on October 9, 2014, finding it to be consistent with the MUA-10 zone, as well as with the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 4). BACKGROUND: Applicant Gary Knight owns property immediately adjacent to the Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) that is zoned MUA-10. Mr. Knight would like to establish a new manufactured home park on his MUA-10 zoned property, 17-12-9A, 200, 300, 400, 500 (Attachment 5). Currently DCC Chapter 18.32 (MUA-10 Zone) does not provide for or allow a new manufactured home park. This prohibition is not based on any specific State regulation, or County Comprehensive Plan policy. A new manufactured home park does however, require the approval of an exception to A public notice,announcing the March 4th Board hearing was published in the Bulletin on February 9,2015. Quality Services Performed with Pride Statewide Planning Goal 14, Urbanization, as specified under Oregon Administrative Rules 660- 004-0040(7)(g), which states: "In rural residential areas, the establishment of a new mobile home park or manufactured home park as defined in ORS 446.003(32) shall be considered an urban use if the density of manufactured dwellings in the park exceeds the density for residential development set by this rule's requirements for minimum lot and parcel sizes. Such a park may be established only if an exception Goal 14 is taken." PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT: The applicant proposes to add the following use to the list of Conditional Uses Permitted under DCC 18.32.030 (DD): A new manufactured home/recreational vehicle park subject to Oregon Administrative Rules 660-004-040(7)(g) on property adjacent to an existing manufactured home/recreational vehicle park, and that is also adjacent to the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary. Any new park shall have no more than 10 dwelling units. The uses currently listed under DCC 18.32.030 as DD through GG would also be changed to EE through HH (Attachment 2). Staff believes that the proposed language in the text amendment requiring that the new park be located adjacent to the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary limits any new proposed manufactured home/recreational vehicle park to Knight's property, as well as to the Department of State Lands property that was recently rezoned to MUA-10.2 Staff is not aware of any other property adjacent to the Bend UGB, zoned MUA-10, that is also adjacent to an existing manufactured home park, Any proposed new park would be subject to a Comprehensive Plan amendment for an exception to Statewide Planning Goal No. 14, Urbanization, followed by approval of a Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan review. CRITERIA: Deschutes County lacks specific criteria in DCC Titles 18, 22, or 23 for reviewing a legislative amendment. Since this is applicant initiated, there is a responsibility for justifying that the amendments are consistent with the purpose statement of the MUA-10 zone, Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan, and DCC 18.136.010, Amendments (Attachment 3). 