The URL can be used to link to this page

2018-317-Minutes for Meeting June 13,2018 Recorded 7/27/2018��v1 ES COG 2{ BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon (541) 388-6570 9:00 AM Recorded in Deschutes County CJ201 8-31 7 Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk Commissioners' Journal 07/27/2018 7:45:02 AM 1111111111111111111111111111 111 FOR RECORDING STAMP ONLY BUSINESS MEETING INUTES WEDNESDAY, June 13, 2018 BARNES SAWYER ROOMS Present were Commissioners Tammy Baney, Phil Henderson and Anthony DeBone. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; David Doyle, County Counsel; and Sharon Keith, Board Executive Assistant. Several citizens and no identified representatives of the media were in attendance. CALL TO ORDER: Chair DeBone called the meeting to order at 9:03 a.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CITIZEN INPUT: Patrick Brady: Approached the Board on Tax Lot 103. Mr. Brady is the Chief Executive Officer of EzraTerra and would like to meet with each Commissioner (having already met with Chair DeBone and County Administrator Anderson last week). BOCC BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 1 OF 10 CONSENT AGENDA: Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda. HENDERSON: Move approval, minus Items 1 and 3 to be pulled for discussion BANEY: Second. VOTE: HENDERSON: Yes. BANEY: Yes. DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried Consent Agenda Items: 1. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2018-393, Helion Software, Inc. Assessment and Taxation Software 2. Consideration of Board Signature of Resolution No. 2018-031, Budget Adjustment - Human Resources Fund 3. Consideration of Board Signature of Resolution No. 2018-032, Budget Adjustment - Health Benefits Fund 4. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter Appointing Tina Smith to the Behavioral Health Advisory Board 5. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter ReAppointing Norma Brenton to the Dog Board of Supervisors 6. Approval of Minutes of the May 30, 2018 Special Meeting ACTION ITEMS Consent Agenda Item 1 as pulled for discussion: Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2018-393, Helion Software, Inc. Assessment and Taxation Software Commissioner Henderson inquired on the terms of the contract and Scot Langton, County Assessor explained the agreement, specifically that the BOCC BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 2 OF 10 software and services provided by Helion allow his Office to generate the annual tax roll. BAN EY: Move approval HENDERSON: Second VOTE: BANEY: Yes HENDERSON: Yes DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried Consent Agenda Item 3 as pulled for discussion: Consideration of Board Signature of Resolution No. 2018-032, Budget Adjustment - Health Benefits Fund Commissioner Henderson inquired why the budget adjustment was required and Human Resources Director Kathleen Hinman explained the overlap process with the third party administrator agreements. BANEY: Move approval HENDERSON: Second VOTE: BAN EY: Yes HENDERSON: Yes DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 7. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2018-409 an Easement Encroachment Agreement Between Deschutes County and Swalley Irrigation District James Lewis, Property Manager reviewed the agreement for consideration to allow procedures for a construction project on the public safety campus. HENDERSON: Move approval BANEY: Second BOCC BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 3 OF 10 Discussion Commissioner DeBone inquired on the paved area. Mr. Lewis reported this is a paved area. VOTE: BAN EY: Yes HENDERSON: Yes DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 8. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2018-410, a Power Service Line Easement on County Property Located at the Pleasant Ridge Road Intersection with Highway 97 James Lewis, Property Manager explained this is a request from Central Electric Cooperative for construction of a weather station and camera to be installed along Highway 97. BAN EY: Move approval HENDERSON: Second VOTE: BAN EY: Yes HENDERSON: Yes DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 9. PUBLIC HEARING and Consideration of Board Approval of Order No. 2018-032, Approving the Petition for Annexation into Oregon Water Wonderland II Sanitary District Adam Smith, Assistant Legal Counsel presented the Order and hearing procedures. This is relative to a single property seeking annexation. Commissioner DeBone did disclose a potential conflict as he cuts grass and hay on that property. Mr. Smith noted there has been no opposition. No challenge was made regarding Commissioner DeBone's comment. BOCC BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 4 OF 10 Commissioner DeBone opened the public hearing and upon no testimony the public hearing was closed. BANEY: Move approval HENDERSON: Second VOTE: BANEY: Yes HENDERSON: Yes DEBONE: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 10.PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal of Administrative Approval to Establish a Marijuana Production and Processing Facility at 21330 Young Avenue, Bend Kyle Collins, Community Development Department reviewed the hearing procedures and gave the staff report. Commissioner Henderson noted citizens have contacted him about this but he directed them to the Community Development Department. The applicant's attorney Ellen Grover presented testimony and evidence on behalf of the applicant Evolution Group LLC. This is a 62 -acre property that contains 51 acres of COID land. This facility will involve 22,000 square feet. Survey and site plans were prepared for the existing agricultural buildings. The applicant has submitted a license application with the Oregon Liquor Control Commission prior to the application going before the Board for approval. Commissioner Henderson inquired on the Evolution Concepts coming before the Board with a previous application. They are currently in the process of a purchase of a retail business on Third and Franklin. They also hold another marijuana grow operation license relatively close to this proposed site. Commissioner Baney requested information on the property and the dairy farm and scope of usage on the property. Commissioner Baney noted the concern of the unknown and the possibility of a modification of the current property. Commissioner Henderson spoke on the concerns of density and the over capacity of marijuana grows and production in the state. BOCC BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 5 OF 10 Commissioner Henderson is concerned with overbuilding of what should be rural areas in Deschutes County. Commissioner Baney requested photographs or the current property design should be included in the record. The proposed operation's extraction, production and processing were reviewed. Commissioner Baney noted the question on the type of processing and was questioned by the Department of Agriculture. Kyle Collins noted the question was raised regarding the processing of edibles. Commissioner DeBone inquired on the type of product that is planned for this property. The applicant explained there is either a flower or extract coming from the property. The client intends on using carbon filtration for odor mitigation. Commissioner Baney requested information on the system to prove it is effectively working. Commissioner Henderson noted the request from the Board is a report demonstrating odor control by actual data and not a letter. Commissioner DeBone noted statistics of air exchange and life of filters should be included in the report. Ms. Groves reviewed the source of water and power for the property. Commissioner Henderson noted concerns with a shared well on the property. Commissioner Baney noted the letter from the neighboring property explained a shortage of water. The applicant is not proposing any well water for the proposed operations. Report given on the employee activity on site and traffic and trip generation expected on the property. Commissioner Henderson explained the Board is requesting trip generation calculations based on the specific type of industry. The business will require two employees on site to fully manage the operation. Two employees can handle all of the production. Discussion was held on the amount of equipment required for the production and the design plans. The applicant will provide the design plans to the Board during the open record. Commissioner Henderson inquired on comments in the record stating there was a prior illegal grow on the property. The applicant noted a code enforcement case was reviewed by the County and there was no violation found. Commissioner Baney noted in the record there are a series of concerns and comments and requested a response in writing. BOCC BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 6 OF 10 Commissioner Henderson inquired on the clarification of the applicant and owner. Both are different LLCs: Evolution Group and PB Group LLC. There are members of the group from Costa Rica. The application to OLCC will be made by the entire group. Commissioner Baney asked for clarification in writing of the owners and applicants. Lee Casebeer presented testimony on behalf of the 20 neighboring property owners. The neighbors are concerned about several items: land values going down, strongly recommends installing a gauge on the well for water usage, lighting and smell concerns are seen with the current grow operation, and are worried of the proposed site, traffic concerns, the amount of workers needed on site, too close to the canal, and the concerns of the total impact. Mr. Casebeer noted his wife is a cancer patient and does use medical marijuana. They have lived on their property since 1983. Commissioner Baney inquired on the activity of the property during the dairy farm. Mr. Casebeer explained the normal farm activity and questions whether producing and processing marijuana is a normal farm activity. Lori Hayden presented testimony. She is a new resident and when they purchased their home they had looked for 7 years for a property. She is a retired police officer from California and her husband is also in law enforcement. She embraces the community and wants to be a part of this community. The majority of her work experience proves crime stems from the realm of drug use. She is "crushed and disappointed" that they searched for seven years to find the perfect place to use and now will be living next to a marijuana grow. Roberta York agrees with Ms. Hayden. She owns the neighboring property. She is a registered nurse and works for Teen Challenge. Ms. York lives on the border. There are so many facilities in the area and asks why there are so many facilities in this area. They have 100 acres and doesn't know how this will impact their farm. Commissioner Baney explained some of the facilities may be medical marijuana and would note they are not regulated by the county but suggests there may be code violations that might need to be reported. Ms. York is concerned on the impact of the facility to the neighboring property. Commissioner Baney requested the applicant's attorney to address that for the record as well. BOCC BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 7 OF 10 Kevin Thompson did not speak but provided written comment. Ms. Groves clarified the requested information and provided rebuttal testimony. Commissioner Baney asked for information to respond for good neighbor practices. The applicant invites anyone to come to the existing grow operation to view the process. Commissioner Baney pointed out there is a current concern of odor control. Commissioner DeBone noted the importance of neighbors and citizens to reach out to report any concerns on the marijuana grow operations. Their current operation also holds medical marijuana operation. Commissioner Henderson explained medical marijuana grows need to follow the land use regulations as well. Ms. Groves requested the public hearing be closed today. Discussion held on the irrigation of the property. Commissioner DeBone closed the oral portion of the public hearing. Mr. Collins noted staff requested the applicant toll the clock for the 21 -day period to allow evidence and testimony. The applicant consented and the Board allowed for the standard 7/7/7 open record schedule. Written testimony can be received until 5:00 p.m. on June 20. RECESS: At the time of 11:00 a.m. the Board took a recess and reconvened the meeting at 11:10 a.m. 11.PUBLIC HEARING: CDD Work Plan For Fiscal Year (FT) 2018-19 Community Development Director Nick Lelack presented. Commissioner Baney requested to keep the record open to allow for further review. Commissioner DeBone excused himself at this time for another meeting. Vice Chair Commissioner Henderson introduced the hearing and Mr. Lelack presented the hearing procedures and additional information received today was presented. Mr. Lelack explained the process involved with the annual work plan and work to be done within the various divisions of the department. Deliberations and Adoption are scheduled for June 25 and could be either a business meeting or work session. BOCC BUSINESS MEETING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 8 OF 10 Commissioner Henderson called for public testimony. Ann Bravfield is a resident of Deschutes County and spoke on the possibility of re -designation of agricultural land. She commends anyone that uses the land for food, wildlife conservation, and quality of life. She asked to look seriously into changing agricultural land to a non -resource land. Ms. Brayfield noted the importance to provide food locally and to take care of our land and urges the Board to think before considering changing our agricultural land to non -resource land. Tyler Neese representing Central Oregon Realtors Association provided testimony. Specifically agricultural lands reclassification. Supports policy around allowing rural accessory dwelling use and supports working toward urban reserve. Rory Isbell provided testimony and is a staff attorney with Central Oregon Landwatch. Central Oregon LandWatch supports the reevaluation of agricultural lands. Mr. Isbell spoke on prior evaluation of the lands and on a current case in Douglas County. This would be an inefficient use of staff time for Deschutes County. Mr. Isbell spoke on Central Oregon LandWatch's recommendation for coordination with counties cities to work on growth management and affordable housing. Central Oregon LandWatch is supportive of wildfire mitigation due to wildfire risk in our county. Paul Lipsomb provided testimony and complimented the Community Development Department on their service provided to the community. Related to Code Enforcement he has worked with the department for several years. The non -resource lands issue he has also worked with the department and feels it is important to note the proposal was to wait until the legislative session considers amendments and the outcome of the Douglas County case at LUBA. Owen Mitz provided testimony and commented on the need for a grading ordinance. He noted the county has matured and of the future of development. He has petitions signed by the residence of Deschutes River Woods asking the County to adopt a grading ordinance. William Kuhn provided testimony and presented the Board with a book to be used as a reference about fires and how to arrange communities to protect BOCC BUSINESS MELTING JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 9 OF 10 themselves from fires. Mr. Kuhn asked the question of the Board, "is growth good?" He feels it is disturbing that we are looking for more land to put people on which takes more land away from our wildlife habitat. Mr. Kuhn also asked the Commissioners to take the time to visit him on his property to give recognition of having unchecked growth. Mr. Kuhn also presented a video and transcript on growth. Mr. Kuhn spoke on a decision made by the County regarding the building lines on his property and reviewed the building history of his property. Mr. Lelack commented on the open record could be held open until Tuesday, June 19th at 5:00 p.m. The packet will be assembled for the Board meeting of Monday, June 25th. The Work Plan Deliberations will be presented at the Business Meeting of June 25tH OTHER ITEMS: None were offered. AD,JOUR Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:17 p.m. DATED this 5 Day of Commissioners. ATTEST° RECO DING SECRETARY BOCC BUSINESS MEETING 2018 for the Deschutes County Board of A79,A7 A TH NY DE ONE, CH IR PHILIP G. H \NDE S , VCE CHAIR TAMMY ANEY, COMMISSICER JUNE 13, 2018 PAGE 10 OF 10 //lifi; c Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703 (541) 388-6570 - www.deschutes.or2' BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 9:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 2018 Barnes Sawyer Rooms - Deschutes Services Center - 1300 NW Wall Street - Bend This meeting is open to the public. To watch it online, visit www.deschutes.org/meetings. Business Meetings are usually streamed live online and video recorded. Pursuant to ORS 192.640, this agenda includes a list of the main topics that are anticipated to be considered or discussed. This notice does not limit the Board's ability to address other topics. Meetings are subject to cancellation without notice. 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. 2018-393, Helion Software, Inc. Assessment and Taxation Software Board of Commissioners Business Meeting Agenda of 3 Wednesday, June 13, 2018 Page 1 2. Consideration of Board Signature of Resolution No. 2018-031, Budget Adjustment - Human Resources Fund 3. Consideration of Board Signature of Resolution No. 2018-032, Budget Adjustment - Health Benefits Fund 4. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter Appointing Tina Smith to the Behavioral Health Advisory Board 5. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter ReAppointing Norma Brenton to the Dog Board of Supervisors 6. Approval of Minutes of the May 30, 2018 Special Meeting ACTION ITEMS 7. Consideration of Board Signature of Document 2018-409, an Easement Encroachment Agreement Between Deschutes County and Swalley Irrigation District. -James Lewis, Property Management 8. Consideration of Board Signature of Document 2018-410, a Power Service Line Easement on County Property Located at the Pleasant Ridge Road Intersection with Highway 97. -James Lewis, Property Management 9. PUBLIC HEARING and Consideration of Board Approval of Order 2018-032, Approving the Petition for Annexation into Oregon Water Wonderland II Sanitary District - Adam Smith, Assistant Legal Counsel 10. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal of Administrative Approval to Establish a Marijuana Production and Processing Facility at 21330 Young Avenue, Bend - Kyle Collins, Assistant Planner 11. PUBLIC HEARING: CDD Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19 - Nick Lelack, Community Development Director 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. Board of Commissioners Business Meeting Agenda of 3 Wednesday, June 13, 2018 Page 2 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 Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and 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 Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Allen Room at 1300 NW Wall St. Bend unless otherwise indicated. If you have question, please call (541) 388-6572. Board of Commissioners Business Meeting Agenda of 3 Wednesday, June 13, 2018 Page 3 BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony Subject: ) 9S Date: ` Name Tti\\/, r/ �� f4,c\7, Address -76 () C.ov ri.- s 0g -? 7(7 Phone #s re <-2,1 E-mail address PLrc,,7? Erq J42 f r5 , (o 4, In Favor (11 Neutral/Undecided Opposed Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. No SUBMIT COMPLETED REQUEST TO RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE MEETING BEGINS 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 June 13. 2018 DATE: June 5, 2018 FROM: Kyle Collins, Community Development, 541-383-4427 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal of Administrative Approval to Establish a Marijuana Production and Processing Facility at 21330 Young Avenue, Bend RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED: The applicant, Evolution Group LLC, requests an Administrative Determination and Site Plan approval to establish a marijuana production and processing facility consisting of four (4) new buildings, each approximately 5,200 square feet in size, and the conversion of an existing 1,200 -square -foot structure to a marijuana processing building. In total, the four (4) buildings would include 22,000 square feet of production and processing area. The proposed buildings will contain a total of approximately 9,800 square feet of mature canopy area. Additionally, the applicant requests a lot of record verification on the subject property. On May 1st, 2018 staff issued an approval of the land use applications. On May 14th an appeal was timely filed by Lee Casebeer et al. The appellant cited the following issue areas: A. Criminal activity B. Commercial truck and employee traffic C. Air quality impacts and odor mitigation D. Fire risk associated with marijuana processing E. Domestic well and other water use impacts F. Proximity to children living near the subject property Per Order Number 2018-033, the Board agreed to hear the appeal. ATTENDANCE: Kyle Collins, Assistant Planner. STAFF MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners ("Board") FROM: Kyle Collins, Assistant Planner HEARING DATE: June 13t", 2018 RE: Public Hearing on an appeal of an Administrative Determination and Site Plan Review for Marijuana Production and Processing. File No. 247- 18-000412-A (appeal of File Nos. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 938 -LR, 939 -AD, 940 -SP). APPLICANT: Evolution Group, LLC OWNER: ATP, LLC APPELLANTS: Lee Casebeer et al PROPOSAL: The applicant requests an Administrative Determination and Site Plan approval to establish a marijuana production and processing facility consisting of four (4) new buildings, each approximately 5,200 square feet in size, and the conversion of an existing 1,200 -square -foot structure to a marijuana processing building. In total, the four (4) buildings would include 22,000 square feet of production and processing area. The proposed buildings will contain a total of approximately 9,800 square feet of mature canopy area. Additionally, the applicant requests a Lot of Record Verification on the subject property. STAFF COMMENT: This memorandum does not replace previous findings in the Administrative Determination and Site Plan Review (Findings and Decision), but only provides clarification from staff for the Board to consider with respect to the appellant's objections listed in the Notice of Appeal. 1 1 7 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 Q'(541) 388-6575 @cdd@deschutes.org fig; www.deschutes.org/cd I. PURPOSE The Deschutes Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing to consider appeals, filed by Lee Casebeer et al, in response to an Administrative Determination and Site Plan Review approving a marijuana production and processing facility proposed by Evolution Group, LLC. The subject property is located at 21330 Young Ave, Bend (Attachment 1). The appeal materials identify several concerns, listed in Section III below. The Board issued an order' on May 7th, 2018 to call up the matter for their review if an appeal was filed. One appeal was timely filed before the deadline on May 14th, 2018. This memorandum supplements the Administrative Determination and Site Plan Review for the above -referenced land use application (Attachment 2) and summarizes the concerns raised in the Notice of Appeal (Attachment 3). II. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED The Planning Division mailed a written notice of public hearing to property owners within 750 feet of the subject property on May 16th, 2018. Staff did not receive any additional comments. Applicable criteria of the DCC are included as Attachments 5 and 6 and are also detailed in the Administrative Determination and Site Plan Review with the associated findings. I11. APPELLANT'S OBIECTIONS SUMMARY The appellants, Lee Casebeer et al, state several reasons for their appeal, which are fully described in the Notice of Appeal (Attachment 3). The appellant's central arguments are summarized below: A. Criminal activity B. Commercial truck and employee traffic C. Air quality impacts and odor mitigation D. Fire risk associated with marijuana processing E. Domestic well and other water use impacts F. Proximity to children living near the subject property Crime, general water use impacts, and concerns regarding children living near the property are not applicable criteria related to this application. Staff has no comments regarding these concerns. OBJECTIONS & DISCUSSION Section 18.116.330. Mariivana Production, Processing. and Retailing 8. Marijuana production and marijuana processing. Marijuana production and marijuana processing shall be subject to the following standards and criteria: 1 Order Ns 2018-033 247-18-000412-A Page 2 of 7 10. Odor. As used in DCC 18.116.330(8)(10), building means the building, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and other similar structures, used for marijuana production or marijuana processing. a. The building shall be equipped with an effective odor control system which must at all times prevent unreasonable interference of neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. b. An odor control system is deemed permitted only after the applicant submits a report by a mechanical engineer licensed in the State of Oregon demonstrating that the system will control odor so as not to unreasonably interfere with neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. c. Private actions alleging nuisance or trespass associated with odor impacts are authorized, if at all, as provided in applicable state statute. d. The odor control system shall: i. Consist of one or more fans. The fan(s) shall be sized for cubic feet per minute (CFM) equivalent to the volume of the building (length multiplied by width multiplied by height) divided by three. The filter(s) shall be rated for the required CFM; or ii. Utilize an alternative method or technology to achieve equal to or greater odor mitigation than provided by (i) above. e. The system shall be maintained in working order and shall be in use. OBJECTION: The Notice of Appeal states: "There is not sufficient history by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on air quality standards for such a facility to adequately guarantee that there will not be odor pollution generated by the operation effecting surrounding properties and subsequently reducing in surrounding property values [sic]. The proposed Charcoal/Carbon air filters have no indicators to determine when the filters have depleted their effectiveness and need changed. If the owners do not change filters at recommended intervals, then pungent orders will be emitted into the outside air." STAFF COMMENT: Establishment and maintenance of an effective odor control system is required. Staff notes that the applicant submitted a site-specific report by an Oregon -licensed Mechanical Engineer which proposed the following: The odor control system will consist of activated carbons filters attached to inline fans that recirculate air within each structure. The capacity of this carbon filtration system will be no less than the volume of the space divided by three, in accordance with DCC 18.116.330(8)(10)(d). Space volumes and fan recommendations are tabulated below. Any similar carbon filtration system with equal or greater capacity may be used. Several sizes of Can -Filter will suffice, although we recommend Can 150 filters. 247-18-000412-A Page 3 of 7 Room Length (ft) Width (ft) Avg. Height (ft) Volume Flower 1 41 42 13 22,386 Flower 2 41 42 13 22,386 Vegetation 24 40 13 12,480 Staging 18 40 13 9,360 Room Req -d CFM Fan Selection Flower 1 7,462 12" Max -Fan Flower 2 7,462 12" Max -Fan Vegetation 4,160 12" Max -Fan Staging 3,120 12" Max -Fan # of Fans Total CFM Surplus CFM 5 7,975 513 5 7,975 513 3 4,785 625 2 3,190 70 This system will satisfy code and mitigate all odor leaving the building. Maintenance for this system will be in accordance with manufacturer instructions: "The life of a filter is determined by the concentration of the contaminant, the relative humidity and the volume of air being cleaned. Unfortunately, there is no indicator light on the filter that tells you when it is ready to be replaced. Typically 12-18 months is expected of the Original Can -Filter, although many of them have lasted much longer." Additionally, as part of the annual reporting, staff will conduct a site visit to ensure that the marijuana production facility meets the requirements and conditions of approval, including the maintenance of odor control systems. A condition of approval was included in the decision to ensure that these requirements will be met. 13. Water. The applicant shall provide: a. A copy of a water right permit, certificate, or other water use authorization from the Oregon Water Resource Department; or b. A statement that water is supplied from a public or private water provider, along with the name and contact information of the water provider; or c. Proof from the Oregon Water Resources Department that the water to be used is from a source that does not require a water right. OBJECTION: The Notice of Appeal states: 'There is no stated requirement that a water use meter be installed on the property's domestic use well to insure (sic] that no domestic well water is used in the growing operation." STAFF COMMENT: Staff notes that the applicant has not proposed to utilize domestic water sources for any portion of the marijuana production operation. The applicant proposed to utilize 51.0 acres of irrigation from Central Oregon Irrigation District (COID) for production purposes. The applicant 247-18-000412-A Page 4 of 7 included the water right certificate for this irrigation right, which highlights the irrigation season as April 1st to October 31St. For periods of time outside of the irrigation season, the applicant proposes to have water delivered to the property by ABC Lightning LLC and stored on site in an existing cistern. The applicant submitted a letter from ABC Lightning stating they are willing and able to serve the farm use on this property with up to 12,000 gallons of water per month, which will be delivered in weekly increments of 3,000 gallons. The water delivered by ABC Lightning will be provided by Avion Water Company. The applicant submitted a letter from Avion which states the following: Avion Water Company, Inc. is willing and able to provide potable water to the above described production, provided all requirements by Avion Water Company are met and all monies due are paid in accordance with Avion's approved tariff Avion is aware that the applicant intends to construct a cannabis production/processing facility and that the water will be used for agriculture purposes. Avion is also aware that the applicant plans on having Avion water delivered by ABC Lightning Water during the non -irrigation season months. The water usage for the above described production is estimated at 4,000 gallons per month. Avion has the capacity to meet the potential demand. 14. Fire protection for processing of cannabinoid extracts. Processing of cannabinoid extracts shall only be permitted on properties located within the boundaries of or under contract with a fire protection district. OBJECTION: The Notice of Appeal states: "If the marijuana processing involves the use of high temperature and combustible grain alcohol to perform the process of obtaining a Full Extract Cannabis Oil product, then there is potently high risk of an explosion and fire, if the process is not adequately ventilated and a fire suppression system installed prevent the fire from spreading to adjacent dwelling [sic]. The area is without fire hydrants." STAFF COMMENT: Staff notes that the subject property is within the boundaries of the Redmond Fire and Rescue District. Notice of the application was supplied to Redmond Fire and Rescue, who provided comments related to fire safety codes and specific fire suppression standards which must be applied to the marijuana production and processing facilities. Additionally, as part of the annual reporting, staff will conduct a site visit to ensure that the marijuana production facility meets the requirements and conditions of approval, including fire, health, safety, waste water, and building codes and laws. A condition of approval was included in the decision to ensure that these requirements will be met. Section 18.124.060. Approval Criteria Approval of a site plan shall be based on the following criteria: K. Transportation access to the site shall be adequate for the use. 1. Where applicable, issues including, but not limited to, sight distance, turn and acceleration/deceleration lanes, right-of-way, roadway surfacing and widening, and bicycle and pedestrian connections, shall be identified. 247-18-000412-A Page 5 of 7 2. Mitigation for transportation -related impacts shall be required. 3. Mitigation shall meet applicable County standards in DCC 17.16 and DCC 17.48, applicable Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) mobility and access standards, and applicable American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards. OBJECTION: The Notice of Appeal states: "The commercial truck and employee vehicle traffic at the site will increase to a level not intended for rural land use standards." STAFF COMMENT: Staff notes that the applicant submitted a supplemental Site Traffic Report (STR) from a certified engineer which was reviewed by the Deschutes County Transportation Planner. In evaluating the report, no transportation infrastructure deficiencies or improvements were identified. Additionally, staff notes that System Development Charges (SDCs) have been levied on the subject property to mitigate potential traffic and transportation related impacts. The following comment from the County Transportation Planner highlights the SDCs in regards to the proposed development: "Board Resolution 2013-020 sets a transportation system development charge (SDC) rate of $3,937 per p.m. peak hour trip. The Board in a policy decision in early 2017 decided to use the ITE rate for Warehouse (LU 150) for marijuana production and Manufacturing (LU 140) for processing. The County has not yet updated its trip generation rates to reflect the 10th edition of the ITE manual. The County's adopted rates are from the 9th edition, hence the discrepancy between the County's SDC rate and the applicant's STR for p.m. peak hour trips. The SDC for growing would be 6.7 p.m. peak hour trips (20.832 X 0.32) for an SDC of $26,378 ($3,937 X 6.7 p.m. peak hour trips). The SDC for processing would be 0.9 p.m. peak hour trips (1.2 X 0.73) for an SDC of $3,543 (0.9 X $3,937). Thus the total applicable SDC for growing and processing would be $29,921 ($26,378 + $3,543). The SDC is due prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; if a certificate of occupancy is not applicable, then the SDC is due within 60 days of the land use decision becoming final,." IV. 150 -DAY CLOCK & NEXT STEPS The applications for 247 -17 -000905 -AD and 247-17-000938-LR/17-939-AD/17-940-SP were submitted on November 3rd and November 21st, 2017, respectively. The application for 247 -17 -000905 -AD was deemed incomplete on November 21th, 2017. The applicant submitted supplemental materials and the application was deemed complete on November 27th, 2017. Additionally, on November 27th, 2017, the applicant requested the clock for file 247 -17 -000905 -AD be tolled until December 18th, 2017. Subsequently, on December 19th, 2017, the applicant requested that file 247 -17 -000905 -AD be placed on hold until files 247-17-000938- LR/17-939-AD/17-940-SP were deemed complete. The application for 247-17-000938-LR/17-939-AD/17-940-SP was deemed incomplete on December 19th, 2017. The applicant submitted supplemental materials and the application for 247-17-000938- 247-18-000412-A Page 6 of 7 LR/17'939,4D/17'94O-SPwas accepted and deemed complete on December 26m,2O17.Asaresult oftheobOvea[t/ons,day1ofth215O-day/andUsec/ockvvou|dhavebegunonOecernber37m,ZO17 for all of the subject applications. However, as noted below, the applicant tolled the clock on December 27th to address a code enforcement issue. The following timeline addresses additional review actions for the subject applications: • December 27th, 2017: the applicant requested the clock be tolled on all the subject applications until a pending code enforcement issue at the subject property was resolved. • January 4th, 2018: the applicant submitted for building permit 247'18-000068'AGE, which resolved pending code enforcement issues. At this time, the applicant also requested processing to continue on the subject land use applications. As a result, day 10fthe 15U'dayland use clock began onJanuary 4th,2018. • January 29th 2018: the applicant requested the clock be tolled on alt subject land use applications in order to gather supplementary materials to address ensuing Board of County Commissioners (BO[[] decisions addressing similar marijuana production/processing applications elsewhere in the County. As a result, a total of 25 days elapsed on the clock from January 4th through JanuaryZOm. • March 15th, 2018: the applicant submitted all supplementary materials and reqVestedprocessingcontinueontheabnve|andUsefi/es. Based on the above timeline, the 150th day on which the County must take final action on these applications is July 17th, 2018. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Board can choose one of the following options: 1. Close the record and begin deliberations. 2. Leave the record open until a date certain for additional written evidence or testimony. Attachments: 1. Area Map 2. Administrative Determination (Findings and Decision) 3. Notice ofAppeal (Lee Casebeer et al) 4. DCC 18.116.330 5. DCC 18.124 O. Mechanical Enineer's Report 7. Site Traffic Report 8. Site Plan 9. Agency Comments 10. Pubtic Comments 11. Will Serve Letters 247'18'000412+A Page 7 of 7 BLANK PAGE ATTACHMENT- 1 Overview Map BLANK PAGE -Ak 247-18-000412-A 21330 YOUNG AVE, BEND, OR 97703 • • ; - ,.., , sc, tec, CU q§4„ ..,.., , tiubs, 41s °`', , gfegrV e,6yAtio GS, we c upi 04,, Map and Taxlot: 1612110000800 StOosAAN0,01P,f • BLANK PAGE ATTACHMENT- 2 Administrative Determination and Site Plan Review BLANK PAGE >f',-rIN,`i ?;_I; /z.F ,. 1 FINDINGS & DECISION FILE NUMBER: 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 938 -LR, 939 -AD, and 940 -SP APPLICANT: Evolution Group LLC 915 SE Rimrock Way, #201 Redmond, OR 97756 OWNER: ATP LLC 21330 Young Ave. Bend, OR 97701 PROPOSAL: The applicant requests an Administrative Determination and Site Plan approval to establish a marijuana production and processing facility consisting of four (4) new buildings, each approximately 5,200 square feet in size, and the conversion of an existing 1,200 -square -foot structure to a marijuana processing building. In total, the four (4) buildings would include 22,000 square feet of production and processing area. The proposed buildings will contain a total of approximately 9,800 square feet of mature canopy area. Additionally, the applicant requests a lot of record verification on the subject property. STAFF CONTACT: Kyle Collins, Assistant Planner 1. APPLICABLE CRITERIA Deschutes County Code (DCC): Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance Chapter 18.16, Exclusive Farm Use Zone Chapter 18.80, Airport Safety Combining Zone Chapter 18.116, Supplementary Provisions Chapter 18.124, Site Plan Review Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance 1I. BASIC FINDINGS A. Location: The subject property has an assigned address of 21330 Young Ave, Bend, and is identified on County Assessor Tax Map 16-12-11 as Tax Lot 800. B. Lot of Record: Deschutes County recognizes this subject property as two (2) legal lots of record, pursuant to the findings in Section 111 (A) below 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes .org :j www.deschutes org/cd C. Zoning: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use — Tumalo/Redmond/Bend (EFUTRB), and is included in the Airport Safety Combining Zone (AS). Additionally, it is designated Agriculture on the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan. D. Proposal: The applicant requests an Administrative Determination and Site Plan approval to establish a marijuana production and processing facility consisting of four (4) new buildings, each approximately 5,200 square feet in size, and the conversion of an existing 1,200 -square -foot structure to an accessory operations building. In total, the four (4) buildings would include 22,000 square feet of production and processing area. The proposed buildings will contain a total of approximately 9,800 square feet of mature canopy area. E. Site Description: The subject property is 62.61 acres in size. The property is flat, fronts on Young Avenue, and is currently developed with a dwelling, a large barn, and 4 accessory farm structures. All structures are located in the southwestern portion of the property. Of the remaining land, 44.5 acres in the central portion of the property is used for irrigated pasture and the rest remain as native vegetation. The Pilot Butte irrigation canal passes through the southeastern portion of the property. Subject Property F. Public Agency Comments: As the applicant submitted the marijuana production and marijuana processing applications separately, the Planning Division mailed two (2) Notice of Applications and received comments from the following agencies: Central Oreaon Irrigation District: COID FACILITIES: 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 2 • COID has three canals on subject's property o The PBC canal has a 100' canal right of way along with a road right of way of 20' on the east of canal o The A-21 canal has a right of way of 20' along with a road right of way of 20' on the east side of the canal o A-21-2 has a 20' canal right of way • No permanent structures are allowed within COID's right of way • A crossing license is required to cross a COID facility. COID WATER RIGHTS: • Subject's property has 51.0 acres of COID water rights • Please contact COID concerning use of water rights • COID requests a site plan COID GUIDELINE STATEMENT • Review the following statement COID response to Community Development Notice for Proposed Marijuana Production: Central Oregon Irrigation District (COID) serves this property with 51.0 acres of irrigation water during the irrigation season of April 1st through October 31st at a rate of up to 6 gallons per minute per acre. This water cannot be used for irrigation during the winter months. An additional source (not COID) of water is necessary to irrigate between November 1st and March 31st. If the recreational marijuana production facility is a greenhouse or other structure proposed to be built on top of the COID water right, land -user must allow COID annual access to the structure to document beneficial use of the water right. Structures on top of a water right for any purpose other than growing plants is not allowed. Applicant should contact COID to determine status of water rights prior to construction of production facility. Plot Plan is required to assist COID in determining if the proposed structure will be located on the water right or if a water transfer application is needed to transfer water to it. [STAFF COMMENT]: COID also submitted a color map depicting irrigated lands on the subject property (see Attachment A). Central Electric Cooperative: CEC requests the applicants apply for a new electrical service by calling Bob Fowler at 541-312- 7778 and provide electrical load and demand requirements for this activity's. CEC will determine if capacity is available, Deschutes County Building Division: The Deschutes County Building Safety Divisions code required Access, Egress, Setback, Fire & Life Safety Fire Fighting Water Supplies, etc. will be specifically addressed during the plan review process for any proposed structures and occupancies. All Building Code required items will be addressed, when a specific structure, occupancy, and type of construction is proposed and submitted for plan review. Deschutes County Senior Transportation Planner. Peter Russell: I have reviewed the transmittal materials for 247-17-000905 for a marijuana production (growing) and processing operation in the Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Airport Safety (AS) zones at 21330 Young Avenue, aka 16-12-11, Tax Lot 800. The proposal will establish four (4) new buildings of 5,964 square feet each and convert an 1,200 -square -foot building to an accessory operations 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP building. As I understand it, this application supplants 247 -17 -000 -939 -AD, which is on the same property. Deschutes County Code (DCC) at 18.116.330(8)(8) only requires proof of legal direct access to the property or access from a private easement for a grow of more than 5,000 square feet of mature canopy. The proposal is for 9,800 square feet of mature canopy, so the access requirement does apply. The traffic study requirements of DCC 18.116.310 are applicable for this marijuana production and processing operation as the application is going through site plan review and thus does need to show compliance with DCC 18.124.080(J), which references the County's traffic study requirements described below. The most recent edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook does not contain a category for marijuana production. In consultation with the Road Department Director and Planning staff, the County has determined the best analog use is Warehouse (Land Use 150) based on the storage requirements and employees of this activity. Warehouse generates daily trips at a rate of 3.56 trips per 1,000 square feet. The application indicates the site will use 23,856 square - feet of greenhouses for cannabis production (5,964 X 4). The resulting trip rate would be 85 daily trips (3.56 X 23.856). For cannabis processing, the County uses the ITE code for Manufacturing (Land Use 140), which has a daily trip rate of 3.82 trips per 1,000 square feet. The 1,200 -square - foot greenhouse will produce 4.6 daily trips (3.82 X 1.2). The combined production and processing will generate 89.6 daily trips (85 + 4.6). Deschutes County Code (DCC) at 18.116.310(C)(3)(b) states a traffic analysis is needed if there are between 50 and 200 new weekday trips generated from the use. The proposed land use will meet this minimum threshold for additional traffic analysis. The traffic analysis is based on p.m. peak hour trips. Warehouse generates at 0.32 trips per 1,000 square feet, which results in 7.6 p.m. peak hour trips (23.856 X 0.32) for production. Light Industrial generates 0.73 p.m. peak hour trips per 1,000 square feet, which results in 0.88 p.m. peak hour trips (1.2 X 0.73) for processing. The total p.m. peak hour trips for this use would be 8.48 p.m. peak hour trips (7.6 + 0.88). If the property does not already have one, the applicant should be required to obtain a driveway permit for this site. The property lies approximately 24,866 feet to the south-southwest of the Redmond Airport. The proposed buildings are 16 feet in height and the zoning allows 30 feet; this means no buildings will penetrate any imaginary surfaces related to the Redmond Airport. Board Resolution 2013-020 sets a transportation system development charge (SDC) rate of $3,937 per p.m. peak hour trip. The ITE rates quoted above are used to determine the SDC. The SDC for growing would be $29,921 ($3,937 X 7.6 p.m. peak hour trips). The SDC for processing would be $3,465 (0.88 X $3,937). Thus the total applicable SDC for growing and processing would be $33,386 ($29,921 + $3,465). The SDC is due prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; if a certificate of occupancy is not applicable, then the SDC is due within 60 days of the land use decision becoming final. Site Traffic Report Evaluation: On December 26th, 2017 the applicant submitted a supplemental Site Traffic Report (STR) from a certified engineer to more thoroughly evaluate the traffic impacts and trip generation rate associated with the proposed development. In response to the STR, the County's Senior Transportation Planner provided the following: I have reviewed the requested Site Traffic Report (STR) for 17-940-SP/939-AD, which is a proposed marijuana production (growing) and processing operation in the Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 4 Airport Safety (AS) zones at 21330 Young Avenue, aka 16-12-11, Tax Lot 800. According to the STR, the operation will result in 20,832 square feet of marijuana production and convert a 1,200 - square -foot building to an accessory operations building for processing. I agree with the STR's methodologies, assumptions, and recommendations. If the property does not already have one, the applicant should be required to obtain a driveway permit for this site to conform with DCC 17.48.210(A). The property lies approximately 24,866 feet to the south-southwest of the Redmond Airport. The proposed buildings are 16 feet in height and the zoning allows 30 feet; this means no buildings will penetrate any imaginary surfaces related to the Redmond Airport. Board Resolution 2013-020 sets a transportation system development charge (SDC) rate of $3,937 per p.m. peak hour trip. The Board in a policy decision in early 2017 decided to use the ITE rate for Warehouse (LU 150) for marijuana production and Manufacturing (LU 140) for processing. The County has not yet updated its trip generation rates to reflect the 10th edition of the 1 TE manual. The County's adopted rates are from the 9th edition, hence the discrepancy between the County's SDC rate and the applicant's STR for p.m. peak hour trips. The SDC for growing would be 6.7 p.m. peak hour trips (20.832 X 0.32) for an SDC of $26,378 ($3,937 X 6.7 p.m. peak hour trips). The SDC for processing would be 0.9 p.m. peak hour trips (1.2 X 0.73) for an SDC of $3, 543 (0.9 X $3, 937). Thus the total applicable SDC for growing and processing would be $29,921 ($26,378 + $3,543). The SDC is due prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; if a certificate of occupancy is not applicable, then the SDC is due within 60 days of the land use decision becoming final. Oreaon Department of Aariculture: The application does not state what type of marijuana processing will occur. Please be advised that marijuana processing facilities that produce food/beverage items and/or ingredients/extracts that can be consumed are subject to licensing and inspection by Oregon Dept. of Agriculture's Food Safety