2015-502-Minutes for Meeting November 09,2015 Recorded 12/4/2015 DESCHUTES
BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERK
4J 40�5'S0�
NANCY
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 12/04/2015 01:53:09 PM
11111111111111111111111111
201 -6
0,rim epL -- — ---- - --
e A "' A
001 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 WORK SESSION
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2015
Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone, Tammy Baney and Alan Unger.
Also present were Tom.Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy
County Administrator; David Doyle, County Counsel; Christina Partain, Finance;
Nick Lelack, Peter Gutowsky and Matt Martin, Community Development; Jane
Smilie, Tom Kuhn, Sherri Pinner and Eric Mone, Health Services; and two other
citizens, including media representative Ted Shorack of The Bulletin.
Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 1:30 p.m.
1. Discussion of Changes to the FY 2016 Fee Schedule (Environmental Health).
Tom Kuhn referred to a memo detailing the need for fee increases for some
services. The number of facilities has risen, creating a higher workload.
Commissioner.Baney asked what has changed since the last budget was adopted
Sherri Pinner stated she did not have enough time to determine the necessary
amounts, since it had been a long time since there was an adjustment. Jane
Smilie added that the State is increasing licensing fees as of the first of the
calendar year. There has been no increase since 2009.
Commissioner Baney asked if they plan for future adjustments automatically as
necessary. Mr. Kuhn stated that he does not feel it needs to be adjusted
annually. Ms. Pinner noted that she would like to review this for next year,
depending on what the State indicates is the proper amount given the size of an
establishment, number of employees and other factors.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 9, 2015
Page 1 of 7 Pages
Mr. Mone added that the fee increase should cover most of another FTE, which
is badly needed. The added person will not necessarily add revenue, but can
help with the workload. There are unfunded mandates such as mold issues that
they are required to handle. There are measurements and standards for the food.
service component.
Commissioner Unger asked why the fees are higher than in other counties. Mr.
Mone stated that some are heavily supported by the general fund or their solid
waste department. They are trying to be self-supporting as much as possible.
The policy question for the Board is whether the users should pay most of the
fee or if it should be supported more through the general fund. Mr. Anderson
stated that here there is a heavy emphasis on education, which takes more time
and effort than just flying through an inspection. This is a policy choice, which
has been supported by the Board in the past.
Chair DeBone asked if the restaurant owners have been advised of this potential
increase. Mr. Mone said there would be a renewal notice sent out in December
but they do have an electronic newsletter that goes out twice a year. The
additional FTE would also h 1 P w ith the educational component instead of just
enforcement. Mr. Kuhn added that the relationship part is important to the
department and the business owners. There are other businesses besides
restaurants, such as day care centers, public pools and schools. Christina
Partain stated that there is a public hearing on the increase as well, which will
be noticed. The department will reach out via e-mail to let the business owners
know.
The Board was supportive of moving forward.
2. Discussion of Plan Amendment and Zone Change Applications and
Request for Emergency Adoption of Ordinances, from CR Contracting.
Matt Martin said that the applicant has requested that the Ordinances be
adopted by emergency. The hearing before the hearings officer was held and
supported. The Board is to review the Ordinances but the applicant would like
this to happen more quickly. The applicant wants to get a faster start on the
development of the property. They have outgrown their current location and
wish to start on the process for the new property before spring.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 9, 2015
Page 2 of 7 Pages
Commissioner Unger would like the adoption process to be similar to that of the
cities. He suggested adopting by emergency with an effective date 30 days
afterwards. That would still allow some for someone to appeal.
Mr. Martin said that the Hearings Officer's decision is final but the Board is to
review and adopt. The timeframe is at the Board's discretion.
Chair DeBone said there is a Tumalo group that is fairly active, and perhaps
should be advised. Mr. Doyle stated that there is time to appeal to LUBA
regardless. Most jurisdictions do land use by emergency so someone can
appeal immediately to LUBA. Commissioner Baney said that some people
question each adoption by emergency. She thinks thirty days is defendable
since it is the same as the cities here, but would still have to be adopted by
emergency for the first and second readings.
Nick Lelack said this is a formality because the decision has already been made
and the appeal period has already passed. The Board is supportive of the
emergency component, as long as it is clear to the public as to the reasons why.
Commissioner Unger said the applicant requested the zone change but did not
indicate the proposed uses. He asked if there are other processes allowing for
oversight of what is being done there. Mr. Martin replied that there would be
site plan review. It was clear that it was for CR use, and they are a paving
company. It will include equipment storage and an office building. Traffic
impacts are also being considered.
3. Discussion of an Additional FTE for Assistant Planner.
Peter Gutowsky gave an overview of the request. They are reclassifying Paul
Blikstads's position to assistant planner, but need to add an assistant planner
due to workload. This will help with more effective counter coverage without
overpaying for it. They are trying to gauge the workload, and staff accordingly.
They have land use planning fees adequate to cover the position. They have an
on-call planner now, but that person has had to work full time.
Mr. Lelack said they have not increased FTE's for planning for almost a
decade. Commissioner Baney stated she appreciates them being conservative
while providing consistent service. The Board was supportive of this.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 9, 2015
Page 3 of 7 Pages
BANEY: Move approval of a Resolution in this regard.
UNGER: Second.
VOTE: BANEY: Yes.
UNGER: Yes.
DEBONE: Chair votes yes.
4. Other Items.
Ken Hales joined the meeting to discuss the CASA funding issue with the
Board. Commissioner Baney said she heard from Representative Gene
Whisnant and is reaching out to clarify the situation. It would take more time if
this goes back to the committee to review and approve. Benton County has
CASA in their application so perhaps it was stated differently.
Mr. Hales said that the award to Benton County included addressing the
questions the local CASA received. Apparently the information received
locally did not address the specific questions. It should have been presented a
different way.
Commissioner Baney said this is an important asset to the system. Mr. Hales
noted that the committee has recommended awarding it as it is now, but they
might entertain another submission from CASA prior to the award. Mr.
Anderson added that this part of the process was coordinated by the District
Attorney's Office.
Chair DeBone said the State does not want to build more prisons so are
apparently redirecting funds this way. Mr. Hales said that CASA received
funds previously but this year had to go through an application process. It
might not be the correct funding pool for CASA. Commissioner Baney said
that every child who is subject to neglect is not necessarily a victim. However,
they need to work on prevention and this part of it.
Mr. Hales stated that the other application included a CASA component, which
included a sub-section on children that could be specifically called a victim due
to certain crimes. They have to show what they would be doing that is new and
different with this funding. He can contact the CASA director and try to
institute changes. However, the submittal from the Public Safety Coordinating
Council would have to be modified if they want to pursue a change in the
submittal.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 9, 2015
Page 4 of 7 Pages
Commissioner Unger feels they should focus on other sources of funding. Mr.
Anderson said they are a County service partner. Mr. Hales stated he provided
some guidance as to how CASA might get more attention at budget time. Chair
DeBone does not want them to suffer because the criteria have changed in the
grant process with the State. CASA is facing a shortfall and pursuing other
avenues would take time.
Mr. Hales stated that he can meet with some of the parties again and look at
strategies. Commissioner Baney would like them to examine what Benton
County did and see if it can be duplicated locally, so is willing to try this if they
can pull PSCC back together to make a decision, due to the tight timeframe.
The Board is willing to give them a chance to make appropriate changes to the
application, if they can get it done quickly.
Mr. Anderson spoke of a message from Dan Moore of ONDA, who is lobbying
hard for the Canyonlands designation in southeastern Oregon. Mr. Moore
wants to make a presentation to the Board. Commissioner Baney said it was
not that the Board does not support wilderness, but more to support local
control. Commissioner Unger feels they should review the monument
designation process overall, including the local governments. He does not think
anyone has the whole story. The Board is open to a presentation at a work
session.
Whitney Malkin spoke about Sunriver being approached for the dates for the
WIR conference, so it would have to be moved up a week or another venue
considered. Chair DeBone would like to attend as he hasn't before.
Commissioners Baney does not know what kind of attendance might be
expected. Ms. Malkin said most people prefer the Memorial Day aspect so they
can perhaps stay longer. Commissioner Unger stated that it is going to be up to
the WIR. Commissioner Baney thinks they will be flexible, but they should
stay away from the Pole-Pedal-Paddle event. Ms. Malkin will speak with Alana
at COVA about any potential conflicts.
Chair DeBone spoke about the chili feed at the Historical Society this Friday to
have city representatives and others speak together about the upcoming
Deschutes County centennial.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 9, 2015
Page 5 of 7 Pages
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY
SERVICE DISTRICT
A. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for the 9-1-1 County Service District in the Amount of
$36,039.31.
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
B. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District in the
Amount of$1,135.16.
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
C. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts
Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County in the Amount of$1,086,327.88.
UNGER: Move approval, subject to review.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: UNGER: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
DEBONE: Chair votes yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 9, 2015
Page 6 of 7 Pages
li
Being no further items discussed, the meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.
DATED this Day of ArliVildfiA----- 2015 for the
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
Agedd)--L-_
Anthony DeBone, Chair
a1C4UtAr-----
Alan Unger, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
6,-/4,(4,(L 4201414_,- Tammy Baney, missioner
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, November 9, 2015
Page 7 of 7 Pages
0 e *41-,
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
WORK SESSION AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
1:30 P.M., MONDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2015
1. Discussion of Changes to the FY 2016 Fee Schedule (Environmental Health)
— Wayne Lowry; Jane Smilie, Tom Kuhn, Eric Mone
2. Discussion of Plan Amendment and Zone Change Applications and Request
for Emergency Adoption of Ordinances, from CR Contracting —Matt Martin
3. Discussion of an Additional FTE for Assistant Planner—Nick Lelack and
Peter Gutowsky
4. Other Items
PLEASE NOTE:At any time during this meeting,an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2)(c),real
property negotiations;ORS 192.660(2)(h),litigation;ORS 192.660(20),labor negotiations;or ORS 192.660(2)(b),personnel issues;or other
issues under ORS 192.660(2),executive session.
Meeting dates,times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted 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.
Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. To request this
information in an alternate format please call(541)330-4640, or email anna.lohnson(c�deschutes.orq.
t
I
\
h
a i
11
m
1 co
E
-...., , or
Ak CD N t—
a r� '^
d
Cket-
ca
N
:I'l US)
o
°°
o
N _____
L
Q1
cn
fti
1 J� r
1 4'
d
4 1
1
•--
tao
i , , 1
a a
-,,,- ... ,,,,,
ir, Q E1 1 w
w co a� /� 1 O
o Z �' 1
a1I j E- J
• I 0.0 co
vo-f ES Cd
Noeff4icilk
Deschutes County Health Services
Memorandum
To: Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners
CC: Tom Anderson,County Administrator
Jane Smilie, Health Services Director
From: Tom Kuhn,Community Health Manager
Eric Mone, Environmental Health Supervisor
Date: November 9,2015
Re: Request to increase Environmental Health Program Fees
Rationale:
• Standard 8 of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)Voluntary National Retail Food
Regulatory Program Standards recommends"a staffing level of 1.0 FTE devoted to the
foodservice program for every 280-320 inspections performed per year." Currently, Deschutes
County Health Services Environmental Health (EH)foodservice staff perform 810 foodservice
inspections per year, per FTE. This high volume of inspections can have the impact of reducing
the quality of inspection, ultimately reducing the quality of public health protection staff can
deliver.