2 The DSL property is across the street from the Sunset View manufactured home park that is located on the west side of 271h Street. TA-14-2 Staff Report Page 2 Attachments: 1. Ordinance 2015-02 2. Ordinance 2015-02, Exhibit A(Text Amendment) 3. Ordinance 2015-02, Exhibit B (Proposed Findings) 4. Planning Commission October 9, 2014 meeting minutes 5 Maps of Subject Property TA-14-2 Staff Report Page 3 Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division r , 0 a h NM\ a\aiPA,p \A\4, 1111111 W \,\:,.,\ Nqm�Md \�N 'vM�\ \\\\ P.©. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97798-6005 (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ MEMORANDUM DATE: Januar y 14, 2015 TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Anthony Raguine, Senior Planner RE: January 26, 2015 Work Session Regarding Two Appeals of the Hearings Officer Decision on a Tumalo Irrigation District Land Use Compatibility Statement (File Nos. 247-14-000238-PS, 247-14-000274-A, 247-14-000452-A) On January 29, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) has agreed to hear two appeals of the Tumalo Irrigation District (TID) Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) issued by the Planning Division (Planning). One appeal was filed by Tumalo Irrigation District (TID). The other appeal was filed by Thomas and Dorbina Bishop, Trustees of the Bishop Family Trust (Bishops). SUBJECT PROPERTY The site associated with the LUCS is the former Klippel Mining Site (Site No. 294). It is comprised of two tax lots, 824 and 828, and encompasses almost 69 acres of land. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR10), and portions of the property include the Landscape Management (LM) combining zones associated with Johnson Road and Tumalo Creek. Additionally, a large portion of the property is within the Wildlife Area (WA) combining zone protecting Tumalo Deer Winter Range. The subject property is currently owned by KC Development Group (KCDG). To provide some perspective on the property, I've included three figures. Figure 1 delineates the property and the extent of associated Landscape Management combining zones. Figure 2 is an aerial photograph taken on August 12, 2012. Figure 3 is an aerial photograph taken January 12, 2015. DEVELOPMENT ACTION VS LAND USE ACTION Typically, a LUCS is treated as a development action. Under Deschutes County Code (DCC) 22.32.050, only the applicant and his/her representative have standing to appeal. In this case, Planning decided to treat the LUCS as a land use action rather than a development action. As a result, the LUCS is now subject to the noticing requirements and appeal procedures afforded to land use actions. Quality Services Performed with Pride TID In her decision, the Hearings Officer (HO) determined that although the LUCS is a development action, the procedures related to land use actions apply because Planning treated the LUGS as a land use action. TID objects to this rationale arguing that a LUCS is excluded from the statutory definition of land use action. Therefore, the LUCS must be treated as a development action that is only appealable by the applicant. Alternately, TID argues that Planning's decision to treat the LUCS as a land use action only extends the land use action procedural requirements to Planning. It does not extend these procedures to the Hearings