2017-883-Minutes for Meeting October 25,2017 Recorded 12/21/2017Recorded in Deschutes County
Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk
Commissioners' Journal
CJ2017-883
12/21/2017 11:01:06 AM
2017-883IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
For Recording Stamp Only
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97703-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Wednesday, October 25, 2017
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Phil Henderson and Anthony DeBone. Commissioner Tammy
Baney and County Administrator Tom Anderson was absent. Also present were Erik Kropp,
Deputy County Administrator; David Doyle, County Counsel; and Sharon Ross, Board Executive
Secretary. One representative of the media was in attendance.
CALL TO ORDER: Vice -Chair DeBone called the meeting to order at 10:05 a.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CITIZEN INPUT: None was offered.
CONSENT AGENDA: Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent
Agenda.
HENDERSON: Move approval of Consent Agenda Items 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6
DEBONE: Second.
VOTE: HENDERSON: Yes.
BANEY: Absent, excused
DEBONE: Vice -Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting October 25, 2017 Page 1 of 3
Consent Agenda Items:
1. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2017-561, Oregon State University
Extension Service Lease in South County
2. Consideration and Approval of Order No. 2017-041, Accepting a Petition and Setting a
Public Hearing Date for Annexation of Land into Bend Park & Recreation District
3. Consideration of Resolution No. 2017-048, a Resolution Extending Workers'
Compensation Coverage
4. Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2017-052, Budget Adjustment — Health
Services Grant
5. Consideration and Signature of Resolution No. 2017-053, Budget Adjustment — County
School Fund
6. Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2017-054, Budget Adjustment — Assessor's
Office
ACTION ITEMS
Consent Agenda #2 as pulled for discussion: Consideration and Approval of Order No. 2017-
041, Accepting a Petition and Setting a Public Hearing Date for Annexation of Land into
Bend Park & Recreation District
Dave Doyle, County Legal Counsel noted this is a formality to set a hearing and this is the order
that sets the hearing date. Peter Gutowsky, Community Development Department reviewed
Title 18 and 19 provisions regarding land divisions.
HENDERSON: Move approval
DEBONE: Second
VOTE: HENDERSON: Yes.
BANEY: Absent, excused
DEBONE: Vice -Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
7. PUBLIC HEARING: Lot of Record Amendment — Third Hearing
Peter Gutowsky, Community Development Department and Adam Smith, Assistant
County Legal Counsel presented this item. Mr. Gutowsky admitted several pieces of
written testimony as submitted for the record. Mr. Smith spoke to written testimony in an
effort to provide greater clarity. Mr. Gutowsky reviewed the amendments.
Commissioner Henderson requested a current version of the amendments. Mr. Smith
reviewed the history of the lot of record amendments. Vice Chair DeBone called for any
citizen comment.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting October 25, 2017 Page 2 of 3
Tyler Neese, Central Oregon Association of Realtors. Mr. Neese noted that he
commented previously. He is here today to reiterate that support.
Paul Dewey, Central Oregon Land Watch. Mr. Dewey thanked the Board for continued
discussions and expressed his hope to solve the post-Grimstad issue with regard to
existing developed parcels within the county. Central Oregon Land Watch asked the
Board to review in the context of a fact situation and don't adopt in terms of unit of land
but wait for another time. Mr. Dewey spoke on the protection of the Skyline Forest. Mr.
Dewey opined there is no pressing public need for a comprehensive text amendment.
Mr. Gutowky presented comment from staff and respectfully asked for direction to return
with the appropriate amendment and an ordinance for consideration upon closure of the
hearing. Commissioner Henderson was disappointed that Liz Fancher was not present
today for further comment. Commissioner Henderson feels the need for more
information on implications and impacts to federal land.
Commissioner DeBone closed the public hearing at this time. Commissioner DeBone
read items of the amendment to be considered and requested further information be
brought forward.
OTHER ITEMS: None were offered.
ADJOURN: Being no further items to come before the Board, meeting adjourned at 10:45 a.m.
DATED this Day of
County Board of Commissioners.
ATTEST:
ecording Secretary
C 2017 for the Deschutes
1
Tammy 13aney, Cha;
Anthony DeBone, Vice Chair
q, I'A , , A,
Philip G. r
derson, Commissioner
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting October 25, 2017 Page 3 of 3
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703
(541) 388-6570 — Fax (541) 385-3202 — https://vwuw.deschutes.org/
BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
10:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2017
Barnes and Sawyer Rooms - Deschutes Services Center — 1300 NW Wall Street — Bend
Pursuant to ORS 192.640, this agenda includes a list of the principal subjects anticipated to be considered or
discussed at the meeting. This notice does not limit the ability of the Board to address additional subjects.
Meetings are subject to cancellation without notice. This meeting is open to the public and interested citizens are
invited to attend. Business Meetings are usually recorded on video and audio, and can be viewed by the public
live or at a later date; and written minutes are taken for the record.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CITIZEN INPUT
This is the time provided for individuals wishing to address the Board, at the Board's discretion, regarding issues
that are not already on the agenda. Please complete a sign-up card (provided), and give the card to the
Recording Secretary. Use the microphone and clearly state your name when the Board Chair calls on you to
speak. PLEASE NOTE. Citizen input regarding matters that are or have been the subject of a public hearing not
being conducted as a part of this meeting will NOT be included in the official record of that hearing.
If you offer or display to the Board any written documents, photographs or other printed matter as part of your
testimony during a public hearing, please be advised that staff is required to retain those documents as part of the
permanent record of that hearing.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2017-561, Oregon State University
Extension Service Lease in South County
2. Consideration and Approval of Order 2017-041, Accepting a Petition and Setting a
Public Hearing Date for Annexation of Land into Bend Park & Recreation District.
3. Consideration of Resolution No. 2017-048, a Resolution Extending Workers'
Compensation Coverage
Board of Commissioners Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, October 25, 2017 Page 1
of 3
4. Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2017-052, Budget Adjustment - Health
Services Grant
5. Consideration and Signature of Resolution No. 2017-053, Budget Adjustment - County
School Fund
6. Consideration of Signature of Resolution No. 2017-054, Budget Adjustment - Assessor's
Office
ACTION ITEMS
7. PUBLIC HEARING: Lot of Record Amendment / Third Hearing - Peter Gutowsky,
Planning Manager
OTHER ITEMS
These can be any items not included on the agenda that the Commissioners wish to discuss as part of
the meeting, pursuant to ORS 192.640.
At any time during the meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS
192.660(2)(e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor
negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(b), personnel issues; or other executive session categories.
Executive sessions are closed to the public; however, with few exceptions and under specific
guidelines, are open to the media.
ADJOURN
To watch this meeting on line, go to: www.deschutes.org/meetings
Please note that the video will not show up until recording begins. You can also view past
meetings on video by selecting the date shown on the website calendar.
Board of Commissioners Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, October 25, 2017 Page 2
of 3
iliaDeschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and
013 activities. To request this information in an alternate format please call (541) 617-4747.
FUTURE MEETINGS:
Additional meeting dates available at www.deschutes.org/meetingcalendar
(Please note: Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Board of
Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions
regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.)
Board of Commissioners Business Meeting Agenda Wednesday, October 25, 2017 Page 3
of 3
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703
(541) 388-6570 — Fax (541) 385-3202 — https://www.deschutes.org/
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
For Board of Commissioners Business Meeting of October 25, 2017
DATE: October 19, 2017
FROM: Peter Gutowsky, Community Development, 541-385-1709
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
PUBLIC HEARING: Lot of Record Amendment / Third Hearing
RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED:
Staff provides three options for the Board's consideration:
Option 1 - Continue the hearing to a date certain to receive additional testimony.
Option 2 - Close the hearing, deliberate, identify a preferred amendment, and request
an ordinance and updated findings for consideration of first and second reading at a
subsequent meeting.
Option 3 - Other as determined by the Board.
ATTENDANCE: Peter Gutowsky, AICP, Planning Manager; Adam Smith, Assistant Legal
Counsel
Community Development Department
MEMORANDUM
PO Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005
117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, OR 97703
TEL (541) 388-6575
TO: Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Peter Gutowsky, AICP, Planning Manager
DATE: October 20, 2017
SUBJECT: Lot of Record Text Amendments / Third Public Hearing
BACKGROUND
www.deschLqPj.orcL/cd
The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners (Board) conducted a public hearing on September 20,
2017, closed the oral record and left the written record open until Friday, September 22, at 12:00 p.m.
Upon receiving testimony by Central Oregon Landwatch (COLW) on September 20 and 22 respectively,
the Board issued Order 2017-039 on September 25, reopening the oral and written record through
October 16 at 10:00 a.m. At the conclusion of the October 16 hearing, the Board continued it to October
25 at 10:00 a.m.
IL LOT OF RECORD AMENDMENTS / 3 VERSIONS
There are currently three versions of the Lot of Record amendments. Two are worthy of consideration:
Comprehensive Amendments introduced by staff and Modified Amendments provided by Central Oregon
Landwatch.
Table 1— Lot Record Amendments / Options
Comprehensive Amendment
Modified Amendment
Deletes existing "Lot of Record" definition and
amends/adds definitions for "Unit of Land," Lot,"
Minimal changes to existing definitions.
"Parcel," etc.
Adds verification requirement tied to specific types of
permits.
Same.
Adds exceptions to the verification requirement.
Mostly the Same.
Verification through meeting the statutory "lawfully
Verification through meeting the County's "lot of
established unit of land" definition.
record" definition.
Establishes process for verifying units of land as part
Mostly the Same,
of applying for permits or through a declaratory ruling.
Codifies statutory provisions governing options when
Deletes proposed section because it is mostly
a unit of land cannot be verified.
repeating statutory provisions.
III. BOARD OPTIONS
Staff provides three options for the Board's consideration:
• Option 1 - Continue the hearing to a date certain to receive additional testimony.
Option 2 — Close the hearing, deliberate, identify a preferred amendment, and request an
ordinance and updated findings for consideration of first and second reading at a subsequent
meeting.
• Option 3 — Other as determined by the Board.
-2-
Peter Gutowsky
From: Caroline House
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 2:11 PM
To: Peter Gutowsky
Subject: FW: 5588 N Hwy 97 Terrebonne
See below.
Caroline House, Assistant Planner
Community Development Department
PO Box 6005 1 117 NW Lafayette Avenue
Bend, Oregon 97708-6005
Tel: (541) 317-3148
www.deschutes.org/cd
Disclaimer:
Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall not be
deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status of a person's property or conferring any rights, including
any reliance rights, on any person.
From: robin.masterson@aol.com [mailto:robin.masterson@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 2:10 PM
To: Caroline House <Caroline.House @deschutes.org>
Subject: Re: 5588 N Hwy 97 Terrebonne
Thank your for meeting with us last Wed.
Enclosed is my letter that I would like to go to the hearing Wed Oct, 25. We leave for vacation on Wed morning, so,
unfortunately we will not be able to attend that hearing.
To Whom It May Concern
Oct 20, 2017
My husband who is retired and myself (1 yr away from retirement) purchased a bank repo for cash and decided to make it
our permanent home here in Deschutes County. A few years later we were talking with our neighbor to the north. We
wanted a few more acres, and the neighbor, who's wife is wheelchair bound with MS, wanted less property. We agreed
on a price and our purchase was going to help the neighbor pay off his mortgage and easing the financial burden on
him. The property we wish to purchase is EFU zoned and we wanted more pasture to run a few more cows
on. Everything was fine until the county tells us we don't have a legal lot of record, so we can't do a lot line adjustment
until the legal lot of record is established. According to our surveyors notes, our parcel of land has been in the Deschutes
County records as a tax lot since 1966. So how is it that we don't have a legal 'lot of record' on our property and have to
now have it surveyed, again. It was surveyed back before 1966 and has been on the county records as tax
lot 1102. How do a few idiots in charge make up these rules and get them passed? Oh, and if we would have made this
agreement a year ago, this rule didn't exist. This 'lot of record' BS just came into effect last fall in 2016. Tell me how that
happens. Oh, and, it's still not in stone, so this could all change after this hearing. It could be better, or ... it could be
worse. Who's in charge of our great county?
Robin Masterson
Terrebonne, OR
-----Original Message -----
From: Caroline House<Caroline.House(a)deschutes.org>
To: robin.masterson <robin.masterson(c aol.com>
Cc: Peter Gutowsky<Peter.Gutowsky(a�deschutes.org>
Sent: Mon, Oct 16, 2017 10:03 am
Subject: RE: 5588 N Hwy 97 Terrebonne
I think it might be helpful for me to provide additional background on what legal "lot of record" means and provide
additional analysis for your property. My manager and I would like to set-up a meeting to answer your questions this
Wednesday, October 18 at 2:30pm. Does this day and time work for you?
The Deschutes County Code (DCC) has a specific definition of when a tax lot can be recognized as a legal lot of record.
The County cannot issue any permits, and in this case review the submitted lot line adjustment, until a property is
confirmed to be a legal lot of record.
The DCC "lot of record" definition provides five (5) options, which are summarized below:
A tax lot is recognized as a legal lot of record if one of the following is true:
1. A lot is created by a County approved partition; or
2. A lot is created by a County approved subdivision; or
3. A lot is created by a separate sales contract before the County had rules (the first partition ordinance was
adopted on April 1, 1977); or
4. A lot is created by Town plat (ex. The unincorporated community of Tumalo); or
5. A lot is created as a remnant parcel (meaning all of the surrounding tax lots were created by partition
and/or subdivision)
In 1974, when the survey was filed at the Surveyor's office, the property owner did not record a sales contract. If a sales
contract had been recorded the property would be recognized as a legal lot of record. Based on the submitted
information, the first sales contract was recorded after the County adopted partition rules. To make matters worse, the
Planning Divisions records show in 1978 a partition was requested, but was not completed (see attached document
titled "MP -78-27 V-77-49"). "Mansfield-Povey Surveyors" is listed as the surveyor for the 1978 partition request. Maybe
Mr. Povey has some additional information showing the 1978 partition was completed that has not been submitted yet?
Without a sales contract before April 1, 1977 or demonstrating the 1978 partition was completed the property does not
meet the legal lot of record options 1-5 above.
The property can be "validated" pursuant to ORS 92.176 and afterwards will be recognized as a legal lot of record. This
process requires a licensed surveyor to file a one -parcel partition plat (see attached document titled "DCSO Memo 2017-
01 (one -parcel partitions)".
Lastly, I am sorry to hear that Mr. Povey is frustrated with the current situation. If there is anything I can do to get things
back on track let me know.
Lot of Record" means:
A. A lot or parcel at least 5,000 square feet in area and at least 50 feet wide, which conformed to all zoning and subdivision
or partition requirements, if any, in effect on the date the lot or parcel was created, and which was created by any of
the following means:
1. By partitioning land as defined in ORS 92;
2. By a subdivision plat, as defined in ORS 92, filed with the Deschutes County Surveyor and recorded with the
Deschutes County Clerk;
3. By deed or contract, dated and signed by the parties to the transaction, containing a separate legal description
of the lot or parcel, and recorded in Deschutes County if recording of the instrument was required on the date
of the conveyance. If such instrument contains more than one legal description, only one lot of record shall
be recognized unless the legal descriptions describe lots subject to a recorded subdivision or town plat;
4. By a town plat filed with the Deschutes County Clerk and recorded in the Deschutes County Record of Plats;
or
5. By the subdividing or partitioning of adjacent or surrounding land, leaving a remainder lot or parcel.
B. Notwithstanding subsection (A), a lot or parcel validated pursuant to ORS 92.176 shall be recognized as a lot of
record.
C. The following shall not be deemed to be a lot of record:
1. A lot or parcel created solely by a tax lot segregation because of an assessor's roll change or for the convenience
of the assessor.
2. A lot or parcel created by an intervening section or township line or right of way.
3. A lot or parcel created by an unrecorded subdivision, unless the lot or parcel was conveyed subject to DCC
18.04.030(B).
4. A parcel created by the foreclosure of a security interest.
For the purposes of DCC Title 18, "lot" or "parcel" means a lot of record as defined DCC 18.04.030.
Caroline House, Assistant Planner
Community Development Department
PO Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue
Bend, Oregon 97708-6005
Tel: (541) 317-3148
www.deschutes.orgZcd
Disclaimer:
Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall not be
deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status of a person's property or conferring any rights, including
any reliance rights, on any person.
From: robin.masterson@aol.com [ma ilto:robin. masterson@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 8:19 AM
To: Caroline House <Caroline.House @deschutes.org>
Subject: 5588 N Hwy 97 Terrebonne
Caroline,
I have laid awake last night not understanding why this is so complicated.
I have some questions about our lot of record.
I have been working with Mr. Randy Povey, who surveyed our property with his grandfather back in 1974. He has all the
maps and recordings. He says we already have what you are asking for. Why do we have to have our land surveyed
again, when it was already done back long before these new land usage laws came into effect? I understand doing the
paperwork the county is requiring to make this 'legal', but I don't understand the reasoning for another survey, and neither
does Mr. Povey.
I have been informed that you and Randy Povey had a conversation about another piece of property, not mine, and that
conversation did not end well.
Mr. Povey is frustrated, I am frustrated. All we want to do is purchase some additional acres from our neighbor.
Mr. Povey has requested we go over your head to your supervisor and make an appointment about surveying our
property. We have all the maps, it was recorded with the county surveyor back in the 70's. Mr. Povey has ALL the
original maps (from the county) that when the county was changing over from paper to computer, he was given the
opportunity to take all the old maps, and he did. He is giving me the original map of our surveyed property, and asked
that I make an appointment with your supervisor and have him explain why I have to have another survey done on my
property prior to completing this lot line adjustment with our neighbor.
I also work for the county.
My work week this week is Sat, Sun, Mon and Tues. I will be calling to make an appointment with your supervisor, and
yourself if need be, hopefully on Wed 10/18, then I am off on vacation. I'm trying to do this on my own, as I'm afraid the
working relationship between Mr. Povey and yourself has been 'damaged' and he is not willing to contact you on our
behalf.
Thanks.
Robin Masterson 541-419-5416
-----Original Message -----
From: Caroline House<Caroline.House(o)deschutes.org>
To: robin.masterson <robin.masterson(o)aol.com>
Sent: Tue, Oct 10, 2017 11:00 am
Subject: Email Contact
Here's my email. Thanks!
ajt i Caroline House, Assistant Planner
y Community Development Department
PO Box 6005 1117 NW Lafayette Avenue
Bend, Oregon 97708-6005
Tel: (541) 317-3148
www.deschutes.org/cd
Disclaimer:
Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall not be
deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status of a person's property or conferring any rights, including
any reliance rights, on any person.
IM
LANDWATCH
October 23, 2017
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
c/o Deschutes County Planning Department
117 NW Lafayette Avenue
Bend, Oregon 97703
Re: Lot of Record Text Amendments
Dear Chair Baney and Commissioners:
(0 SkA, Fk—;nd t., u, R 9, "'1 2
www.centraloregoniandwatch.org
Thank you for this opportunity to expand on our earlier testimony regarding the proposed text
amendments.
The text amendments proposed by the County contain:
1) the "Grimstad" text amendment;
2) clarifications such as for declaratory ruling proceedings; and
3) comprehensive policy changes about development throughout Deschutes County with
potentially far-reaching effects.
LandWatch agrees with the first two parts but disagrees with the third part: adopting overarching
policy changes without a clear understanding of their purpose or effects. Unlike the Grimstad
amendment, no data have been generated about how many unrecorded parcels will be allowed to be
developed contrary to the current code if the County approves these amendments. Our own estimates
are that there could be hundreds of newly developable parcels, including in the Skyline Forest.
Over time, the best way to resolve issues like federal land transfers, remainder lots, and deeds
identifying multiple parcels issues will be through individual quasi-judicial cases. When the code is
interpreted or adapted based on case law, the Board of Commissioners has concrete facts to work
with that bring the related policy issues into focus. None of these issues is being pressed by the
broader public as with Grimstad and are just being promoted by development interests and an
attorney whose clients want the code changed to their benefit.
It is also important to note that most of the unforeseen consequences of adopting the proposed
comprehensive changes cannot be resolved at LUBA. This is mostly a policy choice on the part of
the Commissioners.
2
Moreover, it is not at all clear why the Commissioners would want to undercut their current
comprehensive plan policies in support of protecting the Skyline Forest (attached) by encouraging
development there through loosening lot of record rules. The more lots of record there are the higher
the value of the Skyline Forest land and the less likely a community forest can be achieved.
Ms. Fancher at the hearing stated that if the Commissioners want to protect the Skyline Forest that
they should do so with a zone change that would prohibit development. That the County Board
might pursue that (doubtful because of the likely overwhelming opposition by the Singapore
Investment Company and probable Measure 49 obstacles) does not mean that existing limits on
development should be removed. At the least, the Board should leave the lot of record rules as they
are and make the landowner go through the partitions process if it wants to create more lots.
Neither is this an issue for which there are "layers of protection" in the county code and state law.
Just because the minimum parcel size for a dwelling is 240 acres in the forest zone does not protect a
community working forest or protect the Tumalo Winter Range. Such development would
irreparably fragment the forest and wildlife habitat. The only thing protecting the Skyline Forest
from this fragmentation are the current limits on recognizing old lots of record and the County's
partition rules that limit the creation of new parcels.
With all due respect to the new assistant county counsel who drafted the comprehensive changes and
has advocated for them, he apparently was unfamiliar with the Skyline Forest and its history and
therefore did not consider the impacts on Skyline Forest in drafting these changes. On behalf of
Central Oregon LandWatch, as well as the broad public support for the Skyline Forest, we urge you
not to approve the comprehensive changes, at least until you have been presented with equivalent
data to that provided for the Grimstad amendment.
As we have stated before, please adopt the latest Grimstad amendment and verification/declaratory
process by emergency measure, do not adopt the new term of "unit of land," and do not adopt the
other sweeping changes, including federal lands, remainder lots and deeds including more than one
description of land.
Very truly yours,
/s/ Paul Dewey
Paul Dewey,
Executive Director
www.centraloregonlandwatch.ora
:,..
DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Policy 2.3.8 "Support the maintenance of the Skyline Forest as a Community Forest."
SECTION 2.3 FOREST LANDS
XXX
"Residential Development
The primary concern over changing forest uses is that as timber becomes less profitable, the pressure
to develop forest lands for residential uses increases. State regulations limit the development of
housing in forest zones, recognizing that fragmenting forests decreases productivity. The biggest
challenge posed by residential fragmentation of forests is the danger posed by wildfire in heavily
wooded areas. Fire danger has increased as dry conditions and disease have impacted the health of
forest lands. Years of fire suppression and limited logging have contributed to a build up of wildland
fuel that can spread fires quickly. In these conditions, residential uses in forests create conditions
dangerous to homeowners and firefighters. Section 3.4, Natural Hazards, has more information on
wildfire prevention. The second challenge posed by forest fragmentation is the threat to fish and
wildlife. This is addressed in the Water and Wildlife sections of this Chapter."