• During a recent site visit of the EH program, FDA Regional Food Specialist Katey Kennedy noted
that the program is unable to fully meet any of the nine(9) FDA Voluntary National Retail Food
Regulatory Program Standards due to insufficient FTE.
• Current staff workload allows little room for building capacity or performing other important EH
functions including responding to animal bites, mold mitigation, program planning, and quality
improvement/evaluation programs.
• In the summertime,the surge of tourism inflates the population of Bend alone to approximately
100,000(18,000 visitors a day)and rarely falls below 93,000 year-round. This increased
population creates a burden on EH staff who are actually serving a larger population and a larger
per capita food and tourist industry.
• The EH Supervisor must spend 50%of his time in the field in order to support staff inspections.
This field work contribution allows him less time to perform traditional supervisory duties such
as performance management,operational development,data analysis,and budget functions.
• EH fees have not been raised since 2009. It was decided after 2009 not to raise fees due to the
burden caused by the recession on local business owners.
Proposal: Raise Environmental Health Program Fees 6%
• Raising all EH fees 6%would provide approximately$50,000 additional revenue(FY 15 revenue
of$819,187 x 6%=$49,157),which would be sufficient to support 0.5 Environmental Health
Specialist II FTE in the FY 17 budget.
• This position will inspect 250-300 Licensed Facilities per year. This position will take lead in
functions such as animal bites, mold,outbreak investigations, FDA Voluntary Standards, and
reduce the burden of inspections for EHS staff.
• The FDA Standard for foodservice inspections is 280-320 per year per FTE. Currently,33 FTE
DCHS staff perform 810 foodservice inspections per FTE. Adding 0.5 FTE would reduce the
inspection volume to 703 inspections per FTE,which is a 13.2% reduction.
• In order to meet the FDA standard of 280-320 inspections per year, EH would have to increase
at least 5.0 FTE,which would require a 60%increase in fees. Such an increase would be
excessive and not an option.
Comparison of similarly sized Oregon county environmental health programs
County Inspections Foodservice Inspections EH funding source Food Service
annually FTE per FTE per License cost
year for 0-15 seat
Yamhill (102K) 962 1.25 770 100%fees $497
Douglas(109K) 1,514 2.2 688 75%fees;25%GF $600(7/1/16)
Linn (119K) No stats 75%Fees; 25%Solid Waste $485
Deschutes(166K) 2,672 3.3 810 92%fees,8%GF(FY 15) $645
Jackson (208K) 2,404 3.15 763 100%fees $599
Marion (326K) 3,404 4.6 740 96%fees,4%GF $425
Lane (358K) 3,846 4.2 916 100%fees $536
REVIEWED
LEGAL COUNSEL
For Recording Stamp Only
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,OREGON
A Resolution Adopting and Continuing Fees and Charges
for Services and Providing an Effective Date. * RESOLUTION NO. 2015-105
WHEREAS,various departments of Deschutes County charge fees for services and permits; and
WHEREAS, any fee that charged by the County which is established or authorized may be amended in
accordance with Chapter 4.12 of the Deschutes County Code, as amended; and
WHEREAS, Deschutes County Environmental Health Department has proposed a modification to fees
and charges for services and permits;and
WHEREAS,The Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing on November 23, 2015,on the
proposed change to the fee schedule as set forth in Exhibit "A"reflect the actual cost of providing services and
permits;now,therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES
COUNTY,OREGON, as follows:
Section 1. That the fees set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and, by this reference, incorporated
herein,is hereby adopted as the fees and charges of Deschutes County, Oregon.
Section 2. The fees and charges for services and permits adopted in Section 1 of this Resolution are
effective January 1,2016.
Section 3. All fees and charges for services and permits in effect prior to January 1, 2016, are hereby
continued or superseded as provided herein.
Dated this _day of ,2015 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,OREGON
Anthony DeBone,Chair
Alan Unger,Vice Chair
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary Tammy Baney,Commissioner
PAGE 1 OF 1—RESOLUTION NO.2015-105
N r
I 2
a)
47t 1 0
m
)i U
v —
d
I I as
r
0
o
I I II
o
Q
1
I
re I 1
1
O ! i I 1 11 I
1
r- 11
4 1 1
C C1 C1 C CI C 1 I
r 0 I 0 HO 0 0 0. 0 I
Z• aai 0) C)1 E U) E E
g 0110 0 0 O 0'1 0
V 1,— oI o 0 0 `0'1 o
Q a) a) a)1, a) m' a)I a)
zI
w t to to 1 to cn'1 to
m m to I to to to to
o
_ as
. 0.I
'. 'I. I'1,
II
�
11
0 I 1
a
I al I 1 I
I 1 I
z 1
'
, ' a)
' m
1
a) 1
1 m a
Q ` U a) CO 03 o 4 a) E O) o a N 0 "0 '0 1 0 1 a O c !)
a) L 0 0 C 0 O a E t o 7 I
0 0
nl a a n n ■ N a
(1) a a a� nl 0 n _+—,
-
L O O1 0 4 0QION O N 0) O ao 7O O 10:0
O
__..O U 4 44 41 . U Q OOO,O O O
4) � 0 U) N N 00 N 0'Q 0-) I, I~
a) N. T
, -- 1 7 CO CO
r N.N "Cr LU -
N1 M
LL )L : : III 1 1
CON Cni
U I C1
en
I ,......
LL
❑ -2 1 1 a c
ET
O:a] 1 to
T o 'IC 0- 1 '.. a) 'o I
0' p°p.5 v8 w 1
O U T to N 1 N rC„ to co C ki
"q 1 n, ° 1 ,E.,)- to O 0) C
U N n C 0 1
O 8I _ -2 0. N N I� C
d O 4) p L 0 O n O
O a U N w ' N
0▪1 0 O E o > co Y n . a m 1 c 3 U m a
o o c CO
d 2 '..Z O o 0 ICI a _ c. '1 a n°i�1.2 0 1
Un :? m e °1' E 3 0_ v NI 0 III`�1 ° 1 1 °) el 1 1 12a� I, I to a' I =la - c''I to
U• U .0 .0 N O I C 0'w NI a H « O 1 v) a3'. g VI ce s r U U) U ca m ro m tad `� - 1 a 7!too .N I rn o I o)o
c� as -'� 1 1
m m ❑' ❑ 0 d to l E p al -o i , vv_ m H N I rn'1 a) o E m 0 m
a,
T1 TI TI 07.F. 1(n J I O C 1 0� 0I 2 ! 0) 1 a) f, V N'' m° to II,lo C N''..n td
al a a a a) al cif C a a)' . c, m o) C c� NI 3 a) a 21 CCi1 a1 3'' )
UIIU U' 0 -0 44 I a O _14 O OI w GIr m C wOI- J'0 Cr),d 01�I-o J O
;-0 I v " -0 m N ffi ja o a) 1 1 al 1 01 o m 1 ar. E ° -0 2 s E I m '01
a)1 a)1 a) a) N U N co N Q) m N a)1, O a)
_ EI a �'Q, 0 as NIa) =I E) I m∎ m I . m c a n. 0 d' C a
ry -c ' -a y o L 0) m 0, a CO a m a) a A l n,.� E E .o "0 o.
4) C) C) ° 0 1. m a) v' o r' L N 0 1. ; 0 1 x a) 0 1 0 a7 I'c�
(a U o717 ma a °)'I0 Q UI o d w c 0 a1w o 01010' a w
{ ..4---- r - 1 —2 z LL Q 1 w
_.
O rIN'11 1 r) v1tol� )• co a)0 nrlINr
2 2 2 - X r .- r
N CI V Lo co tD N r v--
.... x� T x..x x 2'2'2 x'..21 '2 21212 2
1- 1-11- r 1- 1- rlrl r r r r r--II� 1-i lr r'r r r
E J J J: J _1 _1 _1 _1 _1 _J J J 'J J J'J J. J __11-1'-.11-1
F 21,212, 2 2 2112;2 212',,2 2 212,2 211x.,, 12'2112 2112
N
m I
u
d
N
d
m
Q
1, Ili 1
1
0
Z
r
a'
Z
W 1
E N
V `o
a 1
Z 1
it 1
8
c
F 1 'a
ro
D
: c
ro
1
1 Z.
a) 1 2 1 w w w 5 = v
1 � V/ U) u) (1) N N_ @ NI as
1 '613:31'>: 5:3: ' 7I a) ' :[(1.) __ (`
.0 yI O1O O O.O O O OjO C
V OIO O 10'.0 O1 O 'Plc':010,0 01,0 0 1 a)
.�.r (D y7 r 11N.[A Q'N N C')'�N co N'�I Or. a)
CD co d M'1M.� M,MIM N1 11— 2
> u. 1 1
N (n I ' �' 1 �1 1E
U• >••1 C 11 ', U_
rn °I
� �_ 1 C 1._
y 1 1 O. 1 d; roll
a) j J, (n' C 7
❑ E
11 1 1 i 1 W I. 'C
a) N' .E
w
w
III 1 N 7 (0
7 3
1 j, III a N. G y
�I = U 4! a)
2 ❑
e
4) 1 m 00.0 3
3
C �' m E1 O N
ZO .Q ' 1 vOi 3 013: 3 7,
DI —a 211 c
ro 1 W
2 '+ 11 1' m d C.,� No
C.) d 1 0) a)' l'r ro C p 1 O C�
W S 1 O E 1.c o.:, 1, !, a)1 E, p a� c
° a 1 (� @1 HE c v TI u c' E
■ c l m Uhtii 0 o er.c 1 a of�i N y1 l -N � m! w e d '.1 1, =1': 41 2 t� @' m l,.,
1 ',.5 s1 w c c.. ro ro'E! U c:c p a )1 o
a)! ' y y i '33i 1� a) a)1 E E ro 1 ro C''..= � -° '�'' c uci
Z W1 1= a' N E E1 E c E, 1W12' (0 m
v' (,g gall 1 o I rn. N , (u� V yr cu
gl aa))ImauailCV, ail=1 : C: c� `� 5f�2: cS °aI�el rod
. a. a. a a a, a.i .. a, ro ro x N 1 4 ro ro I, y
Z ti1rn'v Z rs10)jv cl E. E N N mfr E �p a, w m, l °
4) ,-:co y s1M1(D O (0 p1 O U C a.
in N 1 ro r t 'p.'1 N 7'. a) C
— N aO.O =INlICO�IQ d NI C , W!I.� - °I d1. ro p': a) O'.. a)IQ'. N
—y � y r �;�i A N U U 2 2 II— U r m U'ILL1« 'Z
5. 3 I2!LLll 1 —+ LL
C) K) CO N aO 0 0 1'N M' u7 to ti: 11
❑ 1 rI'
I N N N N NIN N;M M'M MI,M M M M 1 ......