Officer decision. Again, TID argues that only TID has standing to appeal the LUCS. Bishops The Bishops object to the HO's determination that the LUCS is a development action. Rather, the Bishops point to the discretion exercised by both Planning and the HO to argue that the LUCS is a land use action that must be afforded the full appeal procedures in Title 22 for land use actions. IRRIGATION DISTRICT ACTIVITIES: OUTRIGHT VS CONDITIONAL USE In the RR10 chapter of the DCC, there are two uses specific to irrigation districts. Under DCC 18.60.020(1), the following use is allowed outright in the RR10 zone: Operation, maintenance, and piping of existing irrigation systems operated by an Irrigation District except as provided in DCC 18.120.050. Under DCC 18.60.030(W), the following use is allowed with a conditional use permit, Surface mining of mineral and aggregate resources in conjunction with the operation and maintenance of irrigation systems operated by an Irrigation District, including the excavation and mining for facilities, ponds, reservoirs, and the off-site use, storage and sale of excavated material. In advance of submitting the LUCS form, TID submitted a letter to Planning explaining the need to transfer the water right and TID's belief that the transfer is an outright permitted use. Planning subsequently issued the TID LUGS, noting that the water right transfer is an outright permitted use. This decision was subsequently appealed by the Bishops to the HO. In her decision, the HO looked to the legislative history that added the above-referenced language to the zoning code. Ultimately, the HO found that the purpose of the text amendment to add the above outright and conditional uses, was to distinguish between routine maintenance (outright use) and more intensive activities (conditional use). In this case, the HO found that the activity necessary to create the reservoirs — grading, contouring, lining of the pits - constituted surface mining. Because this surface mining was completed in conjunction with an Irrigation District to create reservoirs, a conditional use permit is required. TID objects, and argues that TID's activities do not meet the definition of surface mining in the zoning code. Further, the Klippel pits already existed on-site and no new surface mining was File No.: 247-14-000238-PS,247-14-000274-A, 247-14-452-A Page 2 of 3 necessary to create them. Finally, any site activity was allowed under TU-14-8, a temporary use permit to allow rock crushing on-site in association with private road maintenance and landscaping. For these reasons, TID argues that its activities do not rise to the conditional use described above. RECREATIONAL USE Under DCC 18.60.030(G), the following use is allowed with a conditional use permit, Recreation-oriented facility requiring large acreage such as off-road vehicle track or race track, but not including rodeo grounds. The record includes evidence that the southern reservoir was specifically designed for water skiing, including its two turn-around islands, boat ramp, boat dock and pilings for a boat house. There are also photos in the record depicting water skiing on the southern reservoir. TID argues that the primary use is water storage, not