2017-252-Minutes for Meeting June 09,1988 Recorded 5/19/2017Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2017-252
Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk
Commissioners' Journal 05/19/2017 12:22:42 PM
For Recording Stamp Only
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
Bend, Oregon
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Audio Cassette Recording Titled: PUBLIC HEARING ON LAZY RIVER SOUTH ACCESS
ISSUES
June 9, 1988; 6:00-8:30 PM.
A meeting of the Board of County Commissioners was held on June 9, 1988.
Commissioners present were Lois Prante, Dick Maudlin and Tom Throop. Also
present were Rick Isham, County Counsel; County Administrator Mike Maier; and
other staff; plus many citizens and representatives of the media.
This was a public hearing on Lazy River South access issues. There was a standing
room only crowd.
Mr. Maudlin noted there will be a considerable amount of testimony from the
parties. He asked for the attendees to be considerate of each other. He gave a
statement regarding what the Board hopes to achieve through having this
hearing. They have no preconceived ideas, and are there to listen to they can
eventually take some action.
Mr. Throop remarked that this is an outstanding turnout, with maybe 125 people
in attendance.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Work Session, June 9, 1988 Page 1 of 4
County road fund dollars are very limited and most of this has to used to maintain
and preserve existing roads, or limited modernization. The only new roads that
the County gets involved in are those where there is considerable matching funds.
This could be State or federal funds, or funding through local improvement
districts.
This is an unusual circumstance, with a cul-de-sac that is 3.5 miles long with a
single access. The ten to twenty minute response time for emergency vehicles is
not unusual. There are longer response times all over the County. But at Lazy
River South, they have the opportunity to improve the response time if they put
their heads together to make it happen cooperatively.
The Board is not the total answer to this problem. They do want to be a part of
the solution, working with the citizens and not pitting neighbor against neighbor.
They need to be brought together to come to a solution that most parties in the
area can live with. The Board is here in good faith, and want to listen to the
citizens. They want to encourage citizens to get together to work towards a
solution.
After a year of deliberations, numerous options have been discussed. The County
is down to three, and Larry Rice will present those tonight. There are probably as
many options as there are people, but they hope to discuss three of them. They
want to hear of others from citizens as well.
Ms. Prante noted that the issue is controversial but each person should be
allowed a brief time to speak. She asked for each person to present his or her
case, but to not make value judgments on how his or her preferred alternative
impacts someone else. Each person or group should discuss that impact
themselves.
The Board has meet in open meetings many times to discuss this situation. They
are aware of the problems and do want to find a solution. She was somewhat
distressed to read that some feel they have not been cooperative. They really
have and reviewed a variety of options. They do want to see the problem fixed.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Work Session, June 9, 1988 Page 2 of 4
Ms. Maudlin gave the audience instructions on how to testify, and opened the
hearing at this time. It will be taped on audio tape.
Larry Rice, Director of Public Works since December 1986, will speak first and go
over the three options. The County engineer was also introduced.
Mr. Rice went over the three preferred options at this time. Alternate A is in
three parts; a portion between Forest and Howard, and Howard to Meadow
Road, and there would be some minor work on Howard Road as an emergency
access and bring it to a cinder standard. This would cost about $145,000.
From Dike to Meadow is an LID that is in the works. The County would pick up a
share of that LID, at a cost of $33,600. The cost is usually about $130,000 per
mile.
The last part would be bringing Howard Road up to 20 feet of cinders, at a cost of
$21,000. So Alternate A's total costs would be $199,600.
Alternate B is leaving Bridge Drive at the start of the cul-de-sac, diagonally
crossing the Stern property, connecting at a point about 300 feet south of Paulina
Butte Road, and then going out Howard Road. To bring this up to County
standard would cost about $243,500.
Alternate C would leave Bridge Drive at the same point, but going down east of
Ahern Acres and hooking directly into Burgess Road.
On any alternatives where it crosses the Stern property, the County has included
a cattle underpass. This alternate route would cost about $267,400.
(He referred to handouts at this time.)
At this time, questions came from the audience (not recorded), and Mr. Rice
replied, explaining the various options again.
The cost estimates are for a hard surface, since there are too many complaints if
the surface is cinders, creating rougher driving and dust. This is one reason the
other subdivision formed an LID.
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Work Session, June 9, 1988 Page 3 of 4
The Board has already agreed to allocate $206,000 towards whatever solution is
finally decided. They have already discussed up to nine alternative ideas, and
have come up with what is felt to be the three most reasonable and feasible
solutions.
At this time, audience members talked about improving other roads to do the
same thing. Others spoke about the positive and negative impacts of the various
alternatives. There were comments about the existing access. Fire and
emergency services personnel also testified as to which alternative would be the
fastest regarding response times, and what to do if there is a major disaster, such
as a wildfire, when the population needs to get out of the area quickly.
Some questioned whether the amount of money quoted for each alternative was
accurate, or would go up. Some also asked about the Lost Ponderosa Road option
and other alternatives. Mr. Maudlin pointed out that most of the other options
discussed would result in more cost, and Tess direct access for fire and emergency
services vehicles.
Several people testified that they are ready to fight various alternatives in court if
they have to.
After hearing further testimony, the Board left the hearing open for further
written testimony. They will determine at a future date how to proceed.
I certify that the above is a true and accurate record of a meeting, as reproduced from a
cassette tape identified as Minutes of a Public Hearing of the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners, held on June 9, 1988. This record was completed subsequent to the presiding
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners' tenure.
Bonnie Baker
For the Board of County Commissioners
Transcription of Audio Recording of a Work Session, June 9, 1988 Page 4 of 4