Z 111' 12 212 22 2.2 2.2 2 2.21
'1H H H H HI -
J J J J J N i-1-i-1-0-11- I-11-,I-1 I 1
_ 1 -11-1;-1
1
2 2 2 2 212 2'2 2'21s F 1 .1
n r)
1 a)
0
0
0
W l 1 V
y �': 1 1 I -
C)
Q
0 ca
o-
re I ih VC
0
= ', �l
I^ 1
0
I- H' l
1
4 0I 1 I 1
Z
W
0
Co
C I
d ,, I
• T a,
co T I
1 1 y 1. N 1 1
O 1_0
U o-I
1) 1C 21 1
L Cal C '0 0 0'.00 010000 0 0 10 0 0100 0,0
O lc a)I '000000000000 1 '.0000000
Y O; EI co N co I CD CA ,IN MIN'u) 0 co NIM, r1co
N : al a)1 1 '.mr 0) 0 co u-) N CO rn1C) U' 0) CO ' N N !0
a) co
r Li_ 1 Co N �'. 71' C.7 N.-1 o.) on Cr) r N Cr) En U7 N.Cr) N.En Cr) .4- C.4 ‘1- co
cN r )Ej 1
U U.
LL 1 `J'
a)
0 N
vv)) 8 E 11
m
❑ To E
• c'
ro To o
v -0 c
N 0 co
rn = a
a
E'
v 1 a) - oI
I
Z e N7 a, °cI c E1
E u 8 $ Ca 1 C "Cr E 1
re w 2 5 n ca E c 0 `-
a)
U To n I E a- 0 UI
❑▪ v a) 0 C. c co E aE) n 0. 0! E
7 . c D N Co 1 C III ce j Tit O L �'. 3.-
. co: 0! CZ co cI 7, a)� a) N NI N O
E1 N c C 01 ) Ill N 7 7 N a) 1 al > 3 3 .y Q> T
o nl n n
I-q C JI 00 00 I co 1. co co'I O O G b 0 0 7.N 2 N
0 0' d y 2'. VII t7 N�' N1 0 a) a)' a) 10lo ' 'IT n.c
d m , o ow 21 2 , ? aI w! all n' n nl, a
w' 1) ai -8I E aN) ailr 0 a� a '8-, 4IIgIS o 0 0. n1 o U
e'I , o r v a)I E 0I 0 ED c c I.0 yl
J ; 8n •uNrcolclmU° EEq, gl�, o `,, o'' o ,- 0
fpmf,,)) C�C��, c1 3 . o .1 nl , ❑ ❑, aI 0 El pl o � QnQ Q9Q Qn Qn > c m
D 8'': E '4' l 01.0:1 d J J'.D DIU1U.U'i z .5 olu u �!'Lu U
Imo,co IC) t O N C)l,v U) CD
O _ c) ch d .4- .4 .4-,.4- .cl-'' ' vi-I.71- 1.0 In In-,in I in u,IU,
Z : I I I I I I I L I 1 ZT 2 2:I xli
J
_, _ J'J
W 2 T = _ = zz 1I∎II1 T x1212'2'= 1 1
F- ,
I I 1
i I 1
I � � I
m I
u 1. I III
-a
co
N 1 III
2
1
I
I
i
1
I
I
Q I
II
Z I
• v
V o, 1
a
i
1 1 � u�1 � �I� �.
� cny' 1c�'� � � � � cn �!(ncn (n:(n � cn (n (n � �
Z N,2'2 2I 2.2SXIX2 I I XX XSj2'..SSI LI x12 M=121
N ❑ 1 --' ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑I
m
ro I I I I
I
I I
d
W
Z = I 1
JD 01 I
c 1
a.) �, mII cI
a) 1 N Ei4 Q..1m (4 ."- 1N�'1.. 41 O_47 0 1 N-,T 101 �__- 01O.6"I '41- co r o o ........
..c C] C7 N r
-q LO Lo a0 M P7, ti I N O r- N- I cp W • N •
a) L a3 in N,',N. o-�rn'n •- N;0 o0JN c5 � RjlO (D1 1, M M OINI I,14 QIM'NI
(D �L Gr [r ;N cD�N 4'.CO N.r �1 'O' T'. 147 C1 n
AO LI H 1 U 1 r.. III
C• >. C7 - III 7
0 W. N d; w 1 1
U ?' I
L1 ---
t -- c I� *. L 1 - - - I y
E
c ca L
a
o• c1 m b
cu 1 - o ac
0 a3 .
t
a u? 2I C vii 5
U ,2 cniA ro'
U
1
L
0'
rnlc0 E a
z '� 0 rI o1 m: 1 I I 1 I 1 , I N
O 0 a1 O'I :0
N- U i I c c ci_ 1 1 1 N O
d •� c c o'o m
V ma� o U 2 N
1- - a 71 c U
C/) d j a
W S IU t sl 1 # 11 c c N
O n Ia EIUI• E •°-j
a N E E a1> ,o X01, 1 ro to
a) N N 7
d c 1aI--- a 1wII a .II 3
a] c 15' c U Eo' -
as
> o o m o a m > E U. � Q' y 3
# a .'.I`° c a m all a ro c1Q NIA01 = cu
y),, 't/1 - 1 A m N N ro a" c ' 100 (o d' o
o'a o 01 oI cI > I (0 a:-0 1 ar Q fri o a o'z N1H, a)
a) d ! `j i w'.. a) 4) N 0: f0 1 U z N -a 'D co •C U) a
•� CA - W 5 a a 01 2 0 N % fa 2 Q I Q 0 I- 0 0-
~I d N N u- Ua a n': 7.,+1 0. 8.ry ¢ 001`'"11 > >!a y N 0 d -','Q OD 1' 51'~ •= N 0
•C w c 'c c ' MI ol2 2 n1 m.c ¢ a x1712 c 2 71 E . > ._ 0. 0. 0. 00 .2' _c
C a)Iv:v a, y o a mp_2 2 1- 1----�>lo z = p_ 1Y� 21 a c L7_ �? _'' o i11= =Ia` a o.'' d
_ Ua'¢ ¢ u W >: ¢ : 2
r 01n n M LU CO n CO
n 1 co LU ((0 CO (ND COIN 47 (D n W I W
CO cs>I(o calm aaw ° ("Ir- Is- ti r- n ti m m colmla`ho
z 5 5 2 12 5 S,SI2 Si21X X I 2 2= II S'2� S 2 2�211i2
H H H H H H'H1H H'H H H HIE- i—H H H H H HIS- H H H H H1-
J J J J __J,J J J'J I J J J J J J J J 1 J -I J J'JI J J J J
lll H 1• ' 2 2 2 11212 2 211211511'512 2.2 S S 22IZ 22 2 X 11111
.
1
cr, Lo
1 0)
w 11 I 1 `o
ci I U
v
TO
0
N : I �. Ili I '. : I I U
d III
1 1 i 5
12 4 I I Q
o 1
I 1
1- 1 1
1 11 1 I I
a
w 1
z 1 1
1
1- 1 I
V
z
w
m .c
1
L 1 o o o:oe col �
'
O I . O '?
ii
a) (.0 avi 0 I r 1 vi
Z' E m "
O I a)
c01 N I
u. c
a3 0
y cz
.c
O
En 1 ;
fa
O
'1 >,,, I E
m
❑ a vw c
c o
p v U
p lb m
N w tl
C W w
p O N
I
o - - 6a
�` 7 m a
1 c .c
E I Ja 2 3 0
o'
m m v c 0
c�
v m 72
9 o, ' 11' 11 co �1 c Tti a,z c °I ox I - m N C cap N d �
I I f N N I w N F Y .
Q m c o �a� 8 o E
co v a,. . 1 O. n v I a, t 0.I d 1
c E a; flU n am d 91 o', v QH mml yl 1 c11 I 1 l. ca W
0. ``II y E ZII 0 � sl ai 0 c ml' v, �. c8 v.
u,l c 2 o O l o'rI m a) I v ai a E 01_,ll
gal w1 d N _ N 'G' al E p,,51. v „,0:—
u >• 0 m c =) N1�. J clv LI. c c a)I
o N C C. p 7, V FIg.; 1 NI5II Ci�'. N 'QII d N 7 Cb 911
a1 : 1'nla c c -131 ,0 m 01 cn 2 C v al.
0), a a,I t;N E 3 §r, N 3 I c ' I?, I 1��a o- vin ca
S ” to R - p ° °I U witoI a) ° �' C 71 N ° ° E
1WilflH1D l w a, W e i 7 _C C w'�i2 U c
cocco 0, 0, 0
2 �2 ; 2! 2 5.. ----- I
W IJ ,=,= = = =1= = ='J�J JI-1 -IIJ J -I 1-1 '-I -J
F I s 221Ix 2 2 212 12
I 1
CD in OIO O 0'0 0, II0 010,0 0 01 0 0 0 0
010 0 0 0'100 0 0 0,.0 0'01 0 0 0 0I,
I N 0 CD cn N N CO v CO CD ''1 CV M 1 u7 N M d
W CO cD - N- N u] r co d M Co .- u] N.1
jCD N,Co 0) N N �1 C') NI MI co 1 N.
O I III
LL
in
0- i
1
EE 11
0 1
I
1
a
I- c.,
aI
z
W m I
�
r
z
_ = CC
> > > >
a m o a 1 m
01 010 010 0 0 o 0 0
7
a n
L —..-. 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 O II ,O 0 0 0 0 0'. O
U O 01011010 O0 O O O'O o O O 010 d
(/J )n o l o'o ci ci O in o 0' o
V O M M 1.)7 011 V d 0'.d. N'1 CD O Ln N.
cD N Cp m N N u7 N N co co N
U- li 1 E 111 1 1
@.
C N r0 V) 1i ■
7 N !I C 1
Q l.L } X ........ .... .__r.
(I) N
Nc O
V LL ._ C co c _.......0. O .....
a c as a
° cw q 6 a)I E
• N - O
I VC6 -Q n L O m a L 0 i p C �
d E n_ 0 Tj
.c 2° o cS ° ° c y ' 0 I E a °) c
0 2S V) -° 0 ss H v p c� r) 1 !x ¢ w 0
C w N N M 8 0 0 7 z ',, m M 1 x E m VV)) O O.
y L C .L.- J
7 j ' a) m o m p e °0 O cA _I n ,_
2 Cr o m a) ° a) a a) co:!E E
n "O d a) 1, Q) d
m U m m 1' o a°i I o III m o
a. L G I CC) _0 .L-• G l d
Ot 2 -6 L W 8 a) -c' € 8 1 - d 1 a .3 C
m TO O o La) `p 3 O C.. 1 O J 1 Q)�O ° 111,S G'r$ >
o yi m ° rnco o ai .0 a of l �,N p ro'm w m.
nca u7 c Q L
C) ca T n N V) U d N •jd 1 N 7 > N o a)
C c V)
O 8 - co y -30 as N a) W - W 1 a) a)! ! .J 2 W U W 2
w• cn', � � o E c U 3 m T =1 `m I I a) al 1 o cis 1 o ,- •- °'W I> > o co
p E a C)) .2 c c c - c S' I p' - e ',�l a 0 4 _�1 m W W +
✓ u_ Q. .- 0.� � a . ¢ a cox) c1 O1w a d1m X11 @ ctll2• zlz v
L
jai our moo °c = a dr0rlro - a) Zc !' �''m of ocoo'o10u
at,vi m 2 4° c ° m m �' O ° ' ro Iin `u� 0 cn °' c - -,-: x'I .- a, n nl n n c
0,co Qy �• OCL' an) L d0r.1f) r�y =,'pG y!I u) NI N1 o) V.3 0 1,NII E CDEIE �Ccc
- 011 0 U L .a N U U -v LLB O J�C71 I U U F Q!I ~ 1- 1-11- U
7 Z .. - p C@ - U co 1 co N as Lll co F-1`
U U
N- CA a) O 0 0 cs, M -1 0 I 0'1 co 0 0 I 0 cr/ O r N M
d cn r r.. __........