recreational use. Additionally, TID argues that the HO's definition of recreation is overly broad and creates an untenable precedent. CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT One of the questions posed to the HO was whether TID should be required to obtain conditional use approval to establish a cluster subdivision in the RR10 zone. Although the HO found that there is evidence in the record to suggest that the reservoirs would ultimately be a part of a cluster subdivision in the future, the HO determined that a cluster subdivision would require other components such as dwellings, utility infrastructure, streets, and water and sewer systems. For this reason, the HO ruled that TID was not required to apply, and receive approval for, a cluster subdivision as part of the creation of the reservoirs. The Bishops note that the evidence in the record includes well drilling on-site for future dwellings, the creation of a westerly road that will serve the subdivision, and statements by KCDG to nearby residents of their plans for a future cluster subdivision. The Bishops argue that this is sufficient evidence for the county to require a conditional use application for a cluster subdivision. ATTACHMENTS 1. Figure 1 2. Figure 2 3. Figure 3 4. Notice of Decision on the LUCS (247-14-000238-PS) 5. Hearings Officer decision on the LUCS 6. TID appeal 7. Bishop appeal File No.: 247-14-000238-PS,247-14-000274-A,247-14-452-A Page 3 of 3 1" = ;Pt'- M k1 nw A r,R YwAN,d"i "/r- '' � 1 600' S v "t 4 ' .», I Q—() y, n ,u GJC k"/ :11/4$# Kn.IpPFI:1 7 r i ) _ , , ' 4e ny ...,:„ ,,,,,,,,,,„ ,,,,,,,,, .: ,„,,,,,l'...:1,,,',* ..":"' -,,rh>rs w� .r ,, 1711130000828 'w" + rr '; : gym," tiy, 7 °�w ,y y'j" �i' '.'%'"t,.. !t, .P.',,!" ' y;Y::»w n�, "c�a �w » �Je p '" ` 1711130000824, r , 1 , " 1, '' "r'` 3 r y a,� ' v A,, + r 1, w,.. 7 x n M'- Flo 1 a ?f 1 � Yl ti y, 'I kl k& k � r �" ii ''' (0',!...;41' i 1 keN ny r�l�yam, �'Y vR1! $ pINI% / ti'"" xx��y,d� µA rarip pmt-w , w Pp, �+ ,11...:' + 4�" w rn xk,i a 6 aq ay » .. dig° i , * Figure 1 " d � o, �' 'pw 247-74-000238-PS �w°17�'E�N 247-14-000274-A a . w y° dd 'F Legend 9 4 '" ,yu' A WtiFmµ"'9 r�,* , I " "" i ti + Subject Properties-17 11 13-03-(]0824,OOt328 Mr �Iv,� » ""r» Landscape Management Combining Zone r I.,,„, i',11 r ” i� ' :, w5" Jc7r;,on Road yr, ,l inM + AW w �, t''.:, E 7'umalo Creek a �oUryE+i♦esri (�rclr[ I� 10/2/2014 ;'' r Aero rid. I( N.IGP ,w,- p) ' ■ -,,,,,, : 40. 0,.„ ' P . . . . ... . t . 4 .1110 r-7 . 4, '''- .., . ,:- °., "' ::: It ,,r0',' , ' -,., '... tl,,,,Itorip.,, ,... "' ,.., '.::,4 ,,,,,.,,, ..''''',., ...„ , ,,,,,,',„,,,,1 , ',.,,,,F, ',,41,,im, A. „1:,..1,,,,■,'', %+#6,..."6,,;'1.....?',. ' .„'J l', rtil ' #11.° ' 'dht it::: l'F''.''''''-' 41 citi*Iirti: '4"•.''. ''''''P''''''A;'.l'" .' ''* ■ 7,... ..lte .„,,,A "" 'A'A 1'A,4t1;A ilA411(A'A A A 1, A'' 'kl ''4 P 'r-f' .„ 14"t 12,i 11 * ' . , li,',4■,,.1,,,IA, ' ' -:.1,-. :44:4,,,,,'"' ' ''''''040 4....f.° ."...•-i..i'...°1.„.n.*144.°0.t lit' 471° ,,.. . ..° 4:,.,1,;°,..,°,4 :• ) 1°,, i..w; 041.l■ 4,4** ii,11.1,A,,, .,,vw , :,',,,,,,, „A A, 1 t• '''' '14C AU:. A A:4 2;1A'.A'' . A, ,,„ ,,„„4„. . .. .; ,.•,- . ,,,,104,.., ,,,, , ,,„ ,,,,11,,,,,;,;‘,- 4,4.,Ak i'''sl,' .0%,1,45*4 ' ..