Program. If any food/beverage items and/or ingredients/extracts that can be consumed are produced at this location then the processing facility must meet minimum construction requirements as specified in 21 CFR 110/117. Proper construction must be verified, products evaluated for any significant food safety risk factors which may be present, and the license fee paid before the food processing firm is approved to operate. The applicant is encouraged to contact Jon Harrang, ODA Food Safety Program for assistance in walking through the plan review and buildout process. Mr. Harrang may be reached by calling 541-923-0754 or by email at iharranq(a�oda.state.or.us Redmond Fire and Rescue: If there are questions regarding Fire Code issues, please contact the Redmond Fire and Rescue Deputy Fire Marshal at 541-504-5016 or email at clara.butler(Wredmondfireandrescue.ora, . Note: All fire code requirements must be met for the processing facility. Not enough information provided to give accurate comments. WATER: Area without Fire Hydrants: • NFPA 1142 Requirements o If the structure is being built in an area without a public water supply system, then the water flow requirements will come from NFPA 1142. o Note: The following information will need to be provided in order to determine accurate water flow requirements. • Building height, length and width 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 5 ▪ Use of the building • Type of construction • Whether the structure 100 sq ft or larger and within 50 feet of any other structures Structures with Automatic Sprinkler systems - 2012 NFPA 1142 Chapter 7 o The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to waive the water supply required by this standard when a structure is protected by an automatic sprinkler system that fully meets the requirements of NFPA 13 • Fire Safety during Construction - 2014 OFC 501.4 o Approved fire department access roads, required water supply, fire hydrants, and safety precautions shall be installed and serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. Fire Sprinkler Systems shall be installed per NFPA 13. o Separate permits will be required for the aboveground sprinkler system and the underground sprinkler supply line(s). o If there are greater than 20 sprinkler heads, the system is required to have a fire alarm monitoring system. O 2014 OFC 903.3.7 Fire Department Connections: The location of fire department connections shall be approved by fire code official. The FDC/PIV shall not be under any combustible projections or overhangs. o NFPA 14 - 6.4.5.4 Fire department connections shall be located not more than 100 ft from the nearest fire hydrant connected to an approved water supply. o NOTE - If the Building is sprinklered, the sprinkler system will need to be designed to the specific use that will be occurring in the building. If the sprinkler system is not designed appropriately it will limit the types of businesses that can occupy the space. This also includes the height of storage in the building. In order to have high piled storage (greater than 12 ft), the sprinkler system shall be designed accordingly. ACCESS: • Premises Identification - 2014 OFC 505.1 O Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background and visible at night. Number/letter shall be a minimum of 4" high and a 0.5" stroke width. • Fire Apparatus Access Roads - 2014 OFC Section 503 & Appendix D o Fire apparatus access roads shall extend to within 150 ft of all portions of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. o Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. o Fire apparatus roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of 70,000 lbs and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. o The required turning radius of a fire apparatus access road shall be 30 feet inside and 50 feet outside. o The grade of the fire apparatus access roads shall be within the limits established by the fire code official (10%). Fire Lanes - 2014 OFC 503.3 & Appendix D o Approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads or prohibit the obstruction thereof. Such signs or notices shall 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 6 be kept in legible conditions at all times. The stroke shall be 1 inch with letters 6 inches high and read "No Parking Fire Lane". Spacing for signage shall be every 50 feet. • Recommended to also (in addition to Fire lane signs) paint fire lane curbs in bright red paint with white letters. o Appendix D Section 103.6.1 Roads 20-26 Ft. Wide: Shall have Fire Lane signs posted on both sides of a fire lane. o Appendix D Section 103.6.2 Roads more than 26 Ft. Wide: Roads 26-32 ft wide shall have a Fire Lane signs posted on one side of the road as a fire lane. Aerial Access Roads — 2014 OFC Appendix D, Section 105 o Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads and capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadways. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, all access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 26 feet and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. Dead -Ends — 2014 OFC Section 503.2.5 o Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. Contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for requirements. o OFC Table D103.4 Dead Ends over 750 Feet- Require special approval. If approved, there shall be a turn -around no more than every 1000 feet with a bulb of 60 feet across and the width of the road shall be a minimum of 26 ft clear for fire apparatus. Additional Access — 2014 OFC Section 503.1.2 o The fire code official is authorized to require more than one fire apparatus access road based on the potential for impairment of a single road by vehicle congestion, conditions or terrain, climatic conditions or other factors that could limit access. Emergency Access Road Gates — 2014 OFC Appendix D 103.5 o Minimum 20 feet wide. o Gates shall be swinging or sliding type. o Shall be able to be manually operated by one person. o Electric gates shall be equipped with a means of opening by emergency personnel & approved by fire official. o Locking devices shall be fire department Knox Key Switch purchased from A-1 Lock, Safe Co., Curtis Safe & Lock, on line at www.knoxbox.com, or contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for an order form. o Section 503.3: Install a sign on the gate "No Parking -Fire Lane" Key Boxes — 2014 OFC Section 506.1 o An approved key box shall be installed on all structures equipped with a fire alarm system and /or sprinkler system. Approved key boxes can only be purchased at A-1 Lock Safe Co., Curtis Safe and Lock, on line at www.knoxbox.com, or contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for an order form. Commercial & Industrial Development 2014 OFC Appendix D 104 o Buildings exceeding three stories or 30 feet in height shall have at least 2 means of fire apparatus access for each structure. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 7 Where 2 access roads are required, they shall be placed not less than Y2 the length of the overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. The following agencies either had no comment or did not respond to the notice: Deschutes County Assessor, Deschutes County Environmental Soils Division, and Deschutes County Road Department. G. Public Comments: The Planning Division mailed written notices of these actions to property owners within 750 feet of the subject property on November 15th and November 219t, 2017, respectively. The following concerns were expressed in three comment letters which staff received from the public. All three of the letters opposed the subject proposal, with minor comments related generally to the County's marijuana regulations. In summary, staff has attempted to capture most impacts, comments, requests, and concerns identified by the public in written comments received prior to the date of this decision: 1. General concerns regarding the subject proposal's impacts, including: • Odor • Noise • Water use • Access • Traffic 2. Owner -occupied versus employee -occupied use of the subject property for industrial farming operations. 3. Concerns regarding water impacts to shared wells on the subject property. 4. General concerns regarding impacts from other existing marijuana grows, including: • Odor • Water use • Traffic 5. Lowered property values related to marijuana production. 6. Removal of marijuana production facilities and structures after the use has ceased on site. 7. Insufficient separation distances between marijuana production facilities and neighboring residences. 8. Water table dropping due to marijuana producers nearby. 9. Lack of air quality standards for marijuana production from federal agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) The Deschutes County Code (DCC) would only allow the Planning Division (and any other County hearings body) to approve or deny this application based on the Applicable Criteria addressed in Section III below. In regards to the other comments received, the applicant has requested approval of marijuana production and processing in the Exclusive Farm Use Zone, which is a use permitted outright in DCC 18.16.020(S), and subject to the special provisions of DCC 18.16.025(1) and DCC 18.116.330. The County Commissioners constitute the legislative branch of Deschutes County government and enact applicable law via ordinances, which then are codified in the Deschutes County Code. Staff only has the authority to enforce the law as it is currently written. Staff cannot revisit the propriety of the Commissioners' decision to adopt ordinances that allow marijuana production facilities in the EFU zone as an outright permitted use. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 8 H. Review Period: The applications for 17 -905 -AD and 17-938-LR/17-939-AD/17-940-SP were submitted on November 3rd and November 21st, 2017, respectively. The application for 17 -905 -AD was deemed incomplete on November 21th, 2017. The applicant submitted supplemental materials and the application was deemed complete on November 27th, 2017. Additionally, on November 27th, 2017, the applicant requested the clock for file 17 -905 -AD be tolled until December 18th, 2017. Subsequently, on December 19th, 2017, the applicant requested that file 17 -905 -AD be placed on hold until files 17-938-LR/17-939-AD/17-940-SP were deemed complete. The application for 17-938-LR/17-939-AD/17-940-SP was deemed incomplete on December 19th, 2017. The applicant submitted supplemental materials and the application for 17-938-LR/17-939- AD/17-940-SP was accepted and deemed complete on December 26th, 2017. As a result of the above actions, day 1 of the 150 -day land use clock would have begun on December 27th, 2017 for all of the subject applications. However, as noted below, the applicant tolled the clock on December 27th to address a code enforcement issue. The following timeline addresses additional review actions for the subject applications: • December 27t11, 2017: the applicant requested the clock be tolled on all the subject applications until a pending code enforcement issue at the subject property was resolved. • January 4th, 2018: the applicant submitted for building permit 18 -068 -AGE, which resolved pending code enforcement issues. At this time, the applicant also requested processing to continue on the subject land use applications. As a result, day 1 of the 150 -day land use clock began on January 4th, 2018. • January 29', 2018: the applicant requested the clock be tolled on all subject land use applications in order to gather supplementary materials to address ensuing Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) decisions addressing similar marijuana production/processing applications elsewhere in the County. As a result, a total of 25 days elapsed on the clock from January 4th through January 28th • March 15th, 2018: the applicant submitted all supplementary materials and requested processing continue on the above land use files. Based on the above timeline, the 150th day on which the County must take final action on these applications is July 17th, 2018. The applicant has also complied with the posted notice requirements of Section 22.24.030(B) of Title 22. The applicant has submitted Land Use Action Sign Affidavits for the applications dated November 7th and November 301h, 2017, indicating that the applicant posted notice of the land use actions on November 7th and November 30th, 2017 respectively. III. FINDINGS Title 22 Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance A. CHAPTER 18.04. TITLE, PURPOSE, AND DEFINITIONS "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; 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 9 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 DCC18.04.030. FINDING: The subject property, Tax Lot 800 contains 62.61 acres and is approximately 250 -feet wide at the narrowest point. The southern 40 acres of the subject property was first conveyed as a separate parcel via Quitclaim Deed dated August 5th, 1941 recorded in Volume 126, Page 640, Deschutes County Book of Records. Subsequently, one adjacent property to the southwest of the subject property was conveyed as a separate parcel via Quitclaim Deed dated November 16th, 1953 recorded in Volume 105, Page 474, Deschutes County Book of Records. Subsequently, three properties, two which two of which encompass the subject property, were described separately in a single Warranty Deed dated June 24th, 1957 recorded in Volume 116, Page 456, Deschutes County Book of Records. Furthermore, four properties, two of which encompass the subject property, were described separately in a single Bargain and Sale Deed dated April 29th, 1964 recorded in Volume 139, Page 72, Deschutes County Book of Records. Regarding multiple property conveyances and consolidations within a single deed, staff cites Land Use Board of Appeals file no. 2016-056, which found: "Returning to the more familiar realm of land use law, the board of county commissioners found that under the DCC, consolidation of discrete lots or parcel can be accomplished only by means of a county process that requires county land use approval. Petitioner offers no focused challenge to that understanding of the DCC, and provides no basis for LUBA to reject that interpretation, under the deferential standard of review at ORS 197.829(1) that LUBA must apply to a governing body's interpretation of local land use legislation. The 1988 quitclaim deed, whatever else it accomplished, did not serve as a surrogate for any county process, with county approval, which could have led to the consolidation of existing parcels." Staff finds that the above decision applies to the current Lot of Record analysis and that the 1957 and 1964 deeds did not serve to consolidate the referenced properties therein. Additionally, staff notes that the 1957 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 10 deed established the first conveyance of the northern 23.75 acres of the subject property as a separate parcel. Finally, another property to the southeast of the subject property was conveyed as a separate parcel via Bargain and Sale Deed dated October 23rd, 1975 recorded in Volume 225, Page 423, Deschutes County Book of Records. This property was also included in the 1957 and 1964 deeds which conveyed the two tracts comprising the subject property. At the time of these conveyances, no zoning requirements applied to the subject properties. The net result of these actions is the creation of two separate parcels comprising the current subject property via deed conveyance. Therefore, Tax Lot 800 is recognized as two (2) legal lots of record (see figure below). 2-4 21330 Young Ave Legal Lot #2 t"1 21330 Young Ave Legal Lot #1 rf .” / / !, I 11.t.,15: %'t/ '...* ., .... Title 18 of the Deschutes County Code, County Zoning A. Chapter 18.16, Exclusive Farm Use Zones 1. Section 18.16.020. Use Permitted Outriaht. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright: *SI S. Marijuana production, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 11 FINDING: The proposed marijuana production facility is permitted outright in the EFU zones, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330, which are reviewed below. 2. Section 18.16.025. Uses Permitted Subject to the Special Provisions Under DCC Section 18.16.038 or DCC Section 18.16.042 and a Review Under DCC Chapter 18.124 where applicable. � A facility for the processing of farm crops, or for the production of biofuel as defined in ORS 315.141, if the facility is Iocated on a farm operation that provides at Ieast one- quarter of the farm crops processed at the facility, or an establishment for the slaughter, processing or selling of poultry or poultry products pursuant to ORS 603.038. FINDING: The applicant has proposed a facility for the processing of ma'uona as a farm crop. As a conditionapproval, oftheapp|icmniohaUaaourethatatkaastone-quo�e,ufthe'tanncnopopnoceaeadatthe facility jnany calendar year, measured bvweight, are produced sdthe farm operation onthe oub/entpnopeMy. |nmddiUon.the applicant ohaUprovide tothe Planning Division written dwcunnontadonofoonnp|^ncewith the requirement in paragraph DCC 18.16.025(1) by submitting processed crop summaries to the Planning Division on requemt, and no less frequently than on an annual basis by January 31s1 of each year. The foliowing condition of approval has been added to ensure compliance. Annual Reporting: The annual reporting requirements of DCC 18.116.330(D) shall be met. An annual report shall be submitted to the Community Development Depaent by the real property owner or licensee, if different, each February 1, documenting all of the following as of December 31 of the previous year, including the applicable fee as adopted in the current County Fee Schedule and a fully executed Consent to Inspect Premises form: a. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the: Land use decision and permits. Five, hea|th, oahety, waste water, and building codes and laws. State of Oregon licensing requirements. b. Failure to timely submit the annual report, fee, and Consent to Inspect Premises form or to demonstrate compliance with DCC 18.116.330(C)(1)(a) shall serve as acknowledgement by the real property owner and licensee that the otherwise allowed use is not in compliance with Deschutes County Code; authorizes permit revocation under DCC Title 22, and may be relied upon by the State of Oregon to deny new or license renewal(s) for the subject use. c. Other information as may be reasonably required by the Planning Director to ensure compliance with Deschutes County Code, applicable State ragu|adono, and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. 1. If a building is established or used for the theprocessing facility or establishment, the farm operator may not devote more than 10,000 square feet of floor area to the processing facility or establishment, exclusive of te floor area designated for preparation, storage or other farm use. FINDING: The applicant is proposing up to convert an existing 1.200-aquere~hoot farm building to be used as a structure for processing marijuana. This criterion will be met. � A processing facility or establishment must comply with allsiting standards but �estam�mn��sha�not bea��emy��applicable- applied amn�m��vat prohibits the siting of the processing facility. 247'17'000905-AdD. 17'038'LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 12 FINDING: Staff finds that the processing facility, as proposed and conditioned, can comply with all applicable siting standards identified in this decision and that these applicable standards have not been be applied in a manner that prohibits the siting of the processing facility. 3. The County shall not approve any division of a lot or parcel that separates a processing facility or establishment from the farm operation on which it is located. FINDING: No division of a lot or parcel is proposed. L. Marijuana processing, subject to the applicable provisions of DCC 18.16.025(1) and 18.116.330. FINDING: The applicant is proposing Marijuana Processing on the subject property, a use permitted subject to compliance with the applicable provisions of DCC 18.16.025(1), 18.116.330, additional sections of 18.16 identified below, and relevant sections 18.124. Compliance with these provisions is addressed in this decision. 3. 18.16.060. Dimensional Standards. E. Building height. No building or structure shall be erected or enlarged to exceed 30 feet in height, except as allowed under DCC 18.120.040. FINDING: The proposed structures are all approximately 16 feet in height. The existing structure that is proposed to be converted is 12 feet in height. This criterion will be met. 4. Section 18.16.070. Yards. A. The front yard shall be a minimum of: 40 feet from a property line fronting on a local street, 60 feet from a property line fronting on a collector street, and 100 feet from a property line fronting on an arterial street. B. Each side yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet, except that for a nonfarm dwelling proposed on property with side yards adjacent to property currently employed in farm use, and receiving special assessment for farm use, the side yard shall be a minimum of 100 feet. C. Rear yards shall be a minimum of 25 feet, except that for a nonfarm dwelling proposed on property with a rear yard adjacent to property currently employed in farm use, and receiving special assessment for farm use, the rear yard shall be a minimum of 100 feet. D. In addition to the setbacks set forth herein, any greater setbacks required by applicable building or structural codes adopted by the State of Oregon and/or the County under DCC 15.04 shall be met. FINDING: The subject property consists of two (2) legal lots, which front on and obtain access from Young Ave. The southern property line is the front lot line. Young Avenue is a county -maintained rural local road and the required front yard setback is 40 feet. The proposal is to construct four (4) new structures for marijuana production on the southern legal lot, approximately 50 feet east of the existing agricultural development on site. Additionally, the existing 1,200 -square -foot, northern -most agricultural building on site will be converted to accommodate the proposed marijuana processing facility. The submitted plot plan indicates the structures will be a minimum of 225 feet from the southern front property line. The proposal is not for a non-farm dwelling, therefore, the required side and rear yard setbacks are 25 feet. The submitted plot plan indicates an eastern side yard setback minimum of 460 feet, a western side yard setback minimum 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 13 of 365 feet, and a northern rear yard setback of over 900 feet. The required yard setbacks of subsections A, B, and C will be met. Any greater setbacks required by applicable building or structural codes will be addressed during building permit review. B. CHAPTER 18.80. AIRPORT SAFETY COMBINING ZONE 1. Section 18.80.020. Application of Provisions. The provisions of DCC 18.80.020 shall only apply to unincorporated areas located under airport imaginary surfaces and zones, including approach surfaces, transitional surfaces, horizontal surfaces, conical surfaces and runway protection zones. While DCC 18.80 identifies dimensions for the entire imaginary surface and zone, parts of the surfaces and/or zones do not apply within the Redmond, Bend or Sisters Urban Growth Boundaries. The Redmond Airport is owned and operated by the City of Redmond, and located wholly within the Redmond City Limits. Imaginary surface dimensions vary for each airport covered by DCC 18.80.020. Based on the classification of each individual airport, only those portions (of the AS Zone) that overlay existing County zones are relevant. Public use airports covered by DCC 18.80.020 include Redmond Municipal, Bend Municipal, Sunriver and Sisters Eagle Air. Although it is a public -use airport, due to its size and other factors, the County treats land uses surrounding the Sisters Eagle Air Airport based on the ORS 836.608 requirements for private -use airports. The Oregon Department of Aviation is still studying what land use requirements will ultimately be applied to Sisters. However, contrary to the requirements of ORS 836.608, as will all public -use airports, federal law requires that the FAA Part 77 surfaces must be applied. The private -use airports covered by DCC 18.80.020 include Cline Falls Airpark and Juniper Airpark. FINDING: The subject property lies within the approach surface of the Redmond Municipal Airport. Therefore, the provisions of this chapter apply. 2. Section 18.80.028. Height Limitations. All uses permitted by the underlying zone shall comply with the height limitations in DCC 18.80.028. When height limitations of the underlying zone are more restrictive than those of this overlay zone, the underlying zone height limitations shall control. [ORS 836.619; OAR 660-013-0070] A. Except as provided in DCC 18.80.028(B) and (C), no structure or tree, plant or other object of natural growth shall penetrate an airport imaginary surface. [ORS 836.619; OAR 660-013-0070(1)] FINDING: The subject property is located under the approach surface of the Redmond Airport. The proposed marijuana production and processing buildings will have a maximum elevation of 3,190 feet above sea level. Per DCC 18.80.022, the approach surface for the Redmond Airport above the subject property has an approximate elevation of 3,712 feet. Therefore, staff finds the proposed development will not penetrate the imaginary surfaces. This criterion will be met. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 14 Section 18.80.044. Land Use Compatibility. B. Outdoor lighting. No new or expanded industrial, commercial or recreational use shall project lighting directly onto an existing runway or taxiway or into existing airport approach surfaces except where necessary for safe and convenient air travel. Lighting for these uses shall incorporate shielding in their designs to reflect light away from airport approach surfaces. No use shall imitate airport lighting or impede the ability of pilots to distinguish between airport lighting and other lighting. FINDING: The applicant does not propose any outdoor lighting with the current development. This criterion does not apply. C. Glare. No glare producing material, including but not limited to unpainted metal or reflective glass, shall be used on the exterior of structures located within an approach surface or on nearby lands where glare could impede a pilot's vision. FINDING: The application materials did not indicate the proposed building materials. To ensure that compliance is maintained, the following condition of approval has been added. Airport Safety Glare: No glare producing material, including but not limited to unpainted metal or reflective glass, shall be used on the exterior of the proposed structures. D. Industrial emissions. No new industrial, mining or similar use, or expansion of an existing industrial, mining or similar use, shall, as part of its regular operations, cause emissions of smoke, dust or steam that could obscure visibility within airport approach surfaces, except upon demonstration, supported by substantial evidence, that mitigation measures imposed as approval conditions will reduce the potential for safety risk or incompatibility with airport operations to an insignificant level. The review authority shall impose such conditions as necessary to ensure that the use does not obscure visibility. FINDING: The proposed industrial use (marijuana processing) will not cause emissions of smoke, dust, or steam that could obscure visibility within the airport approach surface for the Redmond Municipal Airport. This criterion will be met. F. Limitations and Restrictions on Allowed Uses in the RPZ, Approach Surface, and Airport Direct and Secondary Impact Areas. For the Redmond, Bend, Sunriver, and Sisters airports, the land uses identified in DCC 18.80 Table 1, and their accessory uses, are permitted, permitted under limited circumstances, or prohibited in the manner therein described. In the event of conflict with the underlying zone, the more restrictive provisions shall control. As used in DCC 18.80.044, a limited use means a use that is allowed subject to special standards specific to that use. FINDING: The subject property is not within the RPZ for the Redmond Municipal Airport. This criterion does not apply. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 15 4. Section 18.80.050. Uses Permitted Outriaht. Any uses permitted outright in the underlying zone with which the AS Zone is combined shall be allowed except as provided in DCC 18.80.044. FINDING: The applicant is proposing marijuana production and processing in the EFU Zone. The proposed marijuana production is permitted outright in the EFU Zone subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. Additionally, the proposed marijuana processing is permitted subject to compliance with the applicable provisions of DCC 18.16.025(1), 18.116, and relevant sections of 18.124. Compliance with these provisions is addressed in this decision. Therefore, the proposed uses are allowed outright in the AS Combining Zone, C. Chapter 18.116, Supplementary Provisions 1. Section 18.116.020. Clear Vision Areas. A. In all zones, a clear vision area shall be maintained on the corners of all property at the intersection of two streets or a street and a railroad. A clear vision area shall contain no planting, fence, wall, structure, or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding three and one-half feet in height, measured from the top of the curb or, where no curb exists, from the established street centerline grade, except that trees exceeding this height may be located in this area provided all branches and foliage are removed to a height of eight feet above the grade. B. A clear vision area shall consist of a triangular area on the corner of a lot at the intersection of two streets or a street and a railroad. Two sides of the triangle are sections of the lot lines adjoining the street or railroad measured from the corner to a distance specified in DCC 18.116.020(B)(1) and (2). Where lot lines have rounded corners, the specified distance is measured from a point determined by the extension of the lot lines to a point of intersection. The third side of the triangle is the line connecting the ends of the measured sections of the street lot lines. The following measurements shall establish clear vision areas within the County: 1. In an agricultural, forestry or industrial zone, the minimum distance shall be 30 feet or at intersections including an alley, 10 feet. 2. In all other zones, the minimum distance shall be in relationship to street and road right of way widths as follows: Right -of -Way Width 80 feet or more 60 feet 50 feet and less Clear Vision 20 feet 30 feet 40 feet FINDING: The subject property is not located at the intersection of two streets or a street and a railroad. This criterion does not apply. 2. Section 18.116.030. Off -Street Parkina and Loadina. A. Compliance. No building or other permit shall be issued until plans and evidence are presented to show how the off-street parking and loading requirements are to be met and that property is and will be available for exclusive use as off-street parking and loading. The subsequent use of the property for which the permit is issued shall be conditional upon the 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 16 unqualified continuance and availability of the amount of parking and loading space required by DCC Title 18. B. Off -Street Loading. Every use for which a building is erected or structurally altered to the extent of increasing the floor area to equal a minimum floor area required to provide loading space and which will require the receipt or distribution of materials or merchandise by truck or similar vehicle, shall provide off-street loading space on the basis of minimum requirements as follows: 1. Commercial, industrial and public utility uses which have a gross floor area of 5,000 square feet or more shall provide truck loading or unloading berths subject to the following table: Sq. Ft. of Floor Area No. of Berths Required 1 Less than 5,000 1 5,000-30,000 30,000-100,000 100,000 and Over 0 1 2 3 2. Restaurants, office buildings, hotels, motels, hospitals and institutions, schools and colleges, public buildings, recreation or entertainment facilities and any similar use which has a gross floor area of 30,000 square feet or more shall provide off-street truck loading or unloading berths subject to the following table: FINDING: Staff identifies marijuana processing in an applicant's proposal will not will be met. Sq. Ft. of Floor Area No. of Berths Required 1 Less than 30,000 1 0 1 30,000-100,000 j 1 1 100,000 and Over 1 2 A loading berth shall contain space 10 feet wide, 35 feet long and have a height clearance of 14 feet. Where the vehicles generally used for loading exceed these dimensions, the required length of these berths shall be increased. the processing of marijuana as an industrial use. The applicant proposes existing 1,200 -square -foot agricultural building site. Per the table above, the meet the minimum floor area threshold requiring a loading berth. These criteria 4. If loading space has been provided in connection with an existing use or is added to an existing use, the loading space shall not be eliminated if elimination would result in less space than is required to adequately handle the needs of the particular use. FINDING: No elimination of a loading space is proposed. 5. Off-street parking areas used to fulfill the requirements of DCC Title 18 shall not be used for loading and unloading operations except during periods of the day when not required to take care of parking needs. FINDING: The following condition of approval has been added to ensure compliance. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 17 Off -Street Parking: Any off-street parking areas used to fulfill the requirements of DCC Title 18 shall not be used for loading and unloading operations except during periods of the day when not required to take care of parking needs. C. Off -Street Parking. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided and maintained as set forth in DCC 18.116.030 for all uses in all zoning districts. Such off-street parking spaces shall be provided at the time a new building is hereafter erected or enlarged or the use of a building existing on the effective date of DCC Title 18 is changed. D. Number of Spaces Required. Off-street parking shall be provided as follows: 7. Industrial. Use Manufacturing establishment Storage warehouse, wholesale establishment, rail or trucking freight terminal Requirements 1 space per employee on the largest working shift 1 space per 2,000 sq, ft. of floor area FINDING: The applicant proposes marijuana processing in an existing 1,200 -square -foot agricultural building. Staff finds the proposed processing operations are considered an industrial use requiring 1 space per employee on the largest working shift, as detailed in the table above. The applicant provides the following information related the largest shift sizes proposed on site: "..assuming the maximum seasonal employee count is 15, with no more than 10 on shift, 10 spaces are required. Therefore the required number of parking spaces for the production and processing use has been satisfied as 10 standard parking spaces are shown on the submitted site plan." Additionally, the existing single family dwelling on site is served by two parking spaces within a carport directly adjacent to the dwelling. Staff finds that the applicant's proposal is sufficient to meet the above criteria. To ensure that compliance is maintained, the following condition of approval has been added Maximum Shift Size for the Proposed Use: The maximum number of employees allowed on site to support the proposed marijuana production and processing use shall not exceed 10 persons on any given shift. E. General Provisions. Off -Street Parking. 1. More Than One Use on One or More Parcels. In the event several uses occupy a single structure or parcel of land, the total requirement for off- street parking shall be the sum of requirements of the several uses computed separately. FINDING: The existing dwelling does not have parking requirements. The only other use proposed on site is marijuana production, which also does not have parking requirements. Additionally, no other uses or businesses will be sharing the proposed off-street parking spaces. Therefore, these criteria are not applicable. 2. Joint Use of Facilities. The off-street parking requirements of two or more uses, structures or parcels of land may be satisfied by the same parking or loading space used jointly to the extent that it can be shown 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 18 by the owners or operators of the uses, structures or parcels that their operations and parking needs do not overlap at any point of time. If the uses, structures or parcels are under separate ownership, the right to joint use of the parking space must be evidence by a deed, lease, contract or other appropriate written document to establish the joint use. FINDING: As noted above, no existing or proposed uses other than the processing facility, have parking requirements. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable 3. Location of Parking Facilities. Off-street parking spaces for dwellings shall be located on the same lot with the dwelling. Other required parking spaces shall be located on the same parcel or another parcel not farther than 500 feet from the building or use they are intended to serve, measured in a straight line from the building in a commercial or industrial zone. Such parking shall be located in a safe and functional manner as determined during site plan approval. The burden of proving the existence of such off -premise parking arrangements rests upon the applicant. FINDING: All required parking spaces are located on the same parcel and are located no more than 500 feet from the proposed processing area on site. 4. Use of Parking Facilities. Required parking space shall be available for the parking of operable passenger automobiles of residents, customers, patrons and employees only and shall not be used for the storage of vehicles or materials or for the parking of trucks used in conducting the business or used in conducting the business or use. FINDING: A condition of approval has been added to ensure compliance. 5. Parking, Front Yard. Required parking and loading spaces for multi- family dwellings or commercial and industrial uses shall not be located in a required front yard, except in the Sunriver UUC Business Park (BP) District and the La Pine UUC Business Park (LPBP) District and the LaPine UUC Industrial District (LPI), but such space may be located within a required side or rear yard. FINDING: No parking is proposed in a required front yard. 6. On -Street Parking Credit. Notwithstanding DCC 18.116.030(G)(2), within commercial zones in the La Pine Planning Area and the Terrebonne and Tumalo unincorporated communities, the amount of required off-street parking can be reduced by one off-street parking space for every allowed on -street parking space adjacent to a property up to 30% of the required off-street parking. On -street parking shall follow the established configurations in the parking design standards under DCC 18.116.030 Table 1. To be considered for the parking credit, the proposed parking surface, along the street frontage under review, must have a defined curb line and improved as required under DCC 17.48, with existing pavement, or an engineered gravel surface. For purposes of establishing credit, the following constitutes an on -street parking space: a. Parallel parking (0 degree), each 20 feet of uninterrupted curb; b. Diagonal parking (60 degree), each with 11 feet of curb; 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 19 c. Perpendicular parking (90 degree), each with 10 feet of curb; d. Curb space must be connected to the lot that contains the use; e. Parking spaces that would not obstruct a required clear vision area, nor any other parking that violates any law or street standard; and f On -street parking spaces credited for a specific use may not be used exclusively by that use, but shall be available for general public use at all times. No signs or actions limiting general public use of on -street spaces are permitted. FINDING: No on -street parking credit under this section is proposed. F. Development and Maintenance Standards for Off -Street Parking Areas. Every parcel of land hereafter used as a public or private parking area, including commercial parking lots, shall be developed as follows: 1. Except for parking to serve residential uses, an off-street parking area for more than five vehicles shall be effectively screened by a sight obscuring fence when adjacent to residential uses, unless effectively screened or buffered by landscaping or structures. FINDING: The applicant proposes a 10 -vehicle parking area. Adjacent residential uses lie approximately 475 feet southwest, 1,100 feet west, and 1,800 feet southeast of the proposed marijuana processing on the subject property. The applicant proposes a 5 -foot wide landscaping strip consisting of trees and shrubs along the western edge of the parking area. Additionally, several existing agricultural buildings, the single family dwelling onsite, and existing vegetation adjacent to the residence provide screening to the south and south east of the proposed parking area. These features will provide sufficient buffering to the adjacent residential uses. This criterion will be met. 2. Any lighting used to illuminate off-street parking areas shall be so arranged that it will not project light rays directly upon any adjoining property in a residential zone. FINDING: The applicant does not propose outdoor lighting to illuminate the off-street parking area. This criterion does not apply. 3. Groups of more than two parking spaces shall be located and designed to prevent the need to back vehicles into a street or right of way other than an alley. FINDING: The applicant's proposed parking area is located over 200 feet from the nearest street or right of way. Staff finds this distance will preclude the need for vehicles to back onto Young Avenue. This criterion will be met. 4. Areas used for standing and maneuvering of vehicles shall be paved surfaces adequately maintained for all weather use and so drained as to contain any flow of water on the site. An exception may be made to the paving requirements by the Planning Director or Hearings Body upon finding that: a. A high water table in the area necessitates a permeable surface to reduce surface water runoff problems; or b. The subject use is located outside of an unincorporated community and the proposed surfacing will be maintained in a manner which will not create dust problems for neighboring properties; or 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 20 c. The subject use will be in a Rural Industrial Zone or an Industrial District in an unincorporated community and dust control measures will occur on a continuous basis which will mitigate any adverse impacts on surrounding properties. FINDING: The subject property is located outside of an unincorporated community. The applicant proposes to develop the parking area with a 6 -inch layer of compacted aggregate which will provide all weather access and minimize dust produced on site. The following condition of approval has been added to ensure compliance. Pavina and Aaareaate: The applicant shall maintain areas used for standing and maneuvering of vehicles with 6 inches of aggregate and in a manner which will not create dust problems. 5. Access aisles shall be of sufficient width for all vehicular turning and maneuvering. FINDING: The applicant proposes an access aisle 24 -feet wide. Staff finds this aisle will allow adequate space for vehicle maneuvering and turning. This criterion will be met. 6. Service drives to off-street parking areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic, provide maximum safety of traffic access and egress and maximum safety of pedestrians and vehicular traffic on the site. The number of service drives shall be limited to the minimum that will accommodate and serve the traffic anticipated. Service drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through the use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers. Service drives to drive in establishments shall be designed to avoid backing movements or other maneuvering within a street other than an alley. FINDING: The applicant proposes to use the existing single drive approach from Young Avenue. Staff finds the existing access drive will provide adequate safety to any pedestrians on site, while also maximizing vehicular traffic access. The access drive is defined by existing agricultural structures, the single family dwelling, and fencing on the western boundary. There are no proposed pedestrian crosswalks through the parking area as pedestrian access to the remaining portions of the property is provided north and east of the proposed parking site. As no additional traffic access points are proposed, staff finds the minimum number which can accommodate the anticipated need has been met. 7. Service drives shall have a minimum vision clearance area formed by the intersection of the driveway centerline, the street right of way line and a straight line joining said lines through points 30 feet from their intersection. FINDING: Through review of the submitted site plan, staff finds that the existing driveway for the subject property has a minimum clear vision area exceeding 30 feet from the intersection of the driveway centerline and the right of way for Young Avenue. This criterion will be met. 8. Parking spaces along the outer boundaries of a parking area shall be contained by a curb or bumper rail placed to prevent a motor vehicle from extending over an adjacent property line or a street right of way. FINDING: The applicant's proposed parking area is not adjacent to the subject property lines or a street right of way. This criterion does not apply. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 21 G. Off -Street Parking Lot Design. All off-street parking lots shall be designed subject to County standards for stalls and aisles as set forth in the following drawings and table: (SEE TABLE 1 AT END OF CHAPTER 18.116) 1. For one row of stalls use "C" + "D" as minimum bay width. 2. Public alley width may be included as part of dimension "D," but all parking stalls must be on private property, off the public right of way. 3. For estimating available parking area, use 300-325 square feet per vehicle for stall, aisle and access areas. 4. For large parking lots exceeding 20 stalls, alternate rows may be designed for compact cars provided that the compact stalls do not exceed 30 percent of the total required stalls. A compact stall shall be eight feet in width and 17 feet in length with appropriate aisle width. FINDING: The applicant's 10 proposed parking spaces will each be 9 -feet wide, 20 -feet deep, and will be accessed via a 24 -foot access aisle. Staff finds that these proposed dimensions will be sufficient to meet the standards addressed in DCC 18.116.030(g)(1). This criterion will be met. 3. Section 18.116.031. Bicycle Parking. New development and any construction, renovation or alteration of an existing use requiring a site plan review under DCC Title 18 for which planning approval is applied for after the effective date of Ordinance 93-005 shall comply with the provisions of DCC 18.116.031. A. Number and Type of Bicycle Parking Spaces Required. 1. General Minimum Standard. c. When the proposed use is located outside of an unincorporated community, a destination resort, and a rural commercial zone, exceptions to the bicycle parking standards may be authorized by the Planning Director or Hearings Body if the applicant demonstrates one or more of the following: i The proposed use is in a location accessed by roads with no bikeways and bicycle use by customers or employees is unlikely. ii. The proposed use generates less than 50 vehicle trips per day. iii. No existing buildings on the site will accommodate bicycle parking and no new buildings are proposed. iv. The size, weight, or dimensions of the goods sold at the site makes transporting them by bicycle impractical or unlikely. v. The use of the site requires equipment that makes it unlikely that a bicycle would be used to access the site. Representative examples would include, but not be limited to, paintball parks, golf courses, shooting ranges, etc. FINDING: Staff finds that the applicant's proposal is outside an unincorporated community, in a location where bicycle access by employees is unlikely and the proposed facility will not be accessible to the general public or customers. Additionally, staff notes the applicant submitted a supplementary Site Traffic Report which found that the proposed uses will generate less than 50 vehicle trips per day. For these reasons, bicycle parking is not required. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 22 4. Section 18.116.035. Bicycle Commuter Facilities. A. Each commercial or public building having a work force of at least 25 people shall have bicycle commuter facilities consisting of shower(s) and changing rooms(s). For facilities with more than one building (such as a college), bicycle commuter facilities may be located in a central location. B. This provision shall apply to (1) new development requiring off-street parking and (2) any construction, renovation or alteration of an existing use requiring a site plan review under DCC Title 18 for which planning approval is applied for after the effective date of Ordinance 93-005. FINDING: The criteria of these two sections are not applicable because the facility does not require bicycle parking pursuant to DCC 18.116.031(A)(1)(c). 5. Section 18.116.330. Mariivana Production, Processina, and Retailina A. Applicability. Section 18.116,330 applies to: 1. Marijuana Production in the EFU, MUA-10, and RI zones. 2. Marijuana Processing in the EFU, MUA-10, TeC, TeCR, TuC, Tul, RI, and SUBP zones 3. Marijuana Retailing in the RSC, TeC, TeCR, TuC, Tul, RC, RI, SUC, SUTC, and SUBP zones. 