F- F- i'I 1--,H11-I o t 0 —
o T T
.. . ............... .. �I I IIi ='.=IJ i i 2 2' ' 2 x 2 2 2 J...
Z = _ =!S = SI 1-' 2S 21- 2x'Z
- -) J`J J J'
1 i 2
1 111 ' I 1
N n
o o 0 1. 0 O O 0 0:01 I O I O I O I O O'O 1 0 O 0 0 '010'0'03H0 0 8
0H0 0 O o'o 0 0 I0,,o,o, o 0I0'� O,u7 000000 �
(D M,Q) co M 0) 0 U).0 N:'0) Co Imo.O N ' (O r I U) o.CO 0 Ni O U)
c0 co:u')I (0 U) U) 0) s a) r u7 C) 1 N I N- .-- LO (A r; M I r l C') r co c0 Cl)
N''.r M rllrN'NIN MIM,MIN N CO
V I,1 1 O
11 III �1, U
Cl, I 1 w°
Cl)y o
mu)
ix Q
O
S !
a
wI
M
U 1
a
z I
w
- -- � - �--- I�� 11 111 —
I- , ! 1 I 1
z
0.O 0 �o o o o o 00'F O
0 `p o o O 0 _ ILO O}}0 o--r 0o o'.O O o
a)
U) o 0 0
� in IO I O1 � I 1 l.U) 1 O Mi l0
N C,N LO CO N I C 1 CO 0 N- N:(U 0 d- CO; O'O I OIO N'In
a) N I e- O , N'r MI � NN N' co MMIN, N
I
1,
' N tp III I
N LL 1 1,
D
c Ip p I
- 1,
Cl) I -
❑ E !. d
Cl) 0 1 E E
7
x C 1 a) 1
C x !, .!.1 I 0 ❑
C — _ x
O 10
O E ce 1 w
o 1
m
y ( x -0 o e 1
us y 3 =O a c -o Cn m co o I y, I p t c,r - x - I '0,ai
a cu c 2 — c ial ,..E2'cI A 0
ai («d '� I d1.- f0 I a) g o:� I,., 1 m1 m
0 m (.4'0 �'!o m t olo m vi1 'p'a�'W1c, cla m c 0I
E ag'''> ''°I� '5 , 2 112 1 o � y o '3 1 : Ian .1 3 Ei
p o: c 2 w `, a�w' n m ) a 2.� o c1 �E7 m.I m a)',0_ o
c a) T N 7 T d c V a O' w a a Qa7 �I yI
m e (0 N: d@ ;c O c c
C
Irt C- o �1�'.. all :=C1 '.79 $'IS m il) C o!m
wllolro E m a' 5 Elm $ 3 Ea'
NI r E) E cpI, m m' e'as as E;ne..lo a0i a 5 WI la) — Sa 1 ,,Ith m c!; I 8 -, q m `t an'' r 5
Ia) I�., co Cl'0 N a) a) 0 W c c Y r (a (C c
N o m m e E,c �i c x [Y a� ml— °(g'o ° °j° a� oI o 01 as E 0 112 d c' a clr,.H11(A clr' ns Qw p o o,a EIS -p o w.'., 3 Esl .! a' E
2 a)I C a c m c c P' 'U L,, ;7) , c . p, Q) Q), U N' N p'.
vzp 0 alai,cppllc la NI,o o (�5 0 55 -o p)r � ci! v' C 1zd' !n ❑ 0U'.
' € Ea (D'nIJitl)'',o•.,a> w E �'V O NIA c3'1 1 I� U=1 a) 1
a E 1 Im'm a1caE m y 0 d I 10 a)'' dl 1
ccc mow
r U T N. Co:Q) 0 OD Q) 0 M (0 N- co
r r IT r = = = = M
Z - E- - J JIJ J I- J J J J ~.~ J J I- I- H 1-11- H H - r___...
_ _ _ N N NICJ M M M CO T
O i =1 2 212 x 2 r 1 'x x r =
E _J �II r _Jr' _1 J -J - _) _I:___J
W I 2 ='1121 = = = x1,1 = = 1=1,1 =ill 2 = 2 = 2 x',=l 111111
CO
1 c 'O1 O 0.0 :010 0 l 01010 0 0'.
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
CO:cD CO u7 ! c7'�N'M : '.0 0 Imo.0 1 M
N 1 co O N cD� T': V rn (D 0 CO W
CV M'V.N N M M N VI V1,
a) I 1� 1
ad-. , I
IA
d
cc
1
Q 1 I
W
z
w
II 11
0 u CU CV
oI
D. N y
u■-6 t
O
co d 0
d d Cl)
o a
1 CD O d d 0 cop
1 w a a o_I I
1 i 7 7 7' •
-0 1 U 001 0 0 0 0' -._ -l0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0,0 0 O:0. --..._..
0 0 __..___- 0 0 0 O CO
Ln 0.Lo N- cs 0 0 M o Il'cOn M N a ............ co co 0 co c0
0 0
0'.
N d IN CV c,) '7.N r N'r u) M N VII VI,
LL• c° d 1
LL
1 C N r
O IL N IL 0
II-
0
o o • d -
s 3 c ! m • c o d v U qat
v o m 0 d � H C m E
0 N d 0 d
c d t 1 as
C N d I 1' M CO 0 d T 0 1 •d
•y. C 11 7,a O ° a w as -
C .0 1 a •- ro m
p L I 4 C d" C O 1 O
C y O 1 1 W a /p 1, d 73 N 0 0 ) 'O W
N.I O� y u07 E 1' 1 M E - O i) : 1; 'a
•1. Ebyd I v- EEo '` ro 'o 1aO
co 15 o-Z x != .�'. -0 DA N cE c I o I:=1 o o
O d a 3 -0,,,, e -o •,e O d d °) a O o o
N -c} d O @ N +r7 - d f0 o -
d 5 -o 0 a -o d o w a, d 13 c
ce rt a! 2, Nm-; 0 I cod mzo • -pi E 4- 0
en y CO, a 0 3 c a S :5 °` a c' yI y v1 m
O E d 1 nl m a o� o▪ •°•°-1 0 Y c - o c,1 o f o f
C 1.2 1 C C �. d 0 d 0 d - a'' O co O. X11 -1 u) N d a. , atf -
0 o •N 00 C 0) E O 1 a I _ c , ,- C �, O U 1 cG 0 d
E C T C C d GI Cl. o cl}
p a N' a
@ uul :j nlI o -6 H N yI a ro v O a o1 E11 CO C
� �. o ED 4-a -C p 0 O.. A1 C01 0 - U N d 7 0 •C1 N p' G NI 0.:O N
u7
d'al - , 7j O c m 0 N 01 uai' NI11 01 c d m d c •T 5I1 w1`c n m 31 0l a_0
0 y_. .- - o -.' O d, ar `N ti ;=1 1 a. ' d R a , O c
d c6 C O W ._ T 0 d -p - d d o 15 w' y NI y� NI G - OBI_ c,1 d. d �1'� .c Q--' c w d 0i O' co: O 12 a1-
�11U U UIU co Z1' ¢ g a 1 °' ' a2 J d: cu' a•0)2 .6 m '6 5:.71- ¢ c cl rnr
011H11,� w z:w
m c y cim`Mm0eu''1E nll000
CD O o d cu o -P3'
c c, ° d 311,3 0 o 1
E;0 O �' •- -c 1- '0 0' Z d L r a ✓�!(n r N �'la.� N
.a-
0-)
I V �ld �. �:�i� '11 M:�I col al'v) co c[)':
W ='=Iii= J 1 I2 2 r r r r IT 1.r
r ---_. T .. ....----_.. -- -
Z r 2 2 2 2 2 2. S'.212 T T'
2 F- r 1- I- r r r r 1-11-- H1r
J J J _1 _11_1 J _1 _I J.,J J JI J'
F S 5 1,2 22 1 1 12212222 1 , 1 2 2 2 2 11 5 11,
N a)
'0 0 OO p 0 a)
U
cn 1ci CO N N e
-1N - (V
w N N
rr O
ti co
a'
m
N
Q
Cl)
1 U
0
I-
7
I-
z
Sil
LU
p
E
a)
C
H
OI
z
N
N
of
Q) c
7 '.I U0
a)
L O 0 0 0 1
U O O: O O
co V3 6 O: 0 o C ir)
c N III
o >- N
O u_
N LL 1
a) I
-C a) 0
Q 8 I a, a) U
7 ], C @ 70
C j U T a
cp
N
_
C 0 N "0 a)
U V 1 ZU r) N
C a W y
.O o N c �'.
O
C y o E
()
. N • 0 I 0. C
Z « c gI 2 is
"= --'
O {a 2 0.1 0 3 -O C -0
H = in 3 1 c.I a m o
1• C 0-0 c a) CL a .,
Cn g f Ei 3 -a o v o- — ` r
c
o C a a 0 N
gy U O N N C a
p L C C O
co 0 a 0 LL O w LLw c
lr ra En -
« ml ay
t_]
CO '1) fll CO 0 U U . c CC fa C 0 C V
3 0 0 a) c. s) p''. NCI-1 a) p'.
C
NIA 01 0) a3 cl a3
T
CO Q, ,n1 U c c 1ml naxia.
m c -
to Q
r 0-c5 1 N ,`a!° y'i 0 1 C.) Q) E'.
co w lc .E �' 0I,rc;�I, OI 0 0 a)
... 010, LL J.O''.0 Z - -..
2 �'U U i
..... .,- try U) ---
� aorno
d I-I
z 221 21 H H; JJ JIJ_ J
i _ 2 2.2',1 112
I
41 n
Community Development Department
Mannino Divisions &sliding Safety Division Einvitoniniontiii Sods Division
� r
P 0 Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend,Oregon 97705-6005
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://w w w.co.de sch utes,or.u s/cdd/
MEMORANDUM
TO: Deschutes Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner
DATE: November 4, 2015
RE: November 9, 2015, Work Session—CR Contracting Plan Amendment/Zone Change
(File Nos. 247-15-000272-ZC/273-PA)
The purpose of this work session is to determine if the Board of County Commissioners(Board) is
supportive of adopting ordinances by emergency. Based on Board direction, staff will prepare two
ordinances for the business meeting on November 30.