„, .', li, fr.,$„i„, ;• .A 4 A tti* g 0' A A ' :4 r 2*14*. .0 I ' .A A 7.'A'A A 4 A'A'A .' ,,,,,,t; "...."'"*"'"44 97i...."..1.1..A. t ''.,'''. ",..)'`. ' - . .,.," '. ."s'.."...lif;',14.. 1 „',.P,PI'.'1...,,,''''. ..,t..,v"-•,.'"” '41.4p.t4-40' 1 . II '1. ','...",-,q.tot., .'4'4 . 1..■ ° - '.'. , ., if "1".q"-F t silit...r ' .' 0.' ."0"....,1 s" $ 41, .%40T.,*!ff, c•i s.,,,. ..— ....0.. * . 1 ..,h . ot Ai. . ,:" ' ..', ' '., Itto* • ' 'I., t ,*, ,,,,, ''',,,,„,,, , co 4,7: ,.e,sto, 4.. , r; ".i,t., •11:,'" „oy "' '- ". ,."!,,...',,. „A,„ st.,,. ... B ,,,„!„ •". . ,, -* . ov 1° -.. ''...6,........, . ''"'4 ...., 41, ' l";''''' ■4,° '"i46,.''' -.."‘""''' 1 ,01,,,,,,,,t,x .., ,,,.. 4 ,:,, 4; ;.,. ,;. „.„41.: .. ..,, , ,::„, ,,, , ,,„ .A , ., ,A, °,,,,''.-I4i,r 4 4,40p4{.i.0....,,t,"■''',','eli,11,1i*A''' '''''' 'r '1110 ' ' ',',,,, ' . ". 1:',';','"**,4!:■.:., ." '". .,, .. 7, .,,a,,4 ,.,,,, , „.,,,, ,„,, -,, ,, ,,,,,,44,„',14 h.,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,4iory,,,,y''''',,,,,,i,4,i.117,,,,'i,,,F,;,, ,, ,, „:„.,7 ..,.. ' , . -' . A ,y,• -' ,' 1, 11;„r` ",,..**• ..;'.. ' - .'"s" ,, ' '6, , ,''' .* ■,,' 1...„ ' " *'16'' '''."'"'"'..,,4'.,,-`'.' - . „... ''' „,,,,- „ . . .., .. ..0.4,, 4 4 " - ' .. . 't ,,,,Lis' ,',,ZT ' .,. ,:-.. „ . . .0., .4,1It. €',',., ,„ ,',,,.." tr. • ilk. or*---, ''''''*.jt 1,,.1 °,t,,I. .,, .°"„tl,„ .00,,, ,, ., „, , , ..lit Af, ,,, . .,,,„:,,,,,jr■ ". .• 4 ,,,,ticiiiii.,,,,, ', ,,,,r,,,, r.,01,'k.,, jelt',,".',.«.:"4 ' ,,,,,,, tits olow ,.,,, , ,,,, 1`.' ' ''".,0-4L. .,,* ' , .''..*4, ,,,,,.' it. . '''":*% . ° ''' :''f,g,1;■:4.,''',"''''*: . ^-^, .1411"....' ' '' — '' ''3. "A.4.** '4: ' ° ,:''''''17,...,'''''''''''... ."-vi.' ' ;". .11Aty;" .'t,''',I.:. !'41,",' . 1*,r4.:„ ,1-N. • “ #.,:: ,,, ,::.:" "”‘I'' ,'',',, 41417:,*,..; • ,„lt'-4.4,4.'2.: ',:' "It;, ' ,h..- °.',;,....4"''-'-''4•44*-- 1, * . 11,,,4 lit' , " * .1,- ,,..■ *mr *,, '• " „,,,,,7 4.',',„1, , . ,,,,7-? 000k. „, ,,4.,..1.,...mt,..-Itt‘4,--„, 4. - ., 1■".:"/ '''" f",'..'7,•''' 4. .1/4'% ' ' '' ''4•••'+'. it, it.' ,....4040eimiiii.444000ii, to,4,.:, .., v.,10.6 -,:'", 4,...,... ',1.',- .liktrAolt. - .4,--41'•• '‘!4" ,-,,,„,.—'''1 Nov t 4 .-.:,.,..•-,.-.-.,4,4'4 i-,,.'h1'l''',,„,.,:.,i,-..,,:.,t,;,„„:i,.,,,,,*t-......„Agg,,.,.„,,i„r.,.',„.,.',i,,,e t'.,-,,.,.,,,.,•,,&.,.",-.-4/,,4'*..,.„,„,,-w,.,,,,„,a4 74llt,%0,.4,,t0'0''.”1.7./,,4..b,4•"1„'41.,1',6,r,.,4,„,4,.-4,:010.,4,N.,.*,.,:'.1,.;'.,..:i.*...,,,v-'71.,„v,i:,.”:1t.'-i„,4,,..,A,,,,,:,,.,„,,,3l.l'-k*.,.....l,,t.o.o.t„„,'t'-..:.„„...4.,..;,...'i,4.,t..,.-:21,:4.'4."',.”v','0't..1./',l,.",-.?.-l..'■i 4.'1,r-,,4'„.r,.-.-..!.:,.i:.i,",t,*,,„,,*t,;4..1*......4...,,„,4,,,4er4•-•4,.,.*,,,:..,,.,,14.*.;.*,*.i.,.,'„.„,‹..,..,',.,:,.4,„t*0,,,,,.,.,..,,.4.",.'.,.,.,”,,,.;,4....:.',.e1'k,1,"..,t.”%,.',,"-,..,,,...c„,. '7:,!440-"...„°0,.01'4.,'.„,,-,."1.,,r."„;.2„'—.,4,,4,•0,..,..i..'.4'.,(*'7„.*„:m'0”.k",,,„.",”.,,..„.'4)-"..4s.°,-:.,.4,,..„1 4"'•„,4,-.14.,t.t.-.-.;..',.m - , 'It: ' ' ' ; .' t ',fk tr:/14111111altiiir' 440111r4: 11111116**164*."'° .1.,v, lif ' • yy 4. } . J6 if I a + < I.;E, Y` ` ° r' " Y j ' ‘ ' '''''' .. ,' ').'' ., ■ ,J. '..,,Ii.0i '' TN'hn ,C wy w V� it - , \ '4 Isft 44' ,f,„4 ',,riqkm 1,',,, 4. I/ ^d-, �4 u i " �' ti w 0. ry ri S I,18ris � w.y .