4. Marijuana Wholesaling in the RSC, TeC, TeCR, TuC, RC, SUC, and SUBP zones. FINDING: The applicant has proposed Marijuana Production and Processing in the EFU zone. This section applies. B. Marijuana production and marijuana processing. Marijuana production and marijuana processing shall be subject to the following standards and criteria: 1. Minimum Lot Area. a. In the EFU and MUA-10 zones, the subject legal lot of record shall have a minimum lot area of five (5) acres. FINDING: The subject property subject property consists of two (2) legal lots of record, 40 acres and 23.75 acres in size respectively. The proposed marijuana production and processing facilities will be located on the southern 40 -acre parcel. This standard is met. 2. Indoor Production and Processing. b. In the EFU zone, marijuana production and processing shall only be located in buildings, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar structures. c. In all zones, marijuana production and processing are prohibited in any outdoor area. FINDING: The subject property is within the EFU zone. The applicant has proposed that all production and processing will occur within four planned agricultural structures and one existing agricultural structure, complying with these criteria. Staff includes the following condition of approval to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section. No Outdoor Production: Marijuana production is prohibited in any outdoor area. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 23 3. Maximum Mature Plant Canopy Size. In the EFU zone, the maximum canopy area for mature marijuana plants shall apply as follows: a. Parcels from 5 acres to less than 10 acres in lot area: 2,500 square feet. b. Parcels equal to or greater than 10 acres to less than 20 acres in lot area: 5,000 square feet. The maximum canopy area for mature marijuana plants may be increased to 10,000 square feet upon demonstration by the applicant to the County that: i. The marijuana production operation was lawfully established prior to January 1, 2015; and 11. The increased mature marijuana plant canopy area will not generate adverse impact of visual, odor, noise, lighting, privacy or access greater than the impacts associated with a 5,000 square foot canopy area operation. c. Parcels equal to or greater than 20 acres to less than 40 acres in lot area: 10,000 square feet. d. Parcels equal to or greater than 40 acres to less than 60 acres in lot area: 20,000 square feet. e. Parcels equal to or greater than 60 acres in lot area: 40,000 square feet. FINDING: The applicant has proposed a maximum of 9,800 square feet of mature plant canopy area, as allowed under section (c) for properties 20 to 40 acres in lot area. Maximum Mature Plant Canopy Size: The maximum canopy area for mature marijuana plants shall not exceed 10,000 square feet at any time. 4. Maximum Building Floor Area. In the MUA-10 zone, the maximum building floor area used for all activities associated with marijuana production and processing on the subject property shall be: a. Parcels from 5 acres to less than 10 acres in lot area: 2,500 square feet. b. Parcels equal to or greater than 10 acres: 5,000 square feet. FINDING: The subject property is not located in the MUA-10 Zone. This criterion does not apply. 5. Limitation on License/Grow Site per Parcel. No more than one (1) Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) licensed marijuana production or Oregon Health Authority (OHA) registered medical marijuana grow site shall be allowed per legal parcel or lot. FINDING: The proposal includes only one (1) Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) licensed marijuana production site. This criterion will be met. 6. Setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply to all marijuana production and processing areas and buildings: a. Minimum Yard Setback/Distance from Lot Lines: 100 feet. b. Setback from an off-site dwelling: 300 feet. For the purposes of this criterion, an off-site dwelling includes those proposed off-site dwellings with a building permit application submitted to Deschutes County prior to submission of the marijuana production or processing application to Deschutes County. c. Exception: Any reduction to these setback requirements may be granted by the Planning Director or Hearings Body provided the applicant 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 24 demonstrates the reduced setbacks afford equal or greater mitigation of visual, odor, noise, lighting, privacy, and access impacts. FINDING: The plot plan indicates the existing structures to be used for marijuana production and processing are more than 100 feet from all property lines and more than 300 feet from all dwellings on neighboring properties. This criterion will be met. 7. Separation Distances. Minimum separation distances shall apply as follows: a. The use shall be located a minimum of 1000 feet from: i. A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance is compulsory under Oregon Revised Statutes 339.010, et seq., including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the school; ii. A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching children as described in ORS 339.030(1)(a), including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the school; A licensed child care center or licensed preschool, including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the child care center or preschool. This does not include licensed or unlicensed child care which occurs at or in residential structures; iv. A youth activity center; and v. National monuments and state parks. b. For purposes of DCC 18.116.330(6)(7), all distances shall be measured from the lot line of the affected properties listed in DCC 18.116.330(B)(7)(a) to the closest point of the buildings and land area occupied by the marijuana producer or marijuana processor. c. A change in use of another property to those identified in DCC 18.116.330(B)(7) shall not result in the marijuana producer or marijuana processor being in violation of DCC 18.116.330(B)(7) if the use is: i. Pending a local land use decision; ii. Licensed or registered by the State of Oregon; or iii. Lawfully established. FINDING: The applicant states the subject property exceeds these separation distance requirements. There are 24 tax lots wholly or partially within 1,000 feet of the subject property. According to staff review of Deschutes County records, none of these properties appear to have a use described in this section or are subject to subsection (c). These criteria will be met. 8. Access. Marijuana production over 5,000 square feet of canopy area for mature marijuana plants shall comply with the following standards. a. Have frontage on and legal direct access from a constructed public, county, or state road; or b. Have access from a private road or easement serving only the subject property. c. If the property takes access via a private road or easement which also serves other properties, the applicant shall obtain written consent to utilize the easement or private road for marijuana production access from all owners who have access rights to the private road or easement. The written consent shall: i. Be on a form provided by the County and shall contain the following information; 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 25 ii. Include notarized signatures of all owners, persons and properties holding a recorded interest in the private road or easement; Include a description of the proposed marijuana production or marijuana processing operation; and iv. Include a legal description of the private road or easement. FINDING: As discussed above, the applicant proposes a maximum mature plant canopy size of 9,800 square feet, therefore, these criteria apply. The property has frontage on and direct access from Young Avenue, a constructed County road. The applicable criterion above is met. 9. Lighting. Lighting shall be regulated as follows: a. Inside building lighting, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar structures, used for marijuana production shall not be visible outside the building from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on the following day. b. Lighting fixtures shall be fully shielded in such a manner that all light emitted directly by the lamp or a diffusing element, or indirectly by reflection or refraction, is projected below the horizontal plane through the lowest light -emitting part. c. Light cast by exterior light fixtures other than marijuana grow lights shall comply with DCC 15.10, Outdoor Lighting Control. FINDING: The applicant states the proposed marijuana production and processing facility will utilize five (5) buildings which will be fully enclosed and will not omit any light during any hour of the day or night. The main access doors to a staging area will be fitted with translucent panels to allow natural light to penetrate, but this area will not host lighting which may exit the structure. The applicant further states that any external lighting will be provided by "sconce" style fixtures and will be shielded in compliance with DCC 15.10. Staff finds these criteria will be met and adds the following condition to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section. Lighting: The following lighting standards shall be met: (a) Inside building lighting, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar structures, used for marijuana production shall not be visible outside the building from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on the following day; (b) Lighting fixtures shall be fully shielded in such a manner that all light emitted directly by the lamp or a diffusing element, or indirectly by reflection or refraction, is projected below the horizontal plane through the lowest light -emitting part; and (c) The light cast by exterior light fixtures other than marijuana growing lights shall comply with DCC 15.10, Outdoor Lighting Control. 10. Odor. As used in DCC 18.116.330(6)(10), building means the building, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and other similar structures, used for marijuana production or marijuana processing. a. The building shall be equipped with an effective odor control system which must at all times prevent unreasonable interference of neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. b. An odor control system is deemed permitted only after the applicant submits a report by a mechanical engineer licensed in the State of Oregon demonstrating that the system will control odor so as not to unreasonably interfere with neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. c. Private actions alleging nuisance or trespass associated with odor impacts are authorized, if at all, as provided in applicable state statute. d. The odor control system shall: 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 26 1. Consist of one or more fans. The fan(s) shall be sized for cubic feet per minute (CFM) equivalent to the volume of the building (length multiplied by width multiplied by height) divided by three. The filter(s) shall be rated for the required CFM; or 11. Utilize an alternative method or technology to achieve equal to or greater odor mitigation than provided by (i) above. e. The system shall be maintained in working order and shall be in use. FINDING: The applicant submitted a site-specific report prepared by Oregon -licensed Mechanical Engineer Rob James, PE of ColeBreit Engineering. The report states the following in regards to the odor control systems proposed for the subject property: The odor control system will consist of activated carbons filters attached to inline fans that recirculate air within each structure. The capacity of this carbon filtration system will be no less than the volume of the space divided by three, in accordance with DCC 18.116.330(8)(10)(d). Space volumes and fan recommendations are tabulated below. Any similar carbon filtration system with equal or greater capacity may be used. Several sizes of Can -Filter will suffice, although we recommend Can 150 filters. Room Flower 1 Flower 2 Vegetation Staging Room Flower 1 Flower 2 Vegetation Staging Length (ft) 41 41 24 18 Req -d CFM 7,462 7,462 4,160 3,120 Width (ft) 42 42 40 40 Fan Selection 12" Max -Fan 12" Max -Fan 12" Max -Fan 12" Max -Fan Avg. Height (ft) 13 13 113 113 # of Fans 5 5 3 2 Volume 22,386 22,386 12,480 9,360 Total CFM 7,975 7,975 4,785 3,190 This system will satisfy code and mitigate all odor leaving the building. Surplus CFM 513 513 625 70 Maintenance for this system will be in accordance with manufacturer instructions: "The life of a filter is determined by the concentration of the contaminant, the relative humidity and the volume of air being cleaned. Unfortunately, there is no indicator light on the filter that tells you when it is ready to be replaced. Typically 12-18 months is expected of the Original Can -Filter, although many of them have lasted much longer." Staff finds these criteria will be met when the applicants install the odor control systems as specified in the mechanical engineer's report, and adds the following condition to ensure ongoing compliance with the requirements of this section. Odor: The proposed odor control system must at all times prevent unreasonable interference with neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. The odor control system shall be maintained in working order and shall be in use. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 27 11. Noise. Noise produced by marijuana production and marijuana processing shall comply with the following: a. Sustained noise from mechanical equipment used for heating, ventilation, air condition, odor control, fans and similar functions shall not exceed 30 dB(A) measured at any property line between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day. b. Sustained noise from marijuana production is exempt from protections of DCC 9.12 and ORS 30.395, Right to Farm. Intermittent noise for accepted farming practices is permitted. ' FINDING: The applicant submitted a site-specific report prepared by Oregon -licensed Mechanical Engineer Rob James, PE of ColeBreit Engineering. The report states the following in regards to the noise control systems proposed for the subject property: Based on a TRANE 4TWA4 5 -ton heat pump, the sound power level of each outdoor unit is 74 dBA. By staggering the 12 -on, 12 -off operation schedule of these structures, 26 of these units will be running simultaneously, 13 on each side. The calculated sound pressure level of 26 units running simultaneously is 88 dBA. Under the assumptions of an 88 dBA point source of noise from the closest point of the structure to each property line, and a ground factor of 1 due to sand and light vegetation, the table below shows approximate sound pressures at each property line as calculated with the MAS Environmental Sound Calculator, with no sound mitigation. Property Line South West North East Distance from Structures 225' 635' 1,000' 460' Sound Pressure at Property Line (dBA) 39.0 29.1 24.6 32.2 Sound Barrier Required As Shown None None As Shown 1 Additionally, the east and west property lines will be protected by the buildings themselves acting as soundbarriers, lowering sound pressures further. A sound barrier 9.5' tall, spanning between the structures with no gaps will be required as follows: 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 28 --� EXISTING BUILDINGS 225' Proposed Equiprnen Locations 460 Proposed Sound Barriers With this sound barrier in place, the calculated sound pressure at the south property line drops to 29.2 dBA. By considering the structures themselves as sound barriers, the calculated sound pressure at the east line drops to 16.5 dBA. Staff finds these criteria will be met when the applicants install the mechanical equipment as specified in the mechanical engineer's report, and adds the following condition to ensure ongoing compliance with the noise requirements of this section. Noise: Sustained noise from mechanical equipment used for heating, ventilation, air conditioning, odor control, fans and similar functions shall not exceed 30 dB(A) measured at any property line between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day. 12. Screening and Fencing. The following screening standards shall apply to greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar non -rigid structures and land areas used for marijuana production and processing: a. Subject to DCC 18.84, Landscape Management Combining Zone approval, if applicable. b. Fencing shall be finished in a muted earth tone that blends with the surrounding natural landscape and shall not be constructed of temporary materials such as plastic sheeting, hay bales, tarps, etc., and shall be subject to DCC 18.88, Wildlife Area Combining Zone, if applicable. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 29 c. Razor wire, or similar, shall be obscured from view or colored a muted earth tone that blends with the surrounding natural landscape. d. The existing tree and shrub cover screening the development from the public right-of-way or adjacent properties shall be retained to the maximum extent possible. This provision does not prohibit maintenance of existing lawns, removal of dead, diseased or hazardous vegetation; the commercial harvest of forest products in accordance with the Oregon Forest Practices Act; or agricultural use of the land. FINDING: The subject property is not in the Landscape Management or the Wildlife Area Combining Zone. No fencing or razor wire is proposed as a part of the development. The property is flat and is mostly comprised of irrigated pasture. It has few, if any, trees or vegetated areas to retain that would to screen the proposed structures from view from the public right of way and adjacent properties. Staff finds these standards can be met and adds the following condition to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section. Fencing: Fencing shall be finished in a muted earth tone that blends with the surrounding natural landscape and shall not be constructed of temporary materials such as plastic sheeting, hay bales, tarps, etc. 13. Water. The applicant shall provide: a. A copy of a water right permit, certificate, or other water use authorization from the Oregon Water Resource Department; or b. A statement that water is supplied from a public or private water provider, along with the name and contact information of the water provider; or c. Proof from the Oregon Water Resources Department that the water to be used is from a source that does not require a water right. FINDING: The subject property is served with 51.0 acres of irrigation from COID (see Attachment A). The applicant has included the water right certificate for this irrigation right, which highlights the irrigation season as April 1st to October 31. For periods of time outside of the irrigation season, the applicant proposes to have water delivered to the property by ABC Lightning LLC and stored on site in an existing cistern. The applicant submitted a letter from ABC Lightning stating they are willing and able to serve the farm use on this property with up to 12,000 gallons of water per month, which will be delivered in weekly increments of 3,000 gallons. The water delivered by ABC Lightning will be provided by Avion Water Company. The applicant submitted a letter from Avion which states the following: Avion Water Company, Inc. is willing and able to provide potable water to the above described production, provided all requirements by Avion Water Company are met and all monies due are paid in accordance with Avion's approved tariff. Avion is aware that the applicant intends to construct a cannabis production/processing facility and that the water will be used for agriculture purposes. Avion is also aware that the applicant plans on having Avion water delivered by ABC Lightning Water during the non -irrigation season months. The water usage for the above described production is estimated at 4,000 gallons per month. Avion has the capacity to meet the potential demand. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 30 In the recent Tewalti decision, the Board clarified expectations regarding the water source that water suppliers are using: The record contains materials demonstrating the property may be served by Bend Water Hauling, LLC. The Board found that the application thereby met subpart b above. However, the record also contains materials questioning if Bend Water Hauling, LLC has the appropriate water rights to serve the proposed marijuana production use. The Board interpreted that the intention of verifying the public or private water provider as required by subpart b above is in part to ensure that applicant has access to a legal source of water that complies with all applicable state statutes and regulations. The Board thereby voted in favor of adding the following condition of approval to ensure ongoing compliance with DCC 18.116.330(8)(13): As an ongoing condition of approval, the use of water from any source for marijuana production shall comply with all applicable state statutes and regulations including ORS 537.545 and OAR 690-340-0010. In light of this Board decision, staff accepts Avion Water Company as an acceptable water source secondary to irrigation from COID, subject to the same condition of approval imposed in the Tewalt decision. Water: The use of water from any source for marijuana production shall comply with all applicable state statutes and regulations including ORS 537.545 and OAR 690-340-0010. 14. Fire protection for processing of cannabinoid extracts. Processing of cannabinoid extracts shall only be permitted on properties located within the boundaries of or under contract with a fire protection district. FINDING: The subject property is within the boundaries of the Redmond Fire and Rescue District. This criterion will be met. 15. Utility Verification. A statement from each utility company proposed to serve the operation, stating that each such company is able and willing to serve the operation, shall be provided. FINDING: The applicant submitted a "will serve" letter from the Central Electric Cooperative (CEC) dated July 27'h, 2017, including information identifying the use as marijuana production and that the electrical load can be provided for. The letter from CEC states: In response to your Inquiry, please be advised that the property located at T.16., R.12., Section 11, Tax Lot 800 in Deschutes County, Oregon, is within the service area of Central Electric Cooperative, Inc. Central Electric Cooperative has reviewed the provided load information (New 3,000 amp Three phase 480 volt service) associated with the submitted recreational marijuana grow facility and has determined that this service will require system upgrades to our facilities in the area. Central Electric Cooperative is willing and able to serve this location in accordance with the rates and policies of Central Electric Cooperative. This is the only utility the proposal will utilize besides water, which is addressed above. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall establish the system upgrades identified by the Central Electric Cooperative prior to initiation of use. ' BOCC Document N2 2017-718, Planning Division File NQ 247-17-000723-A 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 31 16. Security Cameras. If security cameras are used, they shall be directed to record only the subject property and public rights-of-way, except as required to comply with requirements of the OLCC or the OHA. FINDING: The applicant agrees to comply with this standard. Staff adds the following condition to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section. Security Cameras: Security cameras shall be directed to record only the subject property and public rights- of-way, except as required to comply with requirements of the OLCC. 17. Secure Waste Disposal. Marijuana waste shall be stored in a secured waste receptacle in the possession of and under the control of the OLCC licensee or OHA Person Responsible for the Grow Site (PRMG). FINDING: The applicant states that the site will be provided with 1-2 appropriate locking storage containers (see Attachment B) that will remain under the maintenance and supervision of the designated OLCC permit holder. Additionally, the applicant states the storage containers will be stored inside the production and processing buildings which are subject to the above mentioned odor mitigation requirements and additional security measures. Staff finds this criterion can be met and adds the following condition to ensure ongoing compliance with the requirements of this section. Waste: The marijuana waste receptacle shall be stored within the limited access areas within the production buildings, and shall be in the possession of and under the control of the OLCC licensee. 18. Residency. In the MUA-10 zone, a minimum of one of the following shall reside in a dwelling unit on the subject property: a. An owner of the subject property; b. A holder of an OLCC license for marijuana production, provided that the license applies to the subject property; or c. A person registered with the OHA as a person designated to produce marijuana by a registry identification cardholder, provided that the registration applies to the subject property. FINDING: The subject property is not in the MUA-10 zone. This section does not apply. 19. Nonconformance. All medical marijuana grow sites lawfully established prior to June 8, 2016 by the Oregon Health Authority shall comply with the provisions of DCC 18.116.330(8)(9) by September 8, 2016 and with the provisions of DCC 18.116.330(B)(10-12, 16, 17) by December 8, 2016. FINDING: The site is not currently used as a medical grow site. This criterion does not apply. 20. Prohibited Uses. a. In the EFU zone, the following uses are prohibited: 1. A new dwelling used in conjunction with a marijuana crop; 11. A farm stand, as described in ORS 215.213(1)(r) or 215.283(1)(o), used in conjunction with a marijuana crop; 111. A commercial activity, as described in ORS 215.213(2)(c) or 215.283(2)(a), carried on in conjunction a marijuana crop; and iv. Agri -tourism and other commercial events and activities in conjunction with a marijuana crop. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 32 c. In the EFU, MUA-10, and Rural Industrial zones, the following uses are prohibited on the same property as marijuana production: I. Guest Lodge. ii. Guest Ranch. iii. Dude Ranch. iv. Destination Resort. v. Public Parks. vi. Private Parks. vii. Events, Mass Gatherings and Outdoor Mass Gatherings. viii. Bed and Breakfast. ix. Room and Board Arrangements. FINDING: None of the prohibited uses have been proposed by the applicant. Staff adds the following condition to ensure ongoing compliance with the requirements of this section. Prohibited Uses: The uses listed in DCC 18.116.330(B)(20) shall be prohibited on the subject property so long as marijuana production is conducted on the site. D. Annual Reporting 1. An annual report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department by the real property owner or licensee, if different, each February 1, documenting all of the following as of December 31 of the previous year, including the applicable fee as adopted in the current County Fee Schedule and a fully executed Consent to Inspect Premises form: a. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the: i. Land use decision and permits. ii. Fire, health, safety, waste water, and building codes and laws. iii. State of Oregon licensing requirements. b. Failure to timely submit the annual report, fee, and Consent to Inspect Premises form or to demonstrate compliance with DCC 18.116.330(C)(1)(a) shall serve as acknowledgement by the real property owner and licensee that the otherwise allowed use is not in compliance with Deschutes County Code; authorizes permit revocation under DCC Title 22, and may be relied upon by the State of Oregon to deny new or license renewal(s) for the subject use. c. Other information as may be reasonably required by the Planning Director to ensure compliance with Deschutes County Code, applicable State regulations, and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. d. Marijuana Control Plan to be established and maintained by the Community Development Department. e. Conditions of Approval Agreement to be established and maintained by the Community Development Department. f. This information shall be public record subject to ORS 192.502(17). FINDING: Compliance with the annual reporting obligation of this section is required. The applicant has agreed to file the annual report each year in a timely manner. Staff adds the following condition to ensure compliance with the requirements of this section. Annual Reporting: The annual reporting requirements of DCC 18.116.330(D) shall be met. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 33 D. Chapter 18.124, Site Plan Review 1. Section 18.124.030. Approval Reauired. 4. No building, grading, parking, land use, sign or other required permit shall be issued for a use subject to DCC 18.124.030, nor shall such a use be commenced, enlarged, altered or changed until a final site plan is approved according to DCC Title 22, the Uniform Development Procedures Ordinance. B. The provisions of DCC 18.124.030 shall apply to the following: 1. All conditional use permits where a site plan is a condition of approval; 2. Multiple family dwellings with more than three units; 3. All commercial uses that require parking facilities; 4. All industrial uses; 5. All other uses that serve the general public or that otherwise require parking facilities, including, but not limited to, landfills, schools, utility facilities, churches, community buildings, cemeteries, mausoleums, crematories, airports, parks and recreation facilities and livestock sales yards; and 6. As specified for Flood Plain Zones (FP) and Surface Mining Impact Area Combining Zones (SMIA). FINDING: Marijuana Processing is an industrial use2, however the proposed processing represents a small fraction of the total use at the site, which is dominated by the existing farm use and the proposed Marijuana Production facility. Therefore, staff finds that the use of land is not primarily for the manufacture, processing, storage or wholesale distribution of products, goods or materials. The use is not a commercial use3. However, since the proposed processing is a use that requires parking facilities, site plan review is required for the processing use only. 2. Section 18,124.060, Approval Criteria. Approval of a site plan shall be based on the following criteria: A. The proposed development shall relate harmoniously to the natural environment and existing development, minimizing visual impacts and preserving natural features including views and topographical features. FINDING: The property is level farmland currently developed with a single-family dwelling and 5 existing farm buildings. Views to the east from the subject property include portions of the Pilot Butte Canal along with smaller scale farm operations. Views north, west, and south of the subject property include some large undeveloped tracts along with smaller scale farm operations and associated agricultural development. No natural or topographic features would be impacted by this proposal as it is clustered near the existing development on site. Additionally, the proposed parking area landscaping will more seamlessly blend the proposed use into the surrounding area. Staff finds that Marijuana Processing within the existing farm building will relate harmoniously to the natural environment and existing development. B. The landscape and existing topography shall be preserved to the greatest extent possible, considering development constraints and suitability of the landscape and topography. Preserved trees and shrubs shall be protected. 2 DCC 18.04.030 - "Industrial use" means the use of land primarily for the manufacture, processing, storage or wholesale distribution of products, goods or materials. It does not include commercial uses. 3 DCC 18.04.030 - "Commercial use" means the use of land primarily for the retail sale of products or services, including offices. It does not include factories, warehouses, freight terminals or wholesale distribution centers. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 34 FINDING: The property is level farmland currently developed with a single family dwelling and 5 existing farm buildings. The property has native trees and shrubs scattered throughout the site. This vegetation is primarily located in the northeast corner, surrounding the single family dwelling, and along the west property line. None of the existing vegetation will be impacted by this proposal. No alterations to the existing topography are proposed or necessary with this development. C. The site plan shall be designed to provide a safe environment, while offering appropriate opportunities for privacy and transition from public to private spaces. FINDING: The layout of the existing driveway, parking area, and proposed structures, provide appropriate opportunities for privacy and transition from public to private spaces. The parking area is set back approximately 200 feet from the southern property line, which is the nearest property boundary. Additionally, it is screened from view by existing development and landscaping, including the single family dwelling on site. The proposed processing facility is set back from the southern property line by approximately 320 feet, which is the nearest property boundary. Additionally, the facility is screened from the nearest public road, Young Avenue, via existing agricultural structures and landscaping. Marijuana Processing can include unusual levels of fire safety hazard. Redmond Fire and Rescue has provided comments related to this application which are listed above. As a condition of approval, the applicant shall comply with all requirements of Redmond Fire and Rescue at all times to provide a safe environment at the processing facility. D. When appropriate, the site plan shall provide for the special needs of disabled persons, such as ramps for wheelchairs and Braille signs. FINDING: At the time of plan check for the building permit, the applicant will be subject to any applicable ADA requirements. E. The location and number of points of access to the site, interior circulation patterns, separations between pedestrians and moving and parked vehicles, and the arrangement of parking areas in relation to buildings and structures shall be harmonious with proposed and neighboring buildings and structures. FINDING: The applicant proposes to continue using the existing access from Young Avenue to reach the proposed parking area. Additionally, no changes in the existing circulation patterns on site are proposed. The proposed processing building will be separated from the parking area by approximately 45 -feet as well as an existing well structure. The processing facility will buffered from neighboring properties as the proposed location is a minimum of 200 feet from the closest property boundary. Additionally, staff is unaware of any planned structures on adjacent properties. Based on the site plan submitted by the applicant, staff finds proposed processing building shall be harmonious with neighboring buildings and structures. F. Surface drainage systems shall be designed to prevent adverse impacts on neighboring properties, streets, or surface and subsurface water quality. FINDING: There is no evidence in the record that the site has a history of adversely impacting the surface water drainage pattern in the area. The site is relatively level with farmland surrounding the building area. Given the relatively small area of the roof associated with the proposed processing building in relation to the large size of the property, staff finds runoff from the building will be contained on-site. Staff finds that the site will not adversely impact on neighboring properties, streets, or surface and subsurface water quality. G. Areas, structures and facilities for storage, machinery and equipment, services (mail, refuse, utility wires, and the like), loading and parking and similar 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 35 accessory areas and structures shall be designed, located and buffered or screened to minimize adverse impacts on the site and neighboring properties. FINDING: The parking area proposed on site is located more than 200 feet from the nearest property line. Additionally, existing on-site vegetation and development, including the single family dwelling and multiple agricultural structures, will shield the parking area from public view from the south, east, and north. The applicant also proposes to establish a 5 -foot wide landscaping area on the west side of the parking site to more fully screen the use from neighboring properties and the public. Any proposed waste storage structures will be located inside the proposed marijuana production and processing buildings on site, thereby reducing any potential visual impacts. This criterion will be met. H. All above ground utility installations shall be located to minimize adverse visual impacts on the site and neighboring properties. FINDING: No new utility installations are proposed. I. Specific criteria are outlined for each zone and shall be a required part of the site plan (e.g. lot setbacks, etc.). FINDING: The structure will meet the dimensional standards and setback requirements set forth in DCC 18.16 and 18.116, as described above, as well as the building height standard in DCC 18.16. Based on these findings and the plans submitted by the applicant, the proposal meets this criterion. J. All exterior lighting shall be shielded so that direct light does not project off site. FINDING: The applicant has acknowledged this requirement. As a condition of approval, all exterior lighting shall be shielded so that direct light does not project off-site. K. Transportation access to the site shall be adequate for the use. 1. Where applicable, issues including, but not limited to, sight distance, turn and acceleration/deceleration lanes, right-of-way, roadway surfacing and widening, and bicycle and pedestrian connections, shall be identified. 2. Mitigation for transportation -related impacts shall be required. 3. Mitigation shall meet applicable County standards in DCC 17.16 and DCC 17.48, applicable Oregon Department of Transportation (0007) mobility and access standards, and applicable American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards. FINDING: In reviewing the supplemental Site Traffic Report (STR) provided by the applicant, no transportation infrastructure deficiencies or improvements were identified by the Deschutes County Road Department or the Deschutes County Transportation Planner. 3. Section 18.124.070. Reauired Minimum Standards. A. Private or shared outdoor recreation areas in residential developments. IN" FINDING: No residential units are proposed. This criterion is not applicable. B. Required Landscaped Areas. 1. The following landscape requirements are established for multi family, commercial and industrial developments, subject to site plan approval: 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 36 a. A minimum of 15 percent of the lot area shall be landscaped. b. All areas subject to the final site plan and not otherwise improved shall be landscaped. FINDING: These criteria only apply to multi family, commercial and industrial developments. As discussed above, the Marijuana Production use is an "industrial use". However, staff finds that the siting of this use in a 1,200 -square foot building does not make the primary use of the 62 -acre property "industrial development". Staff finds that these criteria do not apply to this proposal. 2. In addition to the requirement of DCC 18.124.O7O(B)(1)(a), the following landscape requirements shall apply to parking and loading areas: a. A parking or loading area shall be required to be improved with defined landscaped areas totaling no less than 25 square feet per parking space. b. In addition to the landscaping required by DCC 18.124.O7O(B)(2)(a), a parking or loading area shall be separated from any lot line adjacent to a roadway by a landscaped strip at least 10 feet in width, and from any other lot line by a landscaped strip at least five feet in width. c. A landscaped strip separating a parking or loading area from a street shall contain: 1) Trees spaced as appropriate to the species, not to exceed 35 feet apart on the average. 2) Low shrubs not to reach a height greater than three feet zero inches, spaced no more than eight feet apart on the average. 3) Vegetative ground cover. d. Landscaping in a parking or loading area shall be located in defined landscaped areas which are uniformly distributed throughout the parking or loading area. e. The landscaping in a parking area shall have a width of not less than five feet. f. Provision shall be made for watering planting areas where such care is required. g. Required landscaping shall be continuously maintained and kept alive and attractive. h. Maximum height of tree species shall be considered when planting under overhead utility lines. FINDING: Ten (10) parking spaces are required for the use proposed. The parking area is not adjacent to a property line or roadway, as it is located approximately 200 feet from any such boundary. Additionally, the proposed parking area will be separated from the southern lot line, the closest property boundary, by existing development and vegetation. The applicant proposes to plant a 5 -foot wide landscaping strip along the west edge of the parking site. The proposed dimensions will supply approximately 45 -square -feet of defined landscape area per parking space. The following condition of approval has been added to ensure compliance with this section. Landscapina maintenance: All proposed landscaping shall be continuously maintained and kept alive and attractive. Additionally, provisions for watering planting areas shall be made where such care is required. C. Non -motorized Access. 1. Bicycle Parking. The development shall provide the number and type of bicycle parking facilities as required in DCC 18.116.031 and 18.116.035. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 37 The location and design of bicycle parking facilities shall be indicated on the site plan. FINDING: Compliance with DCC 18.116.031 and 18.116.035 is discussed in findings for those sections, above. 2. Pedestrian Access and Circulation: a. Internal pedestrian circulation shall be provided in new commercial, office and multi -family residential developments through the clustering of buildings, construction of hard surface pedestrian walkways, and similar techniques. FINDING: This criterion does not apply, as the facility is not a commercial, office, or multi -family residential development. b. Pedestrian walkways shall connect building entrances to one another and from building entrances to public streets and existing or planned transit facilities. On site walkways shall connect with walkways, sidewalks, bikeways, and other pedestrian or bicycle connections on adjacent properties planned or used for commercial, multi family, public or park use. c. Walkways shall be at least five feet in paved unobstructed width. Walkways which border parking spaces shall be at least seven feet wide unless concrete bumpers or curbing and landscaping or other similar improvements are provided which prevent parked vehicles from obstructing the walkway. Walkways shall be as direct as possible. d. Driveway crossings by walkways shall be minimized. Where the walkway system crosses driveways, parking areas and loading areas, the walkway must be clearly identifiable through the use of elevation changes, speed bumps, a different paving material or other similar method. e. To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the primary building entrance and any walkway that connects a transit stop to building entrances shall have a maximum slope of five percent. Walkways up to eight percent slope are permitted, but are treated as ramps with special standards for railings and landings. FINDING: Staff believes that (b) through (e) apply to any use subject to site plan review. The applicant did not show pedestrian walkways at the proposed facility. Staff follows the Hearings Officer decision in CU - 14 -7 where the Hearings Officer found that, "...these criteria have limited application to the applicants' proposal inasmuch as there is only one commercial use proposed for the subject property, and there will be a single building for that use. Therefore, I find there is no need to apply these criteria to require particular pedestrian circulation or walkways on the property." Staff finds that the present application is similar in that there is a single building proposed for the Marijuana Processing facility and that no pedestrian walkways under these criteria are required. D. Commercial Development Standards: FINDING: The proposed facility is not a commercial development. These criteria do not apply. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 38 4. Section 18.124.090. Richt of Wav Improvement Standards. Any dedications or improvements to the road right of way required under DCC 18.124 shall meet the standards for road right of way improvements set forth in DCC Title 17 and any standards for right-of-way improvements set forth in DCC Title 18 for the particular zone in question. FINDING: No transportation infrastructure deficiencies or requirements were identified by the Deschutes County Road Department or the Deschutes County Transportation Planner. IV. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGES: As noted in previous sections by the Deschutes County Transportation Planner, "Board Resolution 2013- 020 sets a transportation system development charge (SDC) rate of $3,937 per p.m. peak hour trip. The Board in a policy decision in early 2017 decided to use the ITE rate for Warehouse (LU 150) for marijuana production and Manufacturing (LU 140) for processing. The County has not yet updated its trip generation rates to reflect the 10th edition of the ITE manual. The County's adopted rates are from the 9th edition, hence the discrepancy between the County's SDC rate and the applicant's STR for p.m. peak hour trips. The SDC for growing would be 6.7 p.m. peak hour trips (20.832 X 0.32) for an SDC of $26,378 ($3,937 X 6.7 p.m. peak hour trips). The SDC for processing would be 0.9 p.m. peak hour trips (1.2 X 0.73) for an SDC of $3,543 (0.9X$3,937). Thus the total applicable SDC for growing and processing would be $29,921 ($26,378 + $3,543). The SDC is due prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; if a certificate of occupancy is not applicable, then the SDC is due within 60 days of the land use decision becoming final." IV. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing Findings, staff finds that the proposed marijuana production and processing facility can comply with the applicable standards and criteria of the Deschutes County zoning ordinance if conditions of approval are met. V. DECISION APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions of approval. VI. ONGOING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. This approval is based upon the application, site plan, specifications, and supporting documentation submitted by the applicant. Any substantial change in this approved use will require review through a new land use application. 2. Building Height: No building or structure, including greenhouses, shall be erected or enlarged to exceed 30 feet in height, except as allowed under DCC 18.120.040. 3. Airport Safety Glare: No glare producing material, including but not limited to unpainted metal or reflective glass, shall be used on the exterior of the proposed structures. 4. No Outdoor Production: Marijuana production is prohibited in any outdoor area. 5. Off -Street Parking: Any off-street parking areas used to fulfill the requirements of DCC Title 18 shall not be used for loading and unloading operations except during periods of the day when not required to take care of parking needs. 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 39 6. Maximum Shift Size for the Proposed Use: The maximum number of employees alloweon site to support the proposed marijuana production and processing use shall not exceed 10 persons on any given shift. 7. Pavina and Aaareaate: The applicant shall maintain areas used for standing and maneuvering of vehicles with 6 inches of aggregate and in a manner which will not create dust problems 8. Maximum Mature Plant Canoov Size: The maximum canopy area for mature marijuana plants shall not exceed 10,000 square feet at any time. 9. Liqhting: The foliowing Iighting standards shall be met. a. Inside building lighting used for marijuana production shall not be visible outside the building from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on the following day. b. Lighting fixtures shall be futly shielded in such a manner that aPI Iight emitted directly by the Iamp or a diffusing e|emant, or indirectly by reflection or refraction, is projected below the horizontal plane through the lowest light -emitting part. c. The Iight cast by exterior Iight fixtures other than marijuana growing Iights shall comply with DCC 15.10. Outdoor Lighting Control. 10' Odor: The proposed odor controsystem must at all times prevent unreasonable interference with neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. The odor control system shall be maintained in working order and shall be in use. 11. Noise: Sustained noise from mechanicaequipment used for heating, ventilation, air conditioning, odor control, fans and similar functions shall not exceed 30 dB(A) measured at any property line between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day. 12. Fancino: Fencing shall be finished in a muted earth tone that biends with the surrounding natural landscape and shall not be constructed of temporary materials such as plastic sheeting, hay bales, tarps, etc. 13. Water: The use of water from any source for marijuanaoroduobonahaU comply with aPI applicable state statutes and regulations including ORS 537.545 and OAR 690-340-0010. 14. Utility Uparades: The applicant shall establish the system upgrades identified by the Central Electric Cooperative prior to initiation of use. 15. Security Cameras: Security cameras shall be directed to record only the subject property and public rights-of-way, except as required to comply with requirements of the OLCC. 16. Waste: The marijuana waste receptacle shall be stored within the limited access areas within the production buildings, and shall be in the possession of and under the control of the OLCC licensee. 17. Prohibited Uses: The uses listed in DCC 18.118.330(B)(2[0 shall be prohibited on the subject property so long as marijuana production is conducted on the site. 18. Annual Reportina: The annual reporting requirements of DCC 18.116.330(D) shall be met. An annual report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department by the real property owner or Iicensee, if different, each February 1, documenting aU of the foliowing as of December 31 of the previous year, including the applicable fee as adopted in the current County Fee Schedule and a fully executed Consent to Inspect Premises form: a. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the: 247-17'000905`4D. 