Summary
C.R. Contracting, LLC, requested a Plan Amendment and Zone Change to change the zoning from
Tumalo Residential-5 Acre Minimum (TuR5) to Tumalo Industrial (Tul) and the plan designation
from Residential 5-Acre Minimum (TuR5) to Industrial (Tul) for a 5.39 acre property located near
the southern boundary of the Tumalo Rural Community.
The Hearings Officer held a public hearing on August 18, 2015, and found the application met, or
could meet, all relevant criteria and approved the applicant's proposal in a decision dated October
7, 2015 (attached). The Hearings Officer's decision was not appealed.
Under DCC 22.28.030(B), "In considering all quasi-judicial zone changes and those quasi-judicial
plan amendments on which the Hearings Officer has authority to make a decision, the Board of
County Commissioners shall, in the absence of an appeal or review initiated by the Board, adopt
the Hearings Officer's decision. No argument or further testimony will be taken by the Board."
Staff will bring the ordinances for review and adoption on November 30, 2015. The attached letter
from Sharon Smith, attorney for the applicant, explains their interest in adoption by emergency.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. 247-15-000272-ZC/273-PA Hearings Officer Decision
2. Letter from Sharon Smith, on behalf of C.R. Contracting, LLC
Quality Services Performed with Pride
BRYANT
LOVLI EN
& JARVIS
-• EST.Sf15
ATtORNEYS ^'-'."w• November G. 2015
A-rTORNE\s Via: email.
Neil R.Bryant
Sharon R.Smith Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners
John 0.Sortie c/o Matt Martin, Associate Planner
Mark G.Reinecke 1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200
Melissa R Lance Bend, OR 97701
Pau;J.Taylor matt.martin@deschutes.oruu
Jeremy M.Green
Mencia r,o,,,u Re: C.R. Contracting, LLC/247-15-000272-%C/273-PA
Heather J.Hansen
Dear Commissioners:
Garrett Chrostek
Danielle Lordt Our office represents C.R. Contracting, l.,l.C, a long-time asphalt management and
Caroline J.Ponzini paving business in Deschutes County. C.R. Contracting outgrew its present facilities
Alan R.Dale within the Bend city limits and has had a challenging time finding a suitable
alternative location. This led to a zone change and plan amendment application for a
5.39 acre property adjacent to Knife River in Tumalo. The Hearings Officer approved
that application on October 7111 and the decision was not appealed. Now, the County
must adopt an ordinance to implement the zone change. Because of a pressing need to
relocate, we request that the Board adopt the zone change/plan amendment ordinance
by emergency.
If the Board does not adopt the ordinance by emergency, it will not become effective
for 90 days. Given the holidays and staff workload, we may not have a second reading
until mid December with an effective date in March. Furthermore, C.R. Contracting
must still receive site plan approval before it can move its operations to the new site,
let alone break ground on a new building. A site plan application cannot be filed until
the ordinance is effective and likely will not be approved until the late summer of
2016 with the current large volume of land use applications.
Like all contractors, C.R. Contracting's peak season is summer. Spending the summer
moving to the new site instead of working would be disastrous to the company and its
40 peak season employees. Adopting the ordinance by emergency will allow C.R.
Contracting to start moving in early spring in advance of the busy season.
A legacy of service to our community.
591 SW Mill View Way,Bend,OR 97702 I P 541.382.4331 I F 541,389.3386 I bljlawyers.com
November 6, 2015
Page 2
We understand the reasons why the Board avoids adopting zone change ordinances by
emergency. However, those reasons are not present here. The proposed ordinance does not have
wide ranging application to county residents who would need some time to prepare for this
change. It is only applicable to a single parcel and all of the neighbors were provided notice of
C.R. Contracting's plans for the property. In any event, the site plan application processing
period provides that transition. Accordingly, adoption by emergency is appropriate and would
facilitate continuity of business by C.R. Contracting.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
.
Sharon R. Smith
smith cr bljlawyers.com
c: Client
{1/806002-00620699:tj
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division
.err'It:'wl di,:i m,r I
OW, i
117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
HEARINGS OFFICER DECISION
FILE NUMBERS: 247-15-000272-ZC and 217-15-000273-PA
SUBJECT: The applicant requests a Plan Amendment and Zone Change to change
the zoning from Tumalo Residential-5 Acre Minimum (TuR5) to Tumalo
Industrial (Tul) and the plan designation from Residential 5-Acre Minimum
(TuR5)to Industrial (Tul)for the subject 5.39 acre property.
APPLICANT: C.R. Contracting, LLC
OWNER: CLR Inc.
AGENT: Sharon R. Smith
Bryant Lovlien &Jarvis PC
LOCATION: The property has an assigned address of 64435 Strickler Avenue, Bend,
and is further identified as tax lot 401 on the County Assessor's Map 16-
12-31.
STAFF REVIEWER: Matthew Martin, AICP, Associate Planner
HEARINGS OFFICER: Dan R. Olsen
SUMMARY OF DECISION: The plan amendment, zone change and text amendments are
approved, subject to a condition of approval.
Except as noted by "Hearings Officer" the findings below are taken from the staff report and all
are the findings of the Hearings Officer.
I. BASIC FINDINGS:
A. Location: The property has an assigned address of 64435 Strickler Avenue, Bend, and
is further identified as tax lot 401 on the County Assessor's Map 16-12-31.
B. Lot of Record: Pursuant to the findings in Lot of Record Determination LR-04-28, the
subject property is recognized as legal lot of record.
C. Zoning and Plan Designation: The Subject Property is zoned Tumalo Residential 5
Acre Minimum District (TUR5) and is within the Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA)
Combining Zone. It is designated Residential 5- Acre Minimum (TUR5) on the
Comprehensive Plan Map.
Quality Services Performed with Pride
D. Site Description: The subject property is approximately 5.39 acres and generally
rectangular in shape except for an irregularly shaped southeast corner. Vegetation
consists of scattered juniper and pine trees with sage, bitterbrush, and other native ground
cover. The topography is generally flat with portions sloping to the south. The property is
unused but developed with a well, pump house, and gravel driveways traversing the
property.
>b f) )! 9 v r r S v r sb j41
r.tsvrr d,m"v m+ n• "3 >( ' v i rtiv ' Nx rjr
Aar. ',
ifir C 9r •1 �'44 i A ,@ vy t
�r e a
as r ,
Mk',t r ! NY ' �. 0
� f)2 ' Y *" as w
"-
)ya P i 1 tN.r v t ap 011
�" d ,'""1:1° C".4
W
.it tl o ip Z14 A i
?: .w S wy
ipY r T a j m
.t1 ,4 re
'� � w '� *{i&. ;'rY ! W'". b nV r 1..;� ^V �f��'�'-'%''��r wt �i4 �i+� ��"'W
View Looking South/Southwest
y'+>rN n'•rX I P h,�`n r"
E. Surrounding Land Use: Properties to the north and west are zoned TUR5 and
developed with residential uses, some with small scale agriculture, and elevated
significantly higher than the subject property. The properties to the south are zoned
Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and developed with residential and agricultural uses. The
property adjacent to the east is zoned TUI and is currently being developed with a mini
storage facility (land use file 247-14-000413-SP). The properties to the southeast and
further east are zoned Surface Mining (SM) and developed with the Knight River facility.
F. Proposal: Applicant requests a Zone Change and Plan Amendment for the subject
property to change the zoning from Tumalo Residential-5 Acre Minimum (TuR5) to
Tumalo Industrial (Tul) and the plan designation from TuR5 to Tul. No specific
development is proposed for the property at this time.
G. Hearing:
Hearings Officer: A public hearing was conducted on August 18, 2015. Several
persons testified and the following exhibits were received:
H-1 Fidler letter dated August 18.
H-2 Ross/Resnick letter dated August 13
H-3 Baker letter dated August 18,
I stated that I have no relationship to the applicant or any conflicts of interest. There
were no ex parte contacts. I did not conduct a site visit. I provided an opportunity
247-15-000272-ZG/247-15-000273-PA Page 2 of 19
for any person to raise procedural or other objections but none were raised.
At the conclusion of the hearing, the applicant asked the record be kept open for
additional submittals. The request was granted as follows:
September 8, 2015 at 5:00pm for new evidence
September 15, 2015 at 5:00pm for rebuttal evidence to new evidence
September 22, 2015 at 5:00pm for applicant's rebuttal but no new evidence
Numerous submittals were received and with one exception are admitted into the
record, An email from Dick and Lois Allen was received by staff on September 17,
2015, after the close of the written record on September 8, 2015.
H. Public Notice: The Planning Division mailed written notice of the applicant's proposal
and the public hearing to the owners of record of all property located within 250 feet of
the subject property.
Hearings Officer: No objections or concerns regarding notice have been raised.
Land Use History: There are no previous land use approvals for the subject property.
11. APPLICABLE STANDARDS:
Chapter 18.136, Amendments
1. Section 18.136.010, Amendments
DCC Title 18 may be amended as set forth in DCC 18.136. The procedures for text
or legislative map changes shall be as set forth in DCC 22.12. A request by a
property owner for a quasi-judicial map amendment shall be accomplished by
filing an application on forms provided by the Planning Department and shall be
subject to applicable procedures of DCC Title 22.
FINDING: The applicant has requested a quasi-judicial map amendment and filed the
applications for a plan amendment/zone change. The applications are being reviewed
under the procedures of DCC Title 22.
Hearings Officer: Also proposed are text amendments as discussed below.
2. Section 18.136.020, Rezoning Standards
The applicant for a quasi-judicial rezoning must establish that the public interest
is best served by rezoning the property. Factors to be demonstrated by the
applicant are:
A. That the change conforms with the Comprehensive Plan, and the change is
consistent with the plan's introductory statement and goals.
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 3 of 19
FINDING: Staff finds that the following are the applicable portions of the comprehensive plan
(Title 23 of the DCC):
Chapter 4, Urban Growth Management
Section 4.1, Introduction
Purpose
The Urban Growth Management chapter, in concert with the other
chapters of this Plan, specifies how Deschutes County will work
with cities and unincorporated communities to accommodate
growth while preserving rural character and resource lands.
Section 4.7
Background
The Tumalo Community Plan was adopted in Ordinance 2010-027 is
hereby incorporated into this Plan as Appendix B.
FINDING: This chapter establishes no approval criteria. The Tumalo Community Plan
is discussed below.
Tumalo Community Plan
Land Use
Land Use Designations and Inventory
Hearings Officer: As part of the proposal, the applicant seeks two text amendments to the
Tumalo Community Plan and staff proposes one.
Amendment#1
Although not included in Table 4, the TUI designation is discussed on page 9 of the Tumalo
Community Plan and the designation was approved by Ordinance 2005-017. The proposed
amendment addresses this omission and corrects the table so the Comprehensive Plan
designations and Zoning Districts match. The table below includes the proposed changes with
the added text identified by underline and the deleted text identified by stciketlacaugh.
Table 4-Tumalo Land Use Designations
Comprehensive Plan Designations Zoning Districts
Commercial(TUC) Commercial District(TUC)
Floodplain (FP) Floodplain(FP)
Research 4nd-bevel ment(T('R) Industrial(TUI) Industrial District(TUI)
Residential-RUN Research and Development(TURF) Research and Development District(TURF)
Residential(TURI Residential District(TUR)
Residential 5 Acre Minimyln(TUR5I Residential Five Acre Minimum District(TUR5)
247-15-000272-2C/247-15-000273-PA Page 4 of 19
Amendment#2
Approval of the proposed plan amendment and zone change requires amendment of the Table
5 changing the total number of TUR5 and TUI zoned parcels. The table below includes the
proposed changes with the added text identified by underline and the deleted text identified by
strikethrough
vm�crrrvwsrr.
Table 5-Tumalo Land Use Inventory*
Zone Residential Units Commercial I Industrial Undeveloped Total Number of
Developments Parcels Parcels
TUC 28 17 57 102
TUR 93 0 37 127
TUR5 75 0 28 27 400 99
TURE 0 2 I 3
TU1 0 2 91 a2
Total 196 21 123 334
*Assessor's Data 2009
Amendment#3
The text description of the TUI designation is currently very specific and this amendment is
necessary to allow for properties other than the Knife River operation to be designated as
Industrial. The text below includes the proposed changes with the added text identified by
underline and the deleted text identified by c•Fikethrough
Industrial (TUI). An "Industrial" designation allows a limited range of industrial
uses to serve Tumalo and the surrounding area. The designation recognizes
nonconforming industrial uses • . - • - •- - -; " ' - = -
ef Tumalo a curfac114ining . and properties suitable for limited amounts
of additional industrial development. It applies to This designation is
concentrated around the Knife River operation that fronts O.B. Riley Road and
U.S. 20.
Hearings Officer: The staff report characterizes these changes as necessary updates to
address omissions. The applicant states that they merely reflect existing conditions. See Fourth
Supplemental Burden of Proof. Terry Fidler Excavation contends that they are substantive and
create a class of industrial use beyond the mining that already is allowed. The unrefuted
testimony is that there are other TUI zoned properties with uses not associated with surface
mining. The TUI District as provided for in the zoning code clearly allows more than surface
mining related industrial uses and there is a separate surface mining designation. It is not clear
how the Tumalo Community Plan, the zoning code and the actual land uses got out of sync, or
how other industrial uses were approved without a change to the Community Plan language. I
find that the changes are substantive but necessary and appropriate so as to reflect the uses
permitted in the zone and actual existing conditions.
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 5 of 19
Goals and Policies
Land Use Goal
Protect and enhance the rural small-town character of Tumalo by supporting
public services, healthy active lifestyles and social connections among residents
and stakeholders.
Hearings Officer: Staff concluded that the proposed zone change and plan amendment to
industrial use would not adversely impact the rural small-town character of Tumalo as it is
limited to the 5.39 acre subject property. In its Sept.8, letter, Fidler argues that this policy is
violated as the proposal would extend the incompatible impacts of Hwy 20, which the Knife
River site buffers, into quieter areas. I agree with Fidler that the size of the parcel at issue, is not
necessarily determinative, but do not see how the proposal expands the impact of Hwy 20. As
discussed below, industrial use of the site may impact nearby properties but this "goal" is
directed at the overall community. In fact, it is doubtful that it is an approval standard at all, at
least as relates to the type of proposal at issue, since it seems to be directed toward promoting
certain things deemed desirable. I do not see how the proposal would interfere with the
provision of public services or encouraging healthy lifestyles and social connections.
Community Policies
1. Consider adding Tumalo State Park to the Tumalo Rural Community
boundary.
FINDING: Tumalo State Park is not subject to the proposed plan amendment and zone
change. Furthermore, neither the subject property owner nor Oregon State Parks
Department can be required to modify the Tumalo Rural Community boundary as part of
this request.
2. Coordinate with community groups and organizations that are working to
improve the livability, economy and access to Tumalo.
FINDING: Notice of the public hearing was provided in compliance with the county
procedures ordinance. Notice was mailed to the Tumalo Business Association and no
comments were submitted. Staff also attempted to contact the Tumalo Community
Association and learned the group is no longer active.
3. Support economic development initiatives and tourism in the Tumalo area.
FINDING: The applicant argues the proposal will enhance economic development as it
will allow for greater economic opportunities than the present TUR5 zoning. Staff
agrees.
Hearings Officer: It appears that there is a very limited amount of industrial land in the area
and that there is a demand for such land, this inevitably will result in more economic activity
than a single home on a large parcel as currently zoned.
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 6 of 19
4. Review the Tumalo community goals and policies every five years to
determine if they meet the current and future needs of the area.
FINDING: This policy is not applicable to this proposal.
5. Support the school district in improving opportunities to use Tumalo
Community School facilities for education, recreation and enrichment
programs for students,parents and area residents.
FINDING: This policy is not applicable to this proposal.
Open Space and Recreation Policies
6. Establish Tumalo as a regional bicycle destination through land use,
transportation and recreation policies and programs.
7. Encourage parks and open space, and where feasible, acquire land for
open space.
8. Preserve public access to the river.
9. Preserve publically owned lands along the Deschutes River by designating
them as open space.
10. Support infrastructure improvements including formal river access points,
public signage, lighting, sanitary facilities and improved parking
conditions.
11. Establish a multi-use trail system from Tumalo State Park to Tumalo.
12. Support community efforts to create and maintain local parks.
13. Coordinate implementation of bikeways with signs and best maintenance
practices on County arterials and collectors.
14. Support community efforts to designate the segment of the Deschutes
River through Tumalo as an Oregon Scenic Waterway for its recreational
values.
15. Support the development of a trails and recreation master plan.
16. Explore the future expansion of the Bend Metro Park and Recreation
District to include the Tumalo area.
FINDING: Staff believes these open space and recreational policies are not applicable
to this proposal because there are no identified bicycle, trail, park, open space, or river
standards or requirements associated with the subject property.
Land Use Policies
1. Conform land use regulations to the requirements of Unincorporated
Communities as defined in OAR 660 Division 22 or any successor.
FINDING: Conformance with the requirements of Unincorporated Communities as
defined in OAR 660 Division 22 is addressed below.
2. Ensure County plans and land use regulations require that new uses
authorized within Tumalo do not adversely affect agricultural uses in the
surrounding exclusive farm use zones.
247-15-000272-M/247-15-000273-PA Page 7 of 19
FINDING: Staff conducted a site visit to the area and reviewed aerial photos. These
inspections revealed some agricultural uses occurring on nearby EFU zoned lands. The
distance of the subject property from these agricultural uses on EFU zoned properties,
along with the Tumalo Industrial Zone (DCC 18.67.060) allowing "...a limited arrange of
industrial use,"will minimize impacts. Furthermore, the County can impose conditions of
approval for specific site-development proposals to ensure compatibility with adjacent
agricultural uses.
Hearings Officer: Mr. Fidler testified that he has some cattle on his EFU properties,
expressing a generalized concern about noise and dust. Other than that, the record just
indicates that there are"some" apparently limited agricultural uses in the area with an indication
that most are some distance from the site. Virtually all of the concerns raised in opposition are
directed at impacts on rural residential uses, traffic, water and so on. It is possible that a re-
designation to industrial may have the potential greater impacts than the existing rural
residential designation but the record provides no basis for such a finding. Moreover, again, it
does not appear that this policy is an applicable approval standard. It is directed toward drafting
plan and code language, not a particular application.
3. Apply setbacks for homes built along the rim forming the Deschutes River
Canyon and Laidlaw Butte to protect scenic views visible from the
community.
FINDING: This policy is not applicable to this proposal.
4. Coordinate with Tumalo Community Association, Tumalo Business
Association and similar local organizations on land use issues, where
appropriate.
FINDING: The Tumalo Business Association was mailed notice of the public hearing
and did not comment. The Tumalo Community Association is not currently active. No
other local organizations were identified to receive notice.
5. Encourage the preservation of historical structures such as the Tumalo
Community Church(1905)and the Laidlaw Bank and Trust(1910).
FINDING: This policy is not applicable to this proposal.
Residential Area Policies
6. Designate residential lands on the comprehensive plan map with a
corresponding residential district on the zoning map.
7. Designate residential lands so they are proximate to the commercial area.
8. Designate Residential 5 acre lands on the perimeter of the community.
9. Designate higher density residential lands in the bowl formed by the
Deschutes River canyon.
FINDING: The applicant is not proposing residential designation or zoning. Therefore,
these policies are not applicable to this proposal.
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 8 of 19
10. Permit livestock in the residential districts subject to use limitations.
FINDING: This policy is not applicable to this proposal.
11. Plan and zone for a diversity of housing types and densities suited to the
capacity of the land to accommodate water and sewage requirements.
FINDING: The proposed zone change will decrease the amount of land available for
housing by one single family dwelling pursuant to current TUR5 zoning. As the Tumalo
Community Plan indicates, residential uses are the predominate use within Tumalo and
there are presently a large number of vacant residential lots within Tumalo. The
applicant argues that removing one TUR5 lot will not inhibit the ability to provide a
diversity of housing types and densities in Tumalo. Staff agrees.
Commercial Area Policies
12. limit access from U.S. 20 so it is safe and economically viable.
13. Encourage design standards in the commercial district so new
development is compatible with the rural character of the community and
reduces negative impacts on adjacent residential districts.
14. Prohibit livestock from being permanently stabled in the commercial
districts.
15. Prohibit additional lands from being designated commercial until an
economic analysis review is completed.
16. Allow residential uses and mixed residential/commercial uses, while
preventing residential uses from dominating or setting development
standards in the commercial district.
17. Utilize approval standards for conditional uses in the commercial district to
consider the impact on nearby residential and commercial uses and the
capacity of public facilities and services.
18. Prohibit replatting for exclusively residential purposes in the commercial
district.
FINDING: The applicant is not proposing commercial designation or zoning. Therefore,
these policies are not applicable to this proposal.
Industrial Area Policies
19. Allow only the following new or expanded industrial uses in the Tumalo
rural community boundary:
a. Uses authorized under Goals 3 and 4(farm and forest uses);
b. Expansion of a use existing on the date of this rule;
c. Small-scale, low impact uses;
d. Uses that require proximity to rural resource, as defined in OAR 660-
004-0022(3)(a);
e. New uses that will not exceed the capacity of water and sewer
service available to the site on the effective date of this rule; or, if
such services are not available to the site, the capacity of the site
itself to provide water and absorb sewage;
f. New uses more intensive than those allowed under subsection (a)
through (e) of this section, provided an analysis set forth in the
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 9 of 19
Comprehensive Plan demonstrates, and land use regulations
ensure:
i. That such uses are necessary to provide employment that
does not exceed the total projected work force within the
community and the surrounding rural area;
ll. That such uses would not rely upon a work force employed
by uses within urban growth boundaries;and
iii. That the determination of the work force of the community
and surrounding rural area considers the total industrial and
commercial employment in the community and is coordinated
with employment projections for nearby urban growth
boundaries.