* , '° l'�d t p� N "d a 1 \' A ,m Ji1 { N r" { " q U 0 u d7 t yard r,"1 q ; ,� ! M 0d "V .1 rr i fwu `r ; '' ! ' • a, •,�.,* r..M' ,✓;, ,,� , �:, •gj . :.. x d m R ■, tl a x N r t I 1 � 1 '� fi p d°All ! ' ` 1 „ ' � '1711 r 1" W r r• ? .r, 4104 .' x t°�7 t,ti.�;a.•,',g a,"rr • 41, f 8 y,; C"k r.:J' {ar '',414,° k CD' ww J M ' *" ' „ ,1*.* $:•"„ '�� + 0. '�"I . 'h w' ` aP j , wtti y "': 1 ry ry ■ ,•? ',. ■ }pryµ°q!� 1 � y d • " *,w404` II „ er g )J S^ i'1,r,''' 'M1�" � �` y�1 a 'd° A, �M1 rvr "old >>�'. 'L" n tlA,�a �iMt"w� 1 a"kk""'h`" y � , a1 yrM' g 8 f.^ 1Pq,�;" 44' y' r. '''',;Il bj1 1� .44 t lit 441110 47 , ql .n, '+' ,w N q'i Jd 1 ' .1 "*Qt.' ri'' llf.r.' .1 .' 1 ' '.''''''.■.- a, y 4/ r ,w • w w1 ` 9 + ikv, 4,,,,,„, , VI a' t O y i , A & ; " „ "r . ,� , . $ M1 M' " • \ y "a „ N, t q * p . L 4. " G, l A . r ° w "r tie+ ! b+ fi., ,`'•' L , 10,tt \ � r a g L o CB P O �O O C c O CO O m -0 4 a e a n 4. a IN M ° -c In -C m In L0 in n C v It A C i+ C m 4 A 22 R at R u v v c c "C m N c c C 2' 2 ° q C 'N 7 = a o o_ o o o_ 0 t Q F a r0 x v a v 2 2 v v v o i a a -' E a u m x Cl a p op , a a a a a a a m C ul u 2 2 v Y 4 = 2 2 2 2 a ' ' ` O �i 2 a e 0. d z im�I u 1 " iH, c .n m e 4 z 7 y � ,° "',,ror a c. "C _ ry a s r T ro o s.• v, a-a C .0 .c U m -a - ':n a Is) 3 c U O -• � 0 ° ' u G E E y 2 E ° a w 5 " E ° • c = ° r t m u� 1 s v o c ° E w• N CCv ° E 1 C v 'c 0 C ° ) :53 a m m N ? 'n as t ° s w T m ° m ° ° = a CI) J Q) 2 br,u 2 -• «fill « m E N c y H o o F 2 ❑ m ° ; f ' o ° c ` c o c t a o x 3 O G a p a O N I N a ° ' >Q c - W y 3 2. c a c E -Q Q c 0 Y r - a , � v = „ w m y 2 ° ro m o ° P j fi+ •'r u ai ro E -- a d m ° o m a, C N v c n -1 Y. - :' ° ° O ° a.e c E C N -,75 Q A N v ° uA aC v -- O 4 a N 'c t y■F C n w n' , Y C •• C W v 2 ' -4 no�o cV °- v et s' o p a N o ° . U c c Z o 'C U vj G u y u 0ro 0 ° m _, W u u p e0 u a lei G B° ' E v c u Q.. GL E 8 c a n u N v c t 3 5 a 0 '_ d o _ g -5, E , N 2• o « ° . ti m m w v a t 2 m CO ° m - o { n oo n d .g c ? on ° now ? a o C sa � v o Co '5 c a n m ` an 00 N ,, a •- w o o ' u .• '" a v v E E a e ° o E. - o u r — H 2 -O ,r = m w S u P ❑ I ° = L O a Q C a m(a c C 0 �v U 0 ,.- 45, C'l h v i a v cc I , c b C a, V' u T N °- o ° ❑ C yr y d- 0 C e o -°- '' a - ai C a • E « g o -Oa. V) 0. u - c ' cc o Y = y Z m > -4 b O C } v ,, q - A c •°- d v • vo Q.) t .c — • eo.E m E v o cv L.L. ▪ - E k fO n ° L a M1 a Ifi' if) 00 n n'8 71 o « _ E a =' C-i a pI as • :.• E o m a �:.=' Z Q, 0 v 0 "' co N a v O M ra p { r-. n ,, u ? m Y 'C v W P 7 '~ a O U 2 C ,u ' - C v ti - 2 c m❑ 0, 2 4 " ' ra 0 Ti ' v O 'c a, « C' O C i I cp v u ` ° ` > 4. ° - N0 m a y a0 j 0%ui v ' v - T .. O u n co C c- C '' c n 2 c a , 0 W N U C C -v an• ° a U e 0 U 0 a __O U ms sp kJ ❑ q 22 O y O C E J w . q y ° 8 w O - v U , a 'o ,0c - -a o m , m a 76 q o v, v � a� 2 v sZd E . N v-,ax(i 0) a - a ° a E - d' ^' a C 0) C ., 0) a N N ° F. .:4 0. i0 5 N - ,0 j -,-, n .„1;o j S- C a o -i 2 0) 7 C '4 .- -- 8 3 O a m ° 0 O Q ro a O p L 0 0 y. 9 - s o C . m c u o n a -o ao U C 'L4 o c i 2 O Y Q a ° N a « oU) ° o ''a q v a n � ° o o ° o v N ° = m ; aN -2 D k. � C C d L SO W � ° N s 4 .4 -2 u a m-o w 7 % w o ❑ o C 3 ° ❑ 'y = d } 'A ''i❑ 3 d z . m - 3 c )' E ro ., -O m 7 r u. x E ro � E a ',a ,O a roa -c m A u • ° ° ° ° `s o m " A ° o o , 2 o o o - a c . t n . 