"Skyline Forest
There is a unique opportunity to preserve a large privately held working forest. Skyline Forest
consists of approximately 33,000 acres of privately held forest lands at the base of the Three Sisters
Mountains. Historically, this property has been logged, but still holds important recreational, scenic
and wildlife habitat value. The non-profit Deschutes Land Trust has been working to purchase
Skyline Forest from the owners, who represent a large financial company. In 2005 the Board of
County Commissioners approved creating a Community Forest Authority, a quasi -municipal
corporation that has the authority to issue tax-exempt bonds to pay for purchasing the forest. The
bonds will be repaid with revenue from logging. The logging revenue is not anticipated to cover all
the bond costs, but combined with other grants and contributions can ensure the bonds are repaid."
Central COAR
Association of REALTORS'
YOUR VOICE IN' REAL ESTATE
October 23, 2017
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall Street
Bend, OR 97703
Re: Lot of Record Text Amendments
Dear Chair and Commissioners,
I..: L.ijcS':
:iultip e _isting ._v,-'. o•f' e', .,i ;n
r.
t'; 0OR
o n _?
On behalf of the Central Oregon Association of REALTORS° (COAR) — representing nearly 1,800 REALTORS° in
Deschutes County — thank you for your efforts to revise the County's legal lot of record verification process.
As you know, the current policy has proven a significant barrier and financial hardship for both current and
prospective property owners in buying and selling property, as well as modifying existing structures. We
value the County's partnership and appreciate the opportunities to work together toward practical solutions
to these problems.
We are writing in support of the Modified Amendments introduced by Central Oregon LandWatch
(COLW). After careful deliberation, we have determined that this policy would address our organization's
primary concerns with the existing process and alleviate much of the burden currently placed on property
owners. We encourage the Commission to approve the Modified Amendments by emergency action in
order to implement code changes as soon as possible.
Thank you for your service to Deschutes County, as well as your consideration of the concerns of the local real
estate industry throughout this process.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at 541-382-6027 or info@coar.com.
Sincerely,
Carolyn Bostwick
2017 President
Central Oregon Association of REALTORS° &
MLS of Central Oregon
Brent Landels
Chair, Government Affairs Committee
Central Oregon Association of REALTORS° &
MLS of Central Oregon
!t..'.. ?': ......
�E, t ..,,,: I ' F.•. 1 ..1.;�`� ( ... �i f �,..tr ..: l;c�rui ;�k, �;%
Having repeatedly secured bi-partisan legislation to protect Skyline, the community forest effort
stalled with the real estate crash of the Great Recession prompting the Florida -based owner to
sell Skyline as part of a larger bulk sale of nearly 2oo,000 acres of timberland in Deschutes and
Klamath Counties. While the current Chinese owner of Skyline is doing an admirable job of
actively managing the timberland and has expressed no desire to subdivide, we're mindful that
economic or other considerations can change and the Deschutes Land Trust remains
committed to permanently protect Skyline Forest and its productive capacity. Consequently,
the Deschutes Land Trust would urge great caution as you consider changes in the "lot of
record" ordinances or other related land -use amendments, which might inadvertently
precipitate tagmentation and eventual residential development of Skyline Forest.
Thank yoV forbour consideration.
i
P. 541} 330 0017:
W W W.DESCH UTESLA N DTRUST.ORG
E1 E; S ('I F. S
LAND
TB1LJS T
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners October 25, 2017
c/o Deschutes County Planning Dept.
PRESIDENT
117 NW Lafayette Ave.
r, NICOL
Bend, OR 97703
VICE PRESIDENT -'�
RE: Lot of Record Amendments
Ci LFAN N VI LLA R
Dear Commissioners,
TREASURER
M KE C. 1r1:NC
I write in regards to proposed land -use ordinance text amendments related to "legal lots of
SECRETARY
record." While I've not had an opportunity to analyze the proposed ordinance amendments
and can't speak to their legal implications, I've become aware of concerns raised by Paul Dewey
and Central Oregon Landwatch related to Skyline Forest.