FINDING: These policies are taken from OAR 660-022-0030 (Planning and Zoning of
Unincorporated Communities). Subsection (g)(A)(B) was not adopted into the Tumalo
Community Plan. Even though they do not apply, they are as follows:
(g) Industrial uses, including accessory uses subordinate to industrial
development, as provided under either paragraph (A) or (B) of this
subsection:
(A) Industrial developments sited on an abandoned or diminished
industrial mill site, as defined in ORS 197.719 that was engaged in
the processing or manufacturing of wood products, provided the
uses will be located only on the portion of the mill site that is
zoned for industrial uses; or
(B) Industrial development, and accessory uses subordinate to the
industrial development, in buildings of any size and type, in an
area planned and zoned for industrial use on January 1, 2004,
subject to the territorial limits and other requirements of ORS
197.713 and 197.714.
There is no development proposal for the subject property at this time. Compliance with
the use criteria and standards of the TUI zone (DCC 18.67.060) will be reviewed upon
application for site-specific development. A subsequent application will need to
demonstrate that Policy 19(e) is met.
Public Facilities Goal
Ensure water and sewage treatment systems encompass the appropriate scale
and cost.
FINDING: The Tumalo Rural Community is not presently served by a community
sewage treatment system and only a portion of the community, not including the subject
property is served domestic water by the Laidlaw Company.
247-15-000272-2C/247-15-000273-PA Page 10 of 19
Public Facility Policies
1. Determine residential minimum lot sizes by the capacity of the land to
accommodate available water and wastewater facilities.
FINDING: No residential use or zoning is proposed. Therefore, this policy is not
applicable to this proposal.
2. Encourage high quality fire protection in Tumalo and the surrounding area.
FINDING: Fire protection for the subject property is currently provided by the Bend
Rural Fire Protection District#2.
3. Encourage early planning and acquisition of sites needed for public
facilities(e.g. school, roads, water supply facility,parks).
FINDING: The policy is not applicable to this proposal,
4. Coordinate development within the Laidlaw Water District to determine if
connection to its water system is required.
FINDING: Notice of these applications was sent to the Laidlaw Water District and no
comments were received.
5. Support replatting of lots in the area comprising the Laidlaw Plat and other
lands designated commercial to create lots large enough to accommodate
a DEQ approved on-site sewage disposal system.
FINDING: The subject property is not part of the Laidlaw Plat.
6. Support the protection of the Tunisia Town Ditch easement and its
distribution system.
7. Support the development and management of the domestic water system
for Tumalo so that cumulative development will not result in public health
hazards or adverse environmental impacts that violate state or federal
water quality regulations.
8. Coordinate with the Tumalo residents and business owners on the creation
of a sewer district, if the community initiates district formation.
FINDING: These policies are not applicable to this proposal.
Transportation Goal
Provide a safe and efficient system for all modes of transportation, including
active modes, to support local economic development, recreational uses, and
community health.
Hearings Officer: Staff initially recommended denial of the proposal due to inadequacies in the
transportation analysis provided by the applicant. On August 17, the applicant submitted a new
Supplemental Transportation Impact Analysis that Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner
found acceptable. See discussion below.
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 11 of 19
Road Network Policies
1. Review the existing Transportation System Plan policies and standards for
Tumalo.
2. Review existing roadway design requirements to ensure complete streets
which accommodate all modes of travel.
FINDING: These policies are not applicable to this proposal.
Road and Sidewalk Policies
3. implement road development standards for Tumalo that minimize
pavement width and are consistent with the small-scale character of the
community.
4. Utilize land development and grant funding opportunities to improve street
segments identified for improvement in the Transportation System Plan.
5. Provide functional, cost effective sidewalks that are consistent with the
rural character of the community.
6. Provide sidewalks or multi-use paths where they are needed for safety, as
set forth in the Transportation System Plan.
7. Construct sidewalks specified on community roads without curbs and
gutters, distant from property lines, to allow room for utilities.
FINDING: The provision of sidewalks/paths will be addressed in a future development
application.
U.S. 20 Policies
8, Coordinate with the Tumalo community and Oregon Department of
Transportation to Implement both short and long-term improvements to
solve transportation problems, including at the Cook Avenue and U.S. 20
intersection.
9. Enhance the roadside environment, through tree planting, signage or other
means.
10. Promote safe access and slower speeds on U.S. 20 through Tumalo.
11. Retain and enhance access across U.S. 20 using above, below, or at grade
crossings to support pedestrian, bicycle and equestrian access to
recreation and community services.
FINDING: The subject property does not take access from U.S. 20. Notice of the
applications was sent to the Oregon Department of Transportation and no comments
were received.
Hearings Officer: See discussion under the Transportation Planning Rule.
2. Section 18.136.020, Rezoning Standards (Continued)
B. That the change in classification for the subject property is consistent with
the purpose and intent of the proposed zone classification.
247-15-000272-2C/247-15-000273-PA Page 12 of 19
FINDING: The purpose of the TUI zone is listed under DCC 18.67.060 as follows:
The purpose of the Industrial District is to allow a limited range of industrial uses
to serve the community and the surrounding area.
FINDING: There is currently no development proposed but the applicant intends to use
the property to relocate its current business operations. Those operations include
storage of equipment used in road paving and related office uses. Likely development
includes a 10-12,000 square foot, maintenance and storage building with an office as
well as a paved storage/circulation area. Equipment storage associated with industrial
activities (such as road paving) is one of the limited permitted uses in the TUI zone.
C. That changing the zoning will presently serve the public health, safety and
welfare considering the following factors:
1. The availability and efficiency of providing necessary public
services and facilities.
FINDING: The applicant indicates public services and facilities will not be required to
utilize the property for the storage of industrial equipment. Bend Rural Fire provides fire
protection, water could be provided by private on-site well, and septic could be provided
on-site. As previously indicated, the submitted traffic study is deficient in its analysis
therefore staff cannot evaluate if the anticipated traffic impacts have been adequately
mitigated. The applicant indents on address this with a supplemental submittal.
Hearings Officer: At the hearing I asked for clarification of the rather cryptic comment from the
Bend Fire Department. In its Second Supplemental Burden of Proof statement the applicant
represents that it discussed the comments with the Fire Marshall and they are intended as a
P Y
general admonishment that fire regulations may impose restrictions on the use or storage of
regulated materials on the subject property. That appears to be consistent with the best reading
of the comment.
2. The impacts on surrounding land use will be consistent with the
specific goals and policies contained within the Comprehensive Plan.
FINDING: No specific development is proposed at this time so specific impacts cannot
be assessed. However, the relevant plan goals and policies are addressed herein.
Hearings Officer: I read this standard as requiring consideration of the potential impacts of the
entire range of uses allowed in the TUI designation and zone. As discussed above, however,
there appear to be very few policies relevant to this proposal or that raise compliance issues. In
its September 8, letter Fidler cites to an arguably applicable standard not raised by staff.
Comp Plan Chapter 4, Urban Growth Management, Section 4.1 states that the purpose of the
comprehensive plan is "to accommodate growth while preserving rural character and resource
lands." Since the proposal would remove land from rural residential and add industrial, the
argument is that this is inconsistent with this policy because the industrial land would not "mesh
with rural and agricultural surrounding uses."
In and of itself, this policy is so general as to not provide any meaningful guidance to a specific
provision. It provides no locational guidance. For example, it could but does not, permit
designation of land as commercial or industrial only if surrounded by other commercial/industrial
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 13 of 19
land or otherwise isolated so as to not impact rural character. Rather, Chapter 4 refers to the
Tumalo Community Plan for implementation guidance. As discussed above, the TCP has few
applicable standards to guide this proposal. But it does clearly permit new or expanded
industrial uses so long as meet the standards of Policy 19, in particular being small scale, low-
impact uses. That limitation appears to be how the County chose to"accommodate growth while
preserving local character." This conclusion is consistent with the fact that the uses allowed
under Site Plan Review appear to be limited to those with minimal impacts. More intensive uses
require a conditional use approval. The zone also grants fairly broad authority to address
impacts with increased setbacks, landscaping and so on.
At the hearing, concerns were raised about potential impacts on wells and on access to the
Baker/Ross-Resnick well. Again, it is not at all clear that there are approval standards at this
stage that are relevant to these issues. The plan amendment/zone change in itself will not affect
water or access, although it opens the door to consideration of whether to approve uses that
may have such impacts. The development review stage is where such impacts may be
considered and addressed based on a specific proposed use.
The applicant asserts in its Third Supplemental Burden of Proof that it is willing to provide
continued access to the Baker/Ross-Resnick well. It may be that a prescriptive easement or
other legal right exists. If it does not, the current owner could cut off access under the current
zoning. Denying this application would have no impact on this issue. It is more likely (although
not certain) that the Bakers and Ross-Resnick will be able to secure some sort of assurance by
working with the applicant and county through the land development process.
Finally, as to the concerns about noise, approval certainly increases the odds that a use noisier
than a residence will be approved for the site. But there is insufficient basis, particularly given
the approval standards, to deny on this basis. Again, the TUI zone grants fairly broad discretion
to address impacts associated with a specific proposed use and that should be used to provide
reasonable mitigation as necessary.
D. That there has been a change in circumstances since the property was last
zoned, or a mistake was made in the zoning of the property In question.
FINDING: There have been several changes of circumstances since the property was
zoned TUR5 in 1997 through Ordinance No. 97-032 that justify the proposed zone
change:
(1) The Knife River properties were rezoned from Tumalo Residential to TUI via ZC-04-
5.
(2) The primary Knife River Facility has undergone substantial development including
the construction of an office building and truck shop (SP-05-6), a ready-mix concrete
recycling facility (SP-05-38), and alterations of both of those facilities (SP-06-5 and
SP-08-36 respectively).
(3) The Creative Real Estate Solutions LLC property was approved for 40,000 square
feet of mini-storage (247-14-000413) on the adjacent property to the east.
The applicant argues this substantial amount of industrial development adjacent to the
subject property has decreased the suitability of the site for residential development and
increased its utility as an industrial site. Staff agrees.
247-15-000272-2C/247-15-000273-PA Page 14 of 19
Oregon Administrative Rules
OAR 660, Division 12,Transportation Planning Rule
OAR 660-012-060, Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments.
(1) Amendments to functional plans, acknowledged comprehensive plans, and
land use regulat ions which significantly affect a transportation facility shall
assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function,
capacity, and performance standards (e.g. level of service, volume to
capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility. This shall be accomplished by either:
(a) Limiting allowed land uses to be consistent with the planned
function, capacity and performance standards of the transportation
facility;
(b) Amending the TSP to provide transportation facilities adequate to
support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of
this division;
(c) Altering land use designations, densities, or design requirements to
reduce demand for automobile travel and meet travel needs through
other modes;or
(a) Amending the TSP to modify the planned function, capacity and
performance standards, as needed, to accept greater motor vehicle
congestion to promote mixed use, pedestrian friendly development
where multimodal travel choices are provided.
(2) A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a
transportation facility if it:
(a) Changes the functional classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility;
(b) Changes standards implementing a functional classification system;
(c) Allows types or levels or land uses which would result in levels of
travel or access which are inconsistent with the functional
classification of a transportation facility;or
(d) Would reduce the performance standards of the facility below the
minimum level identified in the TSP.
(3) Determinations under subsections (1) and (2) of this section shall be
coordinated with affected transportation facility and service providers and
other affected local governments.
FINDING: This above language is applicable to the applicant's proposal because it
involves an amendment to an acknowledged plan. The applicant is not proposing any
land use development of the property at this time and has indicated that future
development may include industrial development.
Hearings Officer: The applicant submitted a Supplemental Transportation Impact Analysis
dated August 17. Unlike the first analysis, it correctly looks at the range of uses permitted under
the requested designation and zone. It states that "an unrestricted zone change would
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 15 of 19
significantly affect the transportation system as defined by TPR criteria." On the other hand,
ODOT did not respond and the TPR permits approval without mitigation in such a case.
The Senior Transportation Planner indicates in his August 18 email that he concurs with the
analysis and conclusions. But it appears that he does not actually concur with the statement that
the 3 pm peak trips are de minimus and do not need to be addressed. Rather, he suggests a
condition prohibiting shift start/end from 4-6 pm.
In its application, the applicant suggests that traffic generation from the site be restricted to that
generated by the use it says it intends to pursue and in its Second Supplemental Burden of
Proof suggests such that a shift limitation makes little practical sense given the number of trips it
intends to generate.
As I understand it, however, the issue is not the overall number of trips but the peak hour trips,
even though they are minimal. The applicant testified that the majority of its crews leave on
Sunday and return late Friday. The impression conveyed by the description of its intended use
is one of a fair amount of flexibility in terms of scheduling. Further, the County apparently has
experience with conditions on shift scheduling.
Accordingly, I find that a condition of approval requiring that employee shifts commence and
end outside of the 4-6 p.m, period is warranted.
OAR 660, Division 15, Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines
FINDING: Findings regarding the Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines are
provided below:
Goal 1, Citizen Involvement. The Planning Division has provided notice of the
proposed plan amendment and zone change to the public through individual notice to
affected property owners, the applicant will be posting a "proposed land use action sign,"
and notice of the public hearing will be in the "Bend Bulletin" newspaper. In addition, a
public hearing will be held on the proposed plan amendment/zone change.
Goal 2, Land Use Planning. Goals, policies, and processes related to zone change
applications are included in the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, and Title 18 of
the Deschutes County Code. The application of these processes and
policies/regulations are documented within this staff report.
Goal 3,Agricultural Lands. Because the property is within an unincorporated
community it is not agricultural land or zoned EFU. As discussed herein, staff believes
the proposed zone change will not adversely affect agricultural uses on surrounding EFU
lands on account of the limited range of industrial uses permitted in the TUI. Additional
mitigation measures could be imposed as upon review of a future site-specific
development proposal.
Goal 4, Forest Lands. The existing site and surrounding areas do not include any
lands that are zoned for, or that support, forest uses.
Goal 5, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources. The
existing site and surrounding areas are not included in the County's Goal 5 inventory.
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 16 of 19
Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality. No specific development is
proposed at this time. Development of the property would not likely result in significant
adverse impacts to air, water, or land resources quality due to the small size of the site
and that any future development would be subject to local, state, and federal regulations
protecting these resources. With that said, comments received from adjacent property
owners Bakers and Ross/Resnick- and express concerns with contamination of and
access to the shared well they use that is located on the subject property. Recognizing
and understanding their concerns, staff notes that the rezoning of the property will not
impact water quality or access to the well. These impacts will be dictated by any future
use of the property and the provisions of the private well agreement. The applicant has
indicated they will address these comments in a supplemental submittal.
Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards. This goal is not applicable
because the subject property is not located in a known natural disaster or hazard area.
Goal 8, Recreational Needs. The proposed plan amendment and zone change do not
affect recreational needs.
Goal 9, Economy of the State. This goal is to provide adequate opportunities
throughout the state for a variety of economic activities. By increasing the types and
intensity of industrial uses available to the property, staff believes the proposal will
increase economic opportunities on the property.
Goal 10, Housing. The goal of Goal 10 is "To provide for the housing needs of citizens
of the state" and is further explained stating:
Buildable lands for residential use shall be inventoried and plans shall
encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at
price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial
capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of housing location,
type and density.
The applicant argues that because Goal 10 defines needed housing as housing within
urban growth boundaries and the subject property is outside a UGB then Goal 10 is not
applicable. Staff agrees with this conclusion. Staff adds that, as the Tumalo Community
Plan indicates, residential uses are the predominate use within Tumalo and there are
presently a large number of vacant residential lots within Tumalo. Removing one TUR5
lot will not inhibit the ability for Tumalo to provide a diversity of housing types and
densities. Therefore, staff believes this proposal will have no adverse impact on the
availability of housing on the area.
Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services. The applicant's proposal will have no adverse
effect on the provision of public facilities and services to the subject site.
Goal 12,Transportation. This report states in a foregoing finding that the
transportation impacts of proposed plan amendment and zone change were not
adequately addressed in the materials submitted at the time of the issuance of the staff
report. However, as previously founds, the Supplemental Transportation Impact
Analysis dated August 17 shows the traffic impacts will be mitigated with a condition of
approval requiring that employee shifts commence and end outside of the 4-6 p.m.
period is warranted.
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 17 of 19
Goal 13, Energy Conservation. Staff believes that the proposal will not have an effect
on energy use or conservation, until such time as it is developed.
Goal 14, Urbanization. The subject property is within the Tumalo Rural Community
boundary. This proposal does not change the types or intensity of uses allowed in, nor
does it change the boundary of, the Tumalo Rural Community.
Goals 15 through 19. These goals, which address river, ocean, and estuarine
resources, are not applicable because the subject property is not located in or adjacent
to any such areas or resources.
IV. CONCLUSION AND CONDITION OF APPROVAL
Based on the record and the foregoing findings and conclusion, the application for a
Plan Amendment from TuR5 to Industrial (Tul) and for a zone change from Tumalo
Residential-5 Acre Minimum (TuR5) to Tumalo industrial (Tul) the subject 5.39 acre
property is APPROVED subject to the following condition of approval:
"Any industrial use approved for the subject property shall demonstrate that it can and
will employ effective measures to ensure that the start and end of employee shifts occur
outside of the 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. peak hour. This condition may be removed or modified
only after notice and public hearing and upon demonstration by the applicant that
impacts on the US 20/OB Riley-Cook Avenue intersection will be avoided or mitigated,
or that intersection conditions have changed so as to warrant modification or removal."
Further, the following text amendments are APPROVED:
Table 4-Tumalo Land Use Designations
Comprehensive Plan Designations Zoning Districts
Commercial(TUC) Commercial District(TUC)
Floodplain(FP) Floodplain(FP)
Industrial(TUI) Industrial District(TUI)
Residential-MA)Research and Development(TUREJ Research and Development District(rURE)
Residential(TUR) Residential District(TUR)
Residential 5 Acre Minimum(TUR51 Residential Five Acre Minimum District(TUR5)
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 18 of 19
Table 5-Tumalo Land Use Inventory
Zone Residential Units
Developments _
Commercial Industrial rial Undeveloped Total Number of
Commercial/Industr
Parcels Parcels
TUC 28 17 57 102
TUR 93 0 37 127
TUR5 — 75 0 28 22 --00 99
TURD 0 2 1 3
TUI 0 2 0 1 23.
Total 196 21 123 334
*Assessor's Data 2009 �~
Industrial (TUI). An "Industrial" designation allows a limited range of industrial
uses to serve Tumalo and the surroundin g area. The designation recognizes
nonconforming industrial uses - _ = - - • . ' - - - = - =-
of Tumalo i Surf Mining zone and properties suitable for limited amounts
of additional industrial development. it applies to This designation is
concentrated around the Knife River operation that fronts O.B. Riley Road and
U.S. 20.
Dated this 7th day of October, 2015. Mailed this, day of October, 2015.
Dan R. Olsen
Hearings Officer
247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA Page 19 of 19
Community Development ment De artment
p
(7Th
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division
P O. Box 6005 1
17 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www,co.deschutes.or,us/cdd/
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
FILE NUMBERS: 247-15-000272-ZC/247-15-000273-PA
DOCUMENT MAILED: Hearings Officer's Decision
MAP/TAX LOT NUMBER: 16-12-31 401
I certify that on the 15th day of October, 2015, the attached notice(s)/report(s), dated
October 15, 2015, was/were mailed by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the person(s) and
address(es) set forth below/on the attached list.
Dated this 15th day of October, 2015.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
By: Sher Buckner
Applicant: Owner:
C.R. Contracting, LLC CLR, Inc.
c/o Bryant Lovlien & Jarvis, PC 703 NW Stonepine Dr,
591 SW Mill View Way Bend, OR 97701
Bend, OR 97702
Mary Ross Terry Fidler
Michael Resnick 64375 OB Riley Rd
64495 Bailey Rd. Bend, OR 97701
Bend, OR 97703
Dick and Lois Allen Lawrence and Conchita Baker
64455 OB Riley Rd, 64435 Bailey Rd.
Bend, OR 97701 Bend, OR 97703
Elizabeth Dickson
Hurley Re, PC
747 SW Mill View Way
Bend, OR 97702
Quality Services Performed with Pride
crES
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division
Now
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/
Memorandum
DATE: November ATE: Nov e e 5, 2015
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Nick Lelack, Community Development Department Director
Peter Gutowsky, Planning Manager
RE: Planning Staff/Budget Amendment/Authorization to Fund Assistant Planner
Position
The Community Development Department(CDD) is respectfully requesting the Board of County •
Commissioners (Board) amend the COD budget to add 1 New Full Time Equivalent (FTE)
employee to fill an Assistant Planner position.
Background
In preparation for a Senior Planner retirement at the end of the calendar year, CDD is
reclassifying the Senior Planner position to an Assistant Planner. In addition to this
reclassification, a new FTE position of Assistant Planner is requested. The result is to replace a
Senior Planner with two Assistant Planners to reestablish the Planning Division's pre-recession
organizational structure ( i.e. two Senior Planners, two Associate Planners and two Assistant
Planners). The goals are to meet service demands, provide outstanding customer service and
to adequately pay for the services delivered (i.e. Senior Planners should not perform routine
duties better suited for a lower planner classification).
Justification
To demonstrate the Planning Division's operational needs, COD offers the following as
justification to add 1 FTE to its budget for a second Assistant Planner position:
• High land use volume shows since FY 2005-2006, that Planning Division FTEs rise and
fall based on land use revenue(Attachment)
• Planning Division cannot meet its current needs as evidenced by an on-call planner
working full time
• CDD has sufficient revenue to fund the position based on year-to-date revenue total of
45% in Current Planning. Expenditures are on target at 33%.
• CDD has employed an on-call planner in the last four months to meet the demands of
the division (costs of this position is included within the 33%expenditure total).
Quality Services Performed with Pride
r
Deschutes County Land Use Applications
1200
—_ 1000
800
600
■Applications
ililTirli __...-.... 400
71/15
ir5 :
FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 FY 15-16
Proposed Planning Division FTE's
12
With 2 New
Proposed a 8
Positions
__ 6 ■FTE's
4
2
0
FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 FY 10-11 FY 11-12 FY 12-13 FY 13-14 FY 14-15 FY 15-16