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 40 Land use decision and permits. ii. Fire, health, safety, waste water, and building codes and laws. State of Oregon licensing requirements. b. Failure to timely submit the annual report, fee, and Consent to Inspect Premises form or to demonstrate compliance with DCC 18.116.330(C)(1)(a) shall serve as acknowledgement by the real property owner and licensee that the otherwise allowed use is not in compliance with Deschutes County Code; authorizes permit revocation under DCC Title 22, and may be relied upon by the State of Oregon to deny new or license renewal(s) for the subject use. c. Other information as may be reasonably required by the Planning Director to ensure compliance with Deschutes County Code, applicable State regulations, and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. 18. Landscaping maintenance: All proposed landscaping shall be continuously maintained and kept alive and attractive. Additionally, provisions for watering planting areas shall be made where such care is required. VII. DURATION OF APPROVAL: The applicant shall complete all conditions of approval and obtain building permits for the proposed use within two (2) years of the date this decision becomes final, or obtain an extension of time pursuant to Section 22.36.010 of the County Code, or this approval shall be void. This decision becomes final twelve (12) days after the date of mailing, unless appealed by a party of interest. DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION Written by: Kyle Collins, Assistant Planner Reviewed by: Peter Gutowsky, Planning Manager 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 41 Attachment A - 44 4 t .. - 1 tEll-sill Cl'illi4 iLli e it 7 161211 00 00800 51.0 Acres Irrigation 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 42 Attachment B Commercial Garbage :Usti Itecpcling Service �5'e c: stand that dtft(:rent business typo have diffetctit garbage and Lt.:cycling needs. in bider to pinviilc service in Ole most efficient, cost ef festive and safe maturer, we consider several !actors when helping you detenoinc your be5i service option Un. usute slrc tort; at cess, type or business, lite lol;slinn of trees. ;.l:it, of ot'ctllead potvt•t Imes, and lite type of debris ate all tntput tont U. consider whin determining set vice lev: Is. 'Ve m'n mfr :a vat tel) of ;'tttlt:,ga; sits(' Yo, yt utrl; cmllcciiou sti:viae,. MON( cuing;curd lni,ita ,c•, ir<iniri a mon! :nail siyir garb;i,c container, n•r, :a lona load sryk: t•ar<lht srd recycling c.' tat iei .n t .t 5-:441,10o ml.uiury,!4 t:•t;yritnt: toll nail StllddIt' htiStiat'5SeS, .» Ihuur 1'i:t i.ln g minimal atnonnt . ni trash, may Ise :„est eivit:cd svtitt a I;atbap' toll cart, t 'r ;Iran a hent! load to nt osier. \Ve te.yt,le and you should tool. An at;l!tes5ive recyciing progisin cart keep vOui:.ithiigc coIlec00,1 (051s down ;t5,tke sure you recycle what you coli. Recommended Garbage Service bevels C)niy You know :;t. araC what yOlir needs twit! de, but ilii following guidelines cart i:eii: make that (Ictmnna:mon .)fifes 1citimule Iwo in flare 35.t'allnu cans pet xuut per week. 6 rusts -= ! cubic yard. Choose Imo: 15, 65 cm 95 -gallon toll t-,ats nt '. to 6 cubic vaui containers i+ejtaurants t nail waste s vet v heavy and the lr.o,ter combiner size and l<elluency of pick up :s t nticsl (i 35 -gallon cans ' i cultic yard C,usc _ from 1 to 6 tubsc yard tunta;uers, .,t v e' I once tv ,uuitilt:c unteS rvcry week np tinlerts Choose 11010 1 to 6 cultic yotal Conlitmet d, service:! mice os multiple rives .'VC 3' we,4k 1'rttek Ctear•Uice litquire:neuts hoot !o:i thieke are 1 1':'• n111. Willi a C4)11t.alre1 3ailnit ttvt'litead they ate 11 'O" c.!1 t'tut k length is 11 reit With forks down, tack 1crih is 3S cect. "(luck tura: lg radius is 50 feet. Truck icltuites 20 feet to make a l'20 degree tura Front Load Container Sizes Capacity, 1`1t;tit I yaicl I `` v,ud 6 66' 2 y.nd 6.66' 1 yard 66G 4 v;i c 1 6 66' 5 y,n ti 6.66' 6 y.utl 6.66' 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 1lci ':u_ s_<Ict 1_S'_witv'tc ct,j 2,5' 6-7 Cans 3.0' 10-12 cans 3 5' I_+ 15 cams 4 4' I Fi-21 gilts 4')' 24.25 cans 5.2' 30-34 cans 6.0' 36.40 eons 43 Commercial Garbage & Recycling Construction Specifications for Enclosures 2ft 2ft 1yd • lyd or or 2yd 2yd 10 ft h 1G4 ® ::.-tv 2ft 2ft 2ft 3yd 3yd 12-1411 h 4 -bye 2ft 18-2011 •NC)Yt A c+.nArr p>»a Nan dx,,A* aatas �'Vs,r.• n,arw ra+oNi ty anC sp^iaa ct ma Our trucks require a 40 foot approach to properly maneuver the garbage containers. The enclosure gate must he at least 10 feet wide to access the container and must swing open a full 180 degrees with a gate stop to hold it open. Container: Front View Side View: 1-3 yd 3 6' 8" ft - 0---Cr------<.7- 940E At 4 ar.d G yard tonintnotr, requeo ;loss 14, 80z01.4.$ Parking Lot 3- 1 1 2 40 ft Best spot 24 ft 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 1' Side View: 4-E yd 1 (Na VYT66,) ENCLOSURE PLACEMEN71 Whenever possible, place enclosures that provide a straight -on approach. • This location would he the best. It allows easy access and would not block parking for customers. • This location would be harder to access and would limit the size of the container. (Smaller containers require more frequent collection at a higher cost.) Please Hite that backing onto a busy roadway is always a concern. The safety of our drivers, customers, and pedestrians should always he consid- ered when placing container enclosures. 44 247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17 -938 -LR, 17 -939 -AD, and 17 -940 -SP 45 Z4 b '9C TENTATIVE SITE PLAN (006 - 8108 .10 884 e41 &O3Njyjf3l-ttC0\ZBB4-4W4nd0V\d(0I\toaoNoppdde\ 1\ 0\0 WI ATTACHMENT- 3 Notice of Appeal (Lee Casebeer et al) BLANK PAGE Land Use Application Appeal - BOCC DESCHUTES COUNTY 117 NW Lafayette Avenue PO Box 6005 Bend,OR 97703 541-388-6575 247-18-000412-A www.deschutes.org/cd cdd-webmaster@deschutes.org APPLICATION DESCRIPTION Type of Application: Appeal - BOCC Description of Work: LOCATION INFORMATION Property Address: Parcel: Owner: 21330 Young Ave, Bend, OR 97703 1612110000800 - Primary Address: APPLICANT INFORMATION Applicant: Business Name: Address: City: State: Zip Evolution Group LLC Evolution Group LLC Tim Weishaupt Fee Description Appeals - Administrative 920 SE Armour Dr Bend OR 97702 APPLICATION FEES Printed on: 06/01/2018 1 Ouantity Amount 1.00 Qty $250.00 Total Fees: $250.00 wd 85:6 8NY6/5 :paluud Jd ldlaoabuoipesuaii Nld sui1100 alAN jalyse0 :le;oj;diaaau 0 N jeegese0 eel :Jeiced :}unowy }uaW Bd N O O a;ep uoi;aesueJj LO£LbB 05L996Z apoa;unoaav 0090000LLZL9Ilowed Worksite address: 21330 YOUNG AVE, BEND, OR 97703 po/6J o.sa}n gosep. nnnnnn 814176US :elea ;dieoej ib9S �£ti :JagwnN ;dla3eI (D Q0 3 n1 r fn rt co � z a. Ar 13 n ~ o O a w 0 p7 -< CD w xx g (D b�ii .Vi o > V 0 0 < 1.0 U1 CO U1 (D `d -Z I,t+000-8 I.-LPZ puag :aDij10 ;d!aoati uogoesueal /ono0 sa}ngosaa Community Development Department Planning Division SulWing Srilety Division Environmental Saris Division P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005 Phone: (541) 388-6575 Fax: (541) 385-1764 http://www.deschutes.org/cd APPEAL APPLICATION EVERY NO OF APPEAL SHALL INCLUDE: 1. A statement describing the specific reasons for the appeal. 2. If the Board of County Commissioners is the Hearings Body, a request for review by the Board stating the reasons the Board should review the lower decision. 3. If the Board of County Commissioners is the Hearings Body and de novo review is desired, a request for de novo review by the Board, stating the reasons the Board should provide the de novo review as provided in Section 22.32.027 of Title 22. 4, If color exhibits are submitted, black and white copies with captions or shading delineating the color areas shall also be provided. It is the responsibility of the appellant to complete a Notice of Appeal as set forth in Chapter 22.32 of the County Code. The Notice of Appeal on the reverse side of this form must include the items listed above. Failure to complete all of the above may render an appeal invalid. Any additional comments should be included on the Notice of Appeal. Staff cannot advise a potential appellant as to whether the appellant is eligible to file an appeal (DCC Section 22.32.010) or whether an appeal is valid. Appellants should seek their own legal advice concerning those issues. Appellant's Name (print): Mailing Address [rig Land Use Application Being Appealed: Property Description: T Appellant's Signature: phone: (5 3 a l City/State/Zip: te ,( E gt7o' .C. ? ROAR . 941,41S/c u7? S Range (2- Section Tax Lot EXCEPT AS PROVI y D IN SECTION 22.32.024, APPELLANT SHALL PROVIDE A COMPLETE TRANSCRIPT OF AN FARING APPEALED, FROM RECORDED MAGNETIC TAPES PROVIDED BY THE PLANNING DIVISION UPON REQUEST (THERE IS A $5.00 FEE FOR EACH MAGNETIC TAPE RECORD). APPELLANT SHALL SUBMIT THE TRANSCRIPT TO THE PLANNING DIVISION NO LATER THAN THE CLOSE OF THE DAY FIVE (5) DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE SET FOR THE DE NOVO HEARING OR, FOR ON -THE -RECORD APPEALS, THE DATE SET FOR RECEIPT OF WRITTEN RECORDS. (over) bQu fiti/ Srr,'ie s 1'i r/i,rni,,f with Pride f rtJAL_ 10/15 NOTICE OF APPEAL (This page may be photocopied if additional space is needed.) Notice of Appeal May 12, 2018 We strongly appeal the approval of the permit to allow the construction & operation of a Marijuana growing & processing operation on property at 21330 Young Ave., Redmond, Oregon, 97756. The basis for our objections to the permit approval are: 1.There is not sufficient history by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on air quality standards for such a facility to adequately guarantee that there will not be odor pollution generated by the operation effecting surrounding properties and subsequently reducing in surrounding property values. The proposed Charcoal/Carbon air filters have no indicators to determine when the filters have depleted their effectiveness & need changed. If the owners do not change filters at recommended intervals, then pungent orders will be emitted into the outside air. 2. The commercial truck & employee vehicle traffic at the site will increase to a level not intended for rural land use standards. 3. The high value nature of the crop being grown on the property could create a security risk and increased criminal activity problems, adding the Law Enforcement's workload in the rural area. 4. The proximity of young infants living close to the operation is not a healthy environment that will generated by the growing & processing activities. 5. There is no stated requirement that a water use meter be installed on the property's domestic use well to insure that no domestic well water is used in the growing operation. 6. If the marijuana processing involves the use of High temperature & combustible grain alcohol to perform the process of obtaining a Full Extract Cannabis Oil product, then there is a potently high risk of an explosion & fire, if the process is not adequately ventilated & a fire suppression system installed prevent the fire from spreading to adjacent dwellings The area is without fire hydrants. 7. A fire suppression system should not be allowed to use the domestic well water as a source. Thank you for considering our position for appealing this approved proposed permit. We, the undersigned, agree with the above statements of concern in the appeal. Name Print Dennis Wirt Signaprej Address Phone Contact 8055 S. Canal Blvd. Redmond, OR. 541-420-8080 8151 S. Canal Blvd., Redmond, OR 503-459-1332 21455 Young,- PO Box 6483, Bend, OR. /J.Lee Casebee Kevin Thompson I'f' Page 2 of sq.473-14 '6"r\i‘ov)Wv, Name Printed -?e Notice of Appeal (continued) Signature May 12, 2018 Address Phone Contact '/ilt (Ci/1 Jr/S(/' 2) 30) Csq -575d— Or Cly/f( 7/. ) 'C(2 (/ /7th', /7/V 7'i 11 hte,114.00.(1 043-9° gEv St --9'05,3 13. (4. I5, [(if, (7, l:_21 • 6 -12e4 - F ( cyvd 6 t 7754, - 2120S 1.1-20,/i.s;1 rx•-t„ 651/0 Sid 4/: Arai (.6/' 1(3 Page 3 0 5 ) ectn 7Rioc,JW , ()/' '1773 9-7-Y57/ f2 9'67 3.9-99'7/ 7/zsz , Pot Farm imap://imap.gmaii.com:993/fetch>UID>/INBOX>108264?header... 0 0 W w 8 0 o 0 W 1 of 1 Subject: Pot Farm1 G/-/ From: Pot Farm Fight <p tfarmfight©"'sa gmail.com Date: 5/13/2018 5:32 PM To: Lcasebeer©gmail.com to IMG 3882-1PG IMG_3883.,JPG IMG_3884.,JPG 112 IMG 3885.IUOV rim AvD'i TI`oNA ko7ic� Y Some of the things I would like for you to bring up to the commissioners are as follows: 1. Water Issue: Irrigation & Well usage including being on a shared well (is that legal?), putting in a meter, and access to the well for the neighbor that shares. Will they have access to the well with the pot farm? If neighboring properties wells dry up, who is responsible? ATP LLC or the other property owners? 2. Permits: According to Deschutes Dial there was electoral/Mechanical work done without permits and a building built without permits. Have they gotten permits for these things or are they being charged daily for this? See attached Doc. 3. Buildings: Are the buildings they are going to be using for ANY business purposes up to code? 4. Property Taxes: The 2017 Property Taxes where due on 11-15-17 and according to Deschutes dial they have not been paid on all three properties ATP LLC owns. 21330 Young Ave, Bend, OR 97703 Owes: $3,516.64. 4800 SW Highland Ave, Redmond, OR 97756: owes $2,422.14.8290 SW 61st St. Redmond, OR 97756 owes $3,589.84 5. According to the application for Agriculture Building Exemption Form applicant notes that the land is being used for grazing pastures which is inaccurate. There have not been animals on the property for nearly 2 years or irrigation use (with an overgrowth of noxious weeds). They also should not be allowed farm deferral since they have not been using the land for anything except a illegal grow. 6. The owners have had an illegal grow. See Photos and dates 7. Owners drive transport Mature marijuana plant in the back of uncovered flat bed trucks. 8.5 different state license plates come and go from property. Many people who 9. Why have 2 different businesses applied for a marijuana grow site. Who is actually applying? Evolution LLC and Synergy Concepts LLC and who owns the property? We have been told there are multiple owners: Jacob Jenkins, Zacharlah Jenkins, Brett Berkowitz, Alejandro Elliott, Moose, and Burl Woods. 10. Is it legal to have felons run a Marijuana grow. Both Jacob Jenkins and Zachariah have felony's. Jacob has 4 that are known and Zachariah has 3. Including schedule 2 drug charges and violent crimes. This does not include the dozens of misdemeanor charges they have have been convicted of and a conspiracy to commit murder; treason; or a class A charge that was dismissed. —Attachments: Interoffice Code Enforement Report Form.pdf 27 bytes Jacob Bow Jenkins: ^ ~ 1,47- 4 - r4 q~ C11/4J • Offense Violation o 5/8/16 — Driving without Privileges — GUILTY 16v168567 � 8/27/01 — Failure to obey traffic control device, driving uninsured — Not Guilty — D366985 o 1O/3/95—Minor Possess/ Purchase Alcohol —GUILTY —V|5O8SS'D u 7'2I-g3—Minor Possess/ Purchase Alcohol — GUILTY —V|3D351'D o O/11/9Z—Violation ofwildlife License/Tag — GUILTY —FG20}99'D � 11/03/00 — Possession LT 1 oz. Marijuana & Drink in public place — GUILTY — Z901505 o 11/03/00 — Fail to Cross at Right Angle — GUILTY — Z901506 o D/2O/9S—Giving False Info for |asumncc/SQW[ofCitation/Warrant — GUILTY —V|SU764'D � Q/28/9S—DWS/Infraction — GUILTY —V|5O764'D o O/2O/9S—Careless Driving — NOT GUILTY —V|507G4'B o � Felony: o 10/10/2005 — Driving under the Influence of Intoxicants — NOT GUILTY - 05C51140 o 7/10/O3—DUI — Not Guilty —O3[47O81 o 5/1/99 — Possession of Forged Instrument — "Event Cancelled — L133246 Guilty on case number 990746425 o 12/l2/97—Felon /nPossess Firearm — Guilty —2098OS821A o 12/12/97 — Manufacture/Delivery of Controlled Sub —Schedule 2'Guilty 'J0900S821A o 12/12/97 — Possession controlled Sub — SC 2 —Dismissed - 209805821A m 9/13/95 — Delivery of Marijuana for Payment — Guilty —gG[RQOO4K1S o 9/13/9S—Possession ofControlled Sub 1—Guilty —96CRODO4u43 o 5-11-95 — Burglary in the Second Degree — Dismissed — 9530501-D o 4/5/93 — Conspiracy to Commit Murder; Treason; or a Class A - Dismissed — 93CR0409ST * Misdemeanor: o 4-24-98 — Assult in the 4th Degree — (G) CR80578 o 7/17/0B—Criminal Driving while Suspended — GUILTY— 05C51140 o J/22/O5—Criminal driving — Suspended —Guilty CR0510422 o 4/14/U4—Criminal driving — Revoked - Guilty Z13O9S34 o 8/27/01 — Criminal Driving — Suspended Guilty 011051176 o 5/1/99 — Criminadriving — Suspended — Event Canceled. - B934394 o 7-13-05 — Criminal Driving while Revoked — Guilty — D054019T p 7'13'0I—Criminal Mischief 2'mdegree — Dismissed 'K802Z231 o 7-13-02 - Driving Uninsured -Convicted - M1022221 o 7'13'0Z'criminal driving suspend — Convicted '»W0Z2Z21 u 7'13'02 failure to perform duties — property damage Dismissed - M1022221 o 7'13'0I'reckless driving Dismissed 'K8|U22JJ1 o 12/1/03 - contempt of court - Dismissed —K8|0ZJ221 o 1'1O'99—DUI' — Guilty —Z62QO2Q o 1/l0/9S—Giving False Information bzPolice officer — Guilty —ZGZDO2g o 1/1O/99—Criminal Driving — Suspended — Dismissed —Z62D03O O 3/18/98 — Harassment - Dismissed — CR80602 O 3/18/98—Criminal K4ischief|nthe Second Degree '0smissedCR806D2 O 3/18/98 — Theft . �n]�de8ree'QismisoedCRQO6O2 o 3/18/98 — Obstructing Governmental or Judicial Administratin — Dismisse- CR80602 o 5/31/97 —Attempt to Commit a Class C/ Unclassified Felony— Dismissed - CR71416-D n 5/31/97 — Driving Uninsured - Dismissed - CR71416-D cit“, C2,/&*N47- *� o 4/1/97 - Attempt to Commit a Class C/ Unclassified Felony - Guilty CR71013-D o 2/2/97-Removal ofKeg Identification -Dismissed -CR70492'D o 2/2/97 - Furnishing Alcohol to Person under 21 - Dismissed -CR70492-D �� o 9/8/96-DUU-Guihy-CR618Z�D - �'�a � 9/@/96-Redk�s Q�v|n8-D�n�sed-CRG1023-D ^ o 8/4/96Theftinthe3=�eQree-Redummdto�esser�h�r0�-�R61S�6-� m 6/31/96Theft inthe 3rd Degree -Guilty -CR6153G-D � Asmaulth`theFnurthDegree-Dismisned- CR60625-D o 2/28/96Assault inthe Fourth Degree -Dismissed -[RGUG2S-D • 4/-.95 Theft i-the 'n1 -~ree Guilty CR51648-D o l2-23-94Assault hmthe Fourth Degree -Guilty- 95CRU630M o 2-23-95 Theft inthe Third Degree -Guilty -CRSO475-D �- o 6-14-94 Minor Possess/Purch - Dismissed - 95CR0164M, CR41574-D n 6/14/94Furnishing Alcohol toPerson under 21-Guilty -9SCRO1G4NY,CR41574-D o 6/14/94 furnishing Alcohol to Person under 21 - Dismissed 95CR0164M, CR41574-D o 4-24-94Theft inthe Third Degree -GuUty-CR411UD-D o 1/23/94Criminal Mischief inthe Second Degree -Dismissed -CR40345'D o 1/J3/94Criminal mischief inthe Second Degree -Dismissed -CR4D345'D o 1/23/94Recklessly Endangering Another Person -Dismissed -CR4O345'D o 1/23/94Minor Possess/Purchase Alcohol -Convicted -CR4D34S-D o 10/23/94 Contempt of Court - Dismissed - CR31611-D m 7/2/93Assault inthe Fourth Degree -Guilty -CRB16l1-O o 7/2/93 Assault in the Fourth Degree - Dismissed - CR31611-D o 7/2/93 Assault in the Fourth Degree - Dismissed - CR31611-D o 7/2/A3-Harassment -Dismissed -CR31611-0 o 7/2/93 - Harassment - Dismissed - CR31611-D o 7/2/93 - Harassment - Dismissed - CR31611-D o * Offense Infraction o 1/1[/ggOperation amotor vehicle w/o license -Guilty -2G2O026 o lO/17/95-DWS/Infraction 8\driving uninsured -Guilty -N-3712S95-D u lO/O/95-DWS/Infraction g'Driving uninsured -Guilty 'Otmt|on#N37439N3743995-D o 8/13/92-Exceed Maximum Speed -Guilty 'Citat(on#381B4-TRI¢91O4-D o 4/16/97-Driving Uninsured B'op. motor vehnolicense -Guilty Citatimn#H3Q652S-83865J5Q7-D o 9/3/94-Failure tnuse safety Belts -Guilty -84U406OT'D o 1-1O-99-Driving Uninsured -Guilty -Z620U27 u 9/8/96 - DWS/Infraction - Dismissed - N4506796-D o 9/8/96 - Drive without Lights - Dismissed - N4506796-D � 9/8/96-Driving Uninsured -Guilty 'N4SO6796-D ZachahahDwayne Jenkins Offense Violation p---~~~'~ � 7/1/O7—Violation Driving while Suspended —Guilty 'Q810407 Jr • 7/1/07 — Driving Uninsured — Dismissed — 8010407 • Z/t1/12—Unlawful parking |naWinter Recreation Parking — Dismissed —E1QD3987 � 9/23/16—Violation aSpeed Limit — Convicted —16V|1488Q3 � 2/28/01 — Operating Vehicle w/o Driving Privileges — Dismissed — 3471801 Personal Injury 2'27-03Isaac Ryan DunmQanvsZachadohDJenkins —Q3CX009OSF Offense Felony • — Felon PossesFirearm — Guilty — 09FE1522SF • 9/1/U4—Manu/Del Controlled Sub —8CI—Convicted —04FE11418T • 9/1/O4—Manu/Del Controlled Sub —SC2—Dismissed —O4FE1141ST • 9/1/04 — Poss Controlled Sub 2 — Dismissed — 04FE11415T � g/1/O4—PoasLT1Oz. Marijuana — Dismissed '04FE11415T • 1/3O/08—PossControlled Sub 2—Convicted —03FED1G0ST • 1/3O/03—Failure toCarry/Present License — Dismissed -O3F[8168ST Offense Misdemeanor • Recktess Driving: Dismissed - M1011717 � 2/28/01: Assault in the Fourth Degree: Dismissed - M1011717 ATTACHMENT- 4 DCC 18.116.330 BLANK PAGE Chapter 18.116. SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS 18.116.330. Marijuana Production, Processing, and Retailing A. Applicability. Section 18.116.330 applies to: 1. Marijuana Production in the EFU, MUA-10, and RI zones. 2, Marijuana Processing in the EFU, MUA-10, TeC, TeCR, TuC, Tul, RI, and SUBP zones 3. Marijuana Retailing in the RSC, TeC, TeCR, TuC, Tul, RC, RI, SUC, SUTC, and SUBP zones. 4. Marijuana Wholesaling in the RSC, TeC, TeCR, TuC, RC, SUC, and SUBP zones. B. Marijuana production and marijuana processing. Marijuana production and marijuana processing shall be subject to the following standards and criteria: 1. Minimum Lot Area. a. In the EFU and MUA-10 zones, the subject legal lot of record shall have a minimum lot area of five (5) acres. 2. Indoor Production and Processing. a. In the MUA-10 zone, marijuana production and processing shall be located entirely within one or more fully enclosed buildings with conventional or post framed opaque, rigid walls and roof covering. Use of greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar non -rigid structures is prohibited. b. In the EFU zone, marijuana production and processing shall only be located in buildings, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar structures. c. In all zones, marijuana production and processing are prohibited in any outdoor area. 3. Maximum Mature Plant Canopy Size. In the EFU zone, the maximum canopy area for mature marijuana plants shall apply as follows: a. Parcels from 5 acres to less than 10 acres in lot area: 2,500 square feet. b. Parcels equal to or greater than 10 acres to less than 20 acres in lot area: 5,000 square feet. The maximum canopy area for mature marijuana plants may be increased to 10,000 square feet upon demonstration by the applicant to the County that: i. The marijuana production operation was lawfully established prior to January 1, 2015; and ii. The increased mature marijuana plant canopy area will not generate adverse impact of visual, odor, noise, lighting, privacy or access greater than the impacts associated with a 5,000 square foot canopy area operation. c. Parcels equal to or greater than 20 acres to less than 40 acres in lot area: 10,000 square feet. d. Parcels equal to or greater than 40 acres to less than 60 acres in lot area: 20,000 square feet. e. Parcels equal to or greater than 60 acres in lot area: 40,000 square feet. 4. Maximum Building Floor Area. In the MUA-10 zone, the maximum building floor area used for all activities associated with marijuana production and processing on the subject property shall be: a. Parcels from 5 acres to less than 10 acres in lot area: 2,500 square feet. b. Parcels equal to or greater than 10 acres: 5,000 square feet. 5. Limitation on License/Grow Site per Parcel. No more than one (1) Oregon Liquor Control Commission (OLCC) licensed marijuana production or Oregon Health Authority (OHA) registered medical marijuana grow site shall be allowed per legal Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) parcel or lot. 6. Setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply to all marijuana production and processing areas and buildings: a. Minimum Yard Setback/Distance from Lot Lines: 100 feet. b. Setback from an off-site dwelling: 300 feet. For the purposes of this criterion, an off-site dwelling includes those proposed off-site dwellings with a building permit application submitted to Deschutes County prior to submission of the marijuana production or processing application to Deschutes County. c. Exception: Any reduction to these setback requirements may be granted by the Planning Director or Hearings Body provided the applicant demonstrates the reduced setbacks afford equal or greater mitigation of visual, odor, noise, lighting, privacy, and access impacts. 7. Separation Distances. Minimum separation distances shall apply as follows: a. The use shall be located a minimum of 1000 feet from: i. A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance is compulsory under Oregon Revised Statutes 339.010, et seq., including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the school; ii. A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching children as described in ORS 339.030(1)(a), including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the school; iii. A licensed child care center or licensed preschool, including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the child care center or preschool. This does not include licensed or unlicensed child care which occurs at or in residential structures; iv. A youth activity center; and v. National monuments and state parks. b. For purposes of DCC 18.116.330(B)(7), all distances shall be measured from the lot line of the affected properties listed in DCC 18.116.330(B)(7)(a) to the closest point of the buildings and land area occupied by the marijuana producer or marijuana processor. c. A change in use of another property to those identified in DCC 18.116.330(B)(7) shall not result in the marijuana producer or marijuana processor being in violation of DCC 18.116.330(B)(7) if the use is: i. Pending a local land use decision; ii. Licensed or registered by the State of Oregon; or iii. Lawfully established. 