5 0 o E a w v 7 c ° oo ? E N « a co E a „ ti❑ 4 ac a am ' E t u c u U u E " � . u U m v v ,,,g° .yu u .3°' umssa E ° -. o o 3 4, p E c o o u a �v n E o Y w r p�0 Ti Z V,,,,,t 1 r a r analc c ts yy a 0 F c 1n Y al N° ai ry ° N C m «, '- O a -o o ' d O a C d C T ❑ a j s O °E ° � o° n '- « Y o ° «% � -a an °° • v 47_ o c E o o tl s nu CO u m 0) a 2 �.en o a d p - • v ? m v .. N m � ° o 3 ` _v a' L., c ❑ u �' a '° r •° a a s b Y m e pp re To m ' O m m« r. co .- o v 0 Et « a m a c E 6 E • c .. c o, 3 E « o q '- _ o - u 0 - 3 d a-Oi :2 E _ o '- N _ a " m u no a, ° a w ro m 4 3 a = o ° ° Fo 0 d'w a ro q Z 3 ro a a CO '- V 0 u N C • 7 « m H a s - u ° - a � a � 'N 'El - 0 C ° ❑ , o o ' a as+ '- o / A w;_ ~ al T M C n [i C O a u ° ._ v N 5 F- m 3 c ' -q « o 5 a -cna n _a 3 - C c =ET, _ . • Y i • a « N L O ° n a .. m a a ?- i N w m o E ° = - «:r. 53 Y t ro , c ro C 3 P Y O Y - '- Co Zd 5 � - O p a C -a n _, o d o u Q a y a c - a ro a •- m c � _M � a N � '-0 E 0 1 n 5 u s c v y . o u' O m 'OE vo '' ' . « U yn a « < p o 0 0 ° f a a a cn e m ▪ v o m o r c m c ' m ro d E" E c ro Et'- o ,� .a m « -° pE o m a s w a- a a - p ' w d m a, o H x ,fi al, i H w v 0,g o S « ° ' = ua m = ,= .5 O m a o m ° ❑ 0 ry r 0 7v c a .• sM V o 3 m an o .v z o r o a s V . v a v G o c w N m ro E. 0 E E. c O n v c (, c O w. a p; NI u 2 C a CO o 0 v o i 0 tN d O ° ti Cl h _O m Y K oto ✓ m a-- _ m 7, v ..,a a c a N- C ' Q a ,n 0 ', F O w b C N ro v E O .' K C N a a o « v o s w ` m • c'' 00 T w O . 3 ❑ o y a -� 0 n 5-u a i r - E o 01 't o, 2 o a p a m e y Vi .'� a N y j O o a « la ° w N c s a a. o y o o v O ._ O O 43 m M U E a m O `m C N mp o w no 6 .. E - o u r o y « ai o n S 00 y - E N m ° o0 a O L« a y •n m Li N an E ,-` v o'2 a w c u W s •b v 7 a a 3 7 E al F2 ._w 0 2 ,n n N on 0- Si 01 Ts c°(. wU Z� O of f '' 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., WEDNESDAY, MARCH 4, 2015 Commissioners'Hearing Room-Administration Building- 1300 NW Wall St., Bend 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. CITIZEN INPUT This is the time provided Jbr individuals wishing to address the Board, at the Board's discretion, regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Please complete a sign-up card(provided), and give the card to the Recording Secretary. Use the microphone and clearly state your name when 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 official record of that hearing. 3. CONSIDERATION of Signature of Document No. 2015-118, an Improvement Agreement between Deschutes County and Tetherow Rim LLC, for Roads and Utilities in the 29-Lot Single Family Subdivision Granted Approval under TP-14-1023 — Will Groves, Community Development Suggested Actions: Move approval of Document No. 2015-118. 4. A PUBLIC HEARING and Consideration of First Reading of Ordinance No. 2015-002, a Code Amendment to Allow a New Manufactured Home/RV Park in the MUA-10 Zone —Paul Blikstad, Community Development Suggested Actions: Open hearing, take testimony; consider first reading of Ordinance No. 2015-002. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 1 of 5 5. DELIBERATIONS and Consideration of a Decision regarding Tumalo Irrigation District's Request for Approval of a Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) to Transfer Water Rights from Tumalo Creek to Reservoirs on Private Property (Owner: KC Development Group LLC) —Anthony Raguine, Community Development Suggested Action(s): Deliberate; consider a decision. CONSENT AGENDA 6. Board Signature of Letters regarding Howell's Hilltop Acres Special Road District: Accepting the Resignation of Gary 011erenshaw and Thanking him for his Service; and appointing Bill Welch, through December 31, 2015 7. Approval of Minutes: • Business Meeting of February 25, 2015 ▪ Work Sessions of February 23 and 25, 2015 CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 8. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION/4-H COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 9. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District RECONVENE AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 10. CONSIDERATION of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County 11. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 2 of 5 Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible,please call (541) 388-6572, or send an e-mail to bonnie.bakergdeschutes.org. PLEASE NOTE:At any time during this meeting,an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2)(e),real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(h),litigation;ORS 192.660(2)(d),labor negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(b),personnel issues;or other executive session items. 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.) Monday, March 2 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Wednesday, March 4 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Wednesday, March 11 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Monday, March 16 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Tuesday, March 17 10:00 a.m. 911 Executive Board Meeting, at 911 Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 3 of 5 Monday, March 23 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Wednesday, March 25 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Monday, March 30 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Wednesday, April 1 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Monday, April 6 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Tuesday, April 7 3:30 p.m. Public Safety Coordinating Council Meeting Wednesday, April 8 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Monday, April 20 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 4 of 5 Monday, April 20 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Tuesday, April 21 10:00 a.m. 911 Executive Board Meeting, at 911 Wednesday, April 22 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Monday, April 25 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Wednesday, April 27 10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting 1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session—could include executive session(s) Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible,please call (541) 388-6572, or send an e-mail to bonnie.bakergdeschutes.org. Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, March 2, 2015 Page 5 of 5