DIRECTORS
BONAC ,FR
As you know, the Deschutes Land Trust has worked tirelessly with a wide range of community
r,hlN
stakeholders to find a voluntary means to permanently protect the 33,000 acre commercial
Cl_- 'vc 6
timberland known as Skyline Forest. Our goal is to keep this important timberland intact and
WIC' RANC,S
,ELiS ;A K:
in production, so that it can continue to provide timber jobs, as well as protecting our
NT
:;rllr:c..1 t.c,a •I
cherished scenic views, critically important deer winter range and maintain public recreational
o fita;; v r,rrIr.ws
access, while also avoiding more housing in highly flammable forests. Deschutes County has
Kne= Mc(C;%,RRE,
been a key partner in this community effort from the beginning.
G iLU;AN 10CKNCr?
Ro,3 r:"'- '-H 0,MA'
As Commissioners witnessed in 2005, the perceived threat to our scenic views, recreation,
h'"'` I'M k``s
wildlife habitat and timber jobs united a remarkably broad cross section of the community. This
CiGL (:':AL. lkf€F. i.tkhfS
unique coalition included homeowners, business owners, equestrians, hunters, mt bikers, real
estate developers, conservationists, timber interests and educators. With Deschutes County's
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
leadership, the coalition rallied behind the cause of creating a Skyline Community Forest, an
BRAD C'#ALf:AN`
effort that ultimately lead to the successful passage of three separate bills to help protect
commercial timberlands.
Having repeatedly secured bi-partisan legislation to protect Skyline, the community forest effort
stalled with the real estate crash of the Great Recession prompting the Florida -based owner to
sell Skyline as part of a larger bulk sale of nearly 2oo,000 acres of timberland in Deschutes and
Klamath Counties. While the current Chinese owner of Skyline is doing an admirable job of
actively managing the timberland and has expressed no desire to subdivide, we're mindful that
economic or other considerations can change and the Deschutes Land Trust remains
committed to permanently protect Skyline Forest and its productive capacity. Consequently,
the Deschutes Land Trust would urge great caution as you consider changes in the "lot of
record" ordinances or other related land -use amendments, which might inadvertently
precipitate tagmentation and eventual residential development of Skyline Forest.
Thank yoV forbour consideration.
i
P. 541} 330 0017:
W W W.DESCH UTESLA N DTRUST.ORG
., i_i."-.I E) r _,stLh, SC...c.. JIC'en .,, )regon
A: .
Association ofREAUTORS'
YOUR VOICE IN REAL ESTATE
October 23, 2017
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall Street
Bend, OR 97703
Re: Lot of Record Text Amendments
Dear Chair and Commissioners,
On behalf of the Central Oregon Association of REALTORS® (COAR) — representing nearly 1,800 REALTORS' in
Deschutes County — thank you for your efforts to revise the County's legal lot of record verification process.
As you know, the current policy has proven a significant barrier and financial hardship for both current and
prospective property owners in buying and selling property, as well as modifying existing structures. We
value the County's partnership and appreciate the opportunities to work together toward practical solutions
to these problems.
We are writing in support of the Modified Amendments introduced by Central Oregon LandWatch
(COLW). After careful deliberation, we have determined that this policy would address our organization's
primary concerns with the existing process and alleviate much of the burden currently placed on property
owners. We encourage the Commission to approve the Modified Amendments by emergency action in
order to implement code changes as soon as possible.
Thank you for your service to Deschutes County, as well as your consideration of the concerns of the local real
estate industry throughout this process.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at 541-382-6027 or info@coar.com.
Sincerely,
Carolyn Bostwick
2017 President
Central Oregon Association of REALTORS° &
MLS of Central Oregon
Brent Landels
Chair, Government Affairs Committee
Central Oregon Association of REALTORS° &
MLS of Central Oregon
r � ..:
Etrit! .;I i)i..;, �ii A.�s,,.:� ::r� .,. REAL 1 �l,a� . 2 ,JI. 1 t ...: Bend ,It, �#: Phone: ,u...,?,.:.`.6027