8. Access. Marijuana production over 5,000 square feet of canopy area for mature marijuana plants shall comply with the following standards. a. Have frontage on and legal direct access from a constructed public, county, or state road; or b. Have access from a private road or easement serving only the subject property. c. If the property takes access via a private road or easement which also serves other properties, the applicant shall obtain written consent to utilize the easement or private road for marijuana production access from all owners who have access rights to the private road or easement. The written consent shall: i. Be on a form provided by the County and shall contain the following information; ii. Include notarized signatures of all owners, persons and properties holding a recorded interest in the private road or easement; Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) iii. Include a description of the proposed marijuana production or marijuana processing operation; and iv. Include a legal description of the private road or easement. 9. Lighting. Lighting shall be regulated as follows: a. Inside building lighting, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar structures, used for marijuana production shall not be visible outside the building from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on the following day. b. Lighting fixtures shall be fully shielded in such a manner that all light emitted directly by the lamp or a diffusing element, or indirectly by reflection or refraction, is projected below the horizontal plane through the lowest light - emitting part. c. Light cast by exterior light fixtures other than marijuana grow lights shall comply with DCC 15.10, Outdoor Lighting Control. 10. Odor. As used in DCC 18.116.330(B)(10), building means the building, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and other similar structures, used for marijuana production or marijuana processing. a. The building shall be equipped with an effective odor control system which must at all times prevent unreasonable interference of neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. b. An odor control system is deemed permitted only after the applicant submits a report by a mechanical engineer licensed in the State of Oregon demonstrating that the system will control odor so as not to unreasonably interfere with neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. c. Private actions alleging nuisance or trespass associated with odor impacts are authorized, if at all, as provided in applicable state statute. d. The odor control system shall: i. Consist of one or more fans. The fan(s) shall be sized for cubic feet per minute (CFM) equivalent to the volume of the building (length multiplied by width multiplied by height) divided by three. The filter(s) shall be rated for the required CFM; or ii. Utilize an alternative method or technology to achieve equal to or greater odor mitigation than provided by (i) above. e. The system shall be maintained in working order and shall be in use. 11. Noise. Noise produced by marijuana production and marijuana processing shall comply with the following: a. Sustained noise from mechanical equipment used for heating, ventilation, air condition, odor control, fans and similar functions shall not exceed 30 dB(A) measured at any property line between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day. b. Sustained noise from marijuana production is exempt from protections of DCC 9.12 and ORS 30.395, Right to Farm. Intermittent noise for accepted farming practices is permitted. 12. Screening and Fencing. The following screening standards shall apply to greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar non -rigid structures and land areas used for marijuana production and processing: a. Subject to DCC 18.84, Landscape Management Combining Zone approval, if applicable. Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) b. Fencing shall be finished in a muted earth tone that blends with the surrounding natural landscape and shall not be constructed of temporary materials such as plastic sheeting, hay bales, tarps, etc., and shall be subject to DCC 18.88, Wildlife Area Combining Zone, if applicable. c. Razor wire, or similar, shall be obscured from view or colored a muted earth tone that blends with the surrounding natural landscape. d. The existing tree and shrub cover screening the development from the public right-of-way or adjacent properties shall be retained to the maximum extent possible. This provision does not prohibit maintenance of existing lawns, removal of dead, diseased or hazardous vegetation; the commercial harvest of forest products in accordance with the Oregon Forest Practices Act; or agricultural use of the land. 13. Water. The applicant shall provide: a. A copy of a water right permit, certificate, or other water use authorization from the Oregon Water Resource Department; or b. A statement that water is supplied from a public or private water provider, along with the name and contact information of the water provider; or c. Proof from the Oregon Water Resources Depar fluent that the water to be used is from a source that does not require a water right. 14. Fire protection for processing of cannabinoid extracts. Processing of cannabinoid extracts shall only be permitted on properties located within the boundaries of or under contract with a fire protection district. 15. Utility Verification. A statement from each utility company proposed to serve the operation, stating that each such company is able and willing to serve the operation, shall be provided. 16. Security Cameras. If security cameras are used, they shall be directed to record only the subject property and public rights-of-way, except as required to comply with requirements of the OLCC or the OHA. 17. Secure Waste Disposal. Marijuana waste shall be stored in a secured waste receptacle in the possession of and under the control of the OLCC licensee or OHA Person Responsible for the Grow Site (PRMG). 18. Residency. In the MUA-10 zone, a minimum of one of the following shall reside in a dwelling unit on the subject property: a. An owner of the subject property; b. A holder of an OLCC license for marijuana production, provided that the license applies to the subject property; or c. A person registered with the OHA as a person designated to produce marijuana by a registry identification cardholder, provided that the registration applies to the subject property. 19. Nonconformance. All medical marijuana grow sites lawfully established prior to June 8, 2016 by the Oregon Health Authority shall comply with the provisions of DCC 18.116.330(B)(9) by September 8, 2016 and with the provisions of DCC 18.116.330(B)(10-12, 16, 17) by December 8, 2016. 20. Prohibited Uses. a. In the EFU zone, the following uses are prohibited: i. A new dwelling used in conjunction with a marijuana crop; Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) ii. A farm stand, as described in ORS 215.213(1)(r) or 215.283(1)(o), used in conjunction with a marijuana crop; iii. A commercial activity, as described in ORS 215.213(2)(c) or 215.283(2)(a), carried on in conjunction a marijuana crop; and iv. Agri -tourism and other commercial events and activities in conjunction with a marijuana crop. b. In the MUA-10 Zone, the following uses are prohibited: i. Commercial activities in conjunction with farm use when carried on in conjunction with a marijuana crop. c. In the EFU, MUA-10, and Rural Industrial zones, the following uses are prohibited on the same property as marijuana production: i. Guest Lodge. ii. Guest Ranch. iii. Dude Ranch. iv. Destination Resort. v. Public Parks. vi. Private Parks. vii. Events, Mass Gatherings and Outdoor Mass Gatherings. viii. Bed and Breakfast. ix. Room and Board Arrangements. C. Marijuana Retailing. Marijuana retailing, including recreational and medical marijuana sales, shall be subject to the following standards and criteria: 1. Hours. Hours of operation shall be no earlier than 9:00 a.m. and no later than 7:00 p.m. on the same day. 2. Odor. The building, or portion thereof, used for marijuana retailing shall be designed or equipped to prevent detection of marijuana plant odor off premise by a person of normal sensitivity. 3. Window Service. The use shall not have a walk-up or drive-thru window service. 4. Secure Waste Disposal. Marijuana waste shall be stored in a secured waste receptacle in the possession of and under the control of the OLCC licensee or OHA registrant. 5. Minors. No person under the age of 21 shall be permitted to be present in the building, or portion thereof, occupied by the marijuana retailer, except as allowed by state law. 6. Co -Location of Related Activities and Uses. Marijuana and tobacco products shall not be smoked, ingested, or otherwise consumed in the building space occupied by the marijuana retailer. In addition, marijuana retailing shall not be co -located on the same lot or parcel or within the same building with any marijuana social club or marijuana smoking club. 7. Separation Distances. Minimum separation distances shall apply as follows: a. The use shall be located a minimum of 1,000 feet from: i. A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance is compulsory under Oregon Revised Statutes 339.010, et seq., including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the school; ii. A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching children as described in ORS 339.030(1)(a), including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the school; iii. A licensed child care center or licensed preschool, including any parking lot Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) appurtenant thereto and any property used by the child care center or preschool. This does not include licensed or unlicensed family child care which occurs at or in residential structures; iv. A youth activity center; v. National monuments and state parks; and vi. Any other marijuana retail facility licensed by the OLCC or marijuana dispensary registered with the 0I -IA. b. For purposes of DCC 18.116.330(B)(7), distance shall be measured from the lot line of the affected property to the closest point of the building space occupied by the marijuana retailer. For purposes of DCC 18.116.330(B)(7)(a)( vi), distance shall be measured from the closest point of the building space occupied by one marijuana retailer to the closest point of the building space occupied by the other marijuana retailer. c. A change in use to another property to a use identified in DCC 18.116.330(B)(7), after a marijuana retailer has been licensed by or registered with the State of Oregon shall not result in the marijuana retailer being in violation of DCC 18.116.330(B)(7). D. Annual Reporting 1. An annual report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department by the real property owner or licensee, if different, each February 1, documenting all of the following as of December 31 of the previous year, including the applicable fee as adopted in the current County Fee Schedule and a fully executed Consent to Inspect Premises form: a. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the: i. Land use decision and permits. ii. Fire, health, safety, waste water, and building codes and laws. iii. State of Oregon licensing requirements. b. Failure to timely submit the annual report, fee, and Consent to Inspect Premises form or to demonstrate compliance with DCC 18.116.330(C)(1)(a) shall serve as acknowledgement by the real property owner and licensee that thc otherwise allowed use is not in compliance with Deschutes County Code; authorizes permit revocation under DCC Title 22, and may be relied upon by the State of Oregon to deny new or license renewal(s) for the subject use. c. Other information as may be reasonably required by the Planning Director to ensure compliance with Deschutes County Code, applicable State regulations, and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. d. Marijuana Control Plan to be established and maintained by the Community Development Department. e. Conditions of Approval Agreement to be established and maintained by the Community Development Department. f. This infoiniation shall be public record subject to ORS 192.502(17). (Ord. 2016-015 §10, 2016) 18.116.340. Marijuana Production Registered by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) A. Applicability. Section 18.116.340 applies to: 1. All marijuana production registered by OHA prior to June 1, 2016; and 2. All marijuana production registered by OHA on or after June 1 2016 until the effective date of Ordinances 2016-015, 2016-16, 2016-17, and 2016-18, at which time Ordinances 2016-015 through Ordinance 2016-018 shall apply. B. All marijuana production registered by OHA prior to June 1, 2016 shall comply with the following standards by September 15, 2016: 1. Lighting. Lighting shall be regulated as follows: d. Inside building lighting, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar structures, used for marijuana production shall not be visible outside the building from 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. on the following day. e. Lighting fixtures shall be fully shielded in such a manner that all light emitted directly by the lamp or a diffusing element, or indirectly by reflection or refraction, is projected below the horizontal plane through the lowest light - emitting part. f. Light cast by exterior light fixtures other than marijuana grow lights shall comply with DCC 15.10, Outdoor Lighting Control. C. All marijuana production registered by OHA prior to June 1, 2016 shall comply with the following standards by December 15, 2016: 1. Odor. As used in DCC 18.116.330(B)(10), building means the building, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and other similar structures, used for marijuana production or marijuana processing. a. The building shall be equipped with an effective odor control system which must at all times prevent unreasonable interference of neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. b. An odor control system is deemed permitted only after the applicant submits a report by a mechanical engineer licensed in the State of Oregon demonstrating that the system will control odor so as not to unreasonably interfere with neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. c. Private actions alleging nuisance or trespass associated with odor impacts are authorized, if at all, as provided in applicable state statute. d. The odor control system shall: i. Consist of one or more fans. The fan(s) shall be sized for cubic feet per minute (CFM) equivalent to the volume of the building (length multiplied by width multiplied by height) divided by three. The filter(s) shall be rated for the required CFM; or ii. Utilize an alternative method or technology to achieve equal to or greater odor mitigation than provided by i. above. e. The system shall be maintained in working order and shall be in use. 2. Noise. Noise produced by marijuana production and marijuana processing shall comply with the following: a. Sustained noise from mechanical equipment used for heating, ventilation, air condition, odor control, fans and similar functions shall not exceed 30 dB(A) measured at any property line between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day. b. Sustained noise from marijuana production is not subject to the Right to Farm Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) protections in DCC 9.12 and ORS 30.395. Intermittent noise for accepted farming practices is however permitted. 3. Screening and Fencing. The following screening standards shall apply to greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar non -rigid structures and land areas used for marijuana production and processing: e. Subject to DCC 18.84, Landscape Management Combining Zone approval, if applicable. f. Fencing shall be finished in a muted earth tone that blends with the surrounding natural landscape and shall not be constructed of temporary materials such as plastic sheeting, hay bales, tarps, etc., and shall be subject to DCC 18.88, Wildlife Area Combining Zone, if applicable. g. Razor wire, or similar, shall be obscured from view or colored a muted earth tone that blends with the surrounding natural landscape. h. The existing tree and shrub cover screening the development from the public right-of-way or adjacent properties shall be retained to the maximum extent possible. This provision does not prohibit maintenance of existing lawns, removal of dead, diseased or hazardous vegetation; the commercial harvest of forest products in accordance with the Oregon Forest Practices Act; or agricultural use of the land. 4. Water. The applicant shall provide: d. A copy of a water right permit, certificate, or other water use authorization from the Oregon Water Resource Department; or e. A statement that water is supplied from a public or private water provider, along with the name and contact information of the water provider; or f. Proof from the Oregon Water Resources Department that the water to be used is from a source that does not require a water right. 5. Security Cameras. If security cameras are used, they shall be directed to record only the subject property and public rights-of-way, except as required to comply with requirements of the OLCC or the OHA. 6. Secure Waste Disposal. Marijuana waste shall be stored in a secured waste receptacle in the possession of and under the control of the OLCC licensee or OHA Person Responsible for the Grow Site (PRMG). D. All new marijuana production registered by OHA on or after June 1, 2016 shall comply DCC 18.116.340(A -C) and the following standards: 1. Shall only be located in the following zones a. EFU; b. MUA-10; or c. Rural Industrial in the vicinity of Deschutes Junction. 2. Minimum Lot Area. b. In the EFU and MUA-10 zones, the subject property shall have a minimum lot area of five (5) acres. 3. Maximum Building Floor Area. In the MUA-10 zone, the maximum building floor area used for all activities associated with medical marijuana production on the subject property shall be: a. Parcels from 5 acres to less than 10 acres in area: 2,500 square feet. b. Parcels equal to or greater than 10 acres: 5,000 square feet. Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) 4.. Setbacks. The following setbacks shall apply to all marijuana production areas and buildings: c. Minimum Yard Setback/Distance from Lot Lines: 100 feet. d. Setback from an off-site dwelling: 300 feet. For the purposes of this criterion, an off-site dwelling includes those proposed off-site dwellings with a building permit application submitted to Deschutes County prior to submission of the marijuana production or processing application to Deschutes County. c. Exception: Reductions to these setback requirements may be granted at the discretion of the Planning Director or Hearings Body provided the applicant demonstrates that the reduced setbacks afford equal or greater mitigation of visual, odor, noise, lighting, privacy, and access impacts. 5. Indoor Production and Processing. d. In the MUA-10 zone, marijuana production shall be located entirely within one or more fully enclosed buildings with conventional or post framed opaque, rigid walls and roof covering. Use of greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar non -rigid structures is prohibited. e. In the EFU zone, marijuana production shall only be located in buildings, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and similar structures. f. In all zones, marijuana production is prohibited in any outdoor area. 6. Maximum Mature Plant Canopy Size. In the EFU zone, the maximum canopy area for mature marijuana plants shall apply as follows: f. Parcels from 5 acres to less than 10 acres in lot area: 2,500 square feet. g. Parcels equal to or greater than 10 acres to less than 20 acres in lot area: 5,000 square feet. The maximum canopy area for mature marijuana plants may be increased to 10,000 square feet upon demonstration by the applicant to the County that: i. The marijuana production operation was lawfully established prior to January 1, 2015; and ii. The increased mature marijuana plant canopy area will not generate adverse impact of visual, odor, noise, lighting, privacy or access greater than the impacts associated with a 5,000 square foot canopy area operation. h. Parcels equal to or greater than 20 acres to less than 40 acres in lot area: 10,000 square feet. i. Parcels equal to or greater than 40 acres to less than 60 acres in lot area: 20,000 square feet. j. Parcels equal to or greater than 60 acres in lot area: 40,000 square feet. 7. Separation Distances. Minimum separation distances shall apply as follows: a. The use shall be located a minimum of 1000 feet from: i. A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance is compulsory under Oregon Revised Statutes 339.010, et seq., including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the school; ii. A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching children as described in ORS 339.030(1)(a), including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the school; iii. A licensed child care center or licensed preschool, including any parking lot appurtenant thereto and any property used by the child care center or preschool. This does not include licensed or unlicensed child care which occurs at or in residential structures; iv. A youth activity center; and v. National monuments and state parks. Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) b. For purposes of DCC 18.116.330(B)(7), all distances shall be measured from the lot line of the affected properties listed in DCC 18.116.330(B)(7)(a) to the closest point of the buildings and land area occupied by the marijuana producer or marijuana processor. c. A change in use of another property to those identified in DCC 18.116.330(B)(7) shall not result in the marijuana producer or marijuana processor being in violation of DCC 18.116.330(B)(7) if the use is: iv. Pending a local land use decision; v. Registered by the State of Oregon; or vi. Lawfully established. 8. Access. Marijuana production over 5,000 square feet of canopy area for mature marijuana plants shall comply with the following standards. d. Have frontage on and legal direct access from a constructed public, county, or state road; or e. Have access from a private road or easement serving only the subject property. f. If the property takes access via a private road or easement which also serves other properties, the applicant shall obtain written consent to utilize the easement or private road for marijuana production access from all owners who have access rights to the private road or easement. The written consent shall: v. Be on a form provided by the County and shall contain the following information; vi. Include notarized signatures of all owners, persons and properties holding a recorded interest in the private road or easement; vii. Include a description of the proposed marijuana production or marijuana processing operation; and viii. Include a legal description of the private road or easement. 9. Residency. In the MUA-10 zone, a minimum of one of the following shall reside in a dwelling unit on the subject property: a. An owner of the subject property; or b. A person registered with the OHA as a person designated to produce marijuana by a registry identification cardholder, provided that the registration applies to the subject property. 10. Annual Reporting. An annual report shall be submitted to the Community Development Department by the real property owner or licensee, if different, each February 1, documenting all of the following as of December 31 of the previous year, including the applicable fee as adopted in the current County Fee Schedule and a fully executed Consent to Inspect Premises form: a. Documentation demonstrating compliance with the: iv. Land use decision and permits. v. Fire, health, safety, waste water, and building codes and laws. vi. State of Oregon licensing requirements. b. Failure to timely submit the annual report, fee, and Consent to Inspect Premises form or to demonstrate compliance with DCC 18.116.330(C)(1)(a) shall serve as acknowledgement by the real property owner and licensee that the otherwise allowed use is not in compliance with Deschutes County Code; authorizes permit revocation under DCC Title 22, and may be relied upon by the State of Oregon to deny new or license renewal(s) for the subject use. Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) c. Other information as may be reasonably required by the Planning Director to ensure compliance with Deschutes County Code, applicable State regulations, and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. d. Marijuana Control Plan to be established and maintained by the Community Development Department. e. Conditions of Approval Agreement to be established and maintained by the Community Development Department. f. This information shall be public record subject to ORS 192.502(17). 11.Prohibited Uses. a. In the EFU zone, the following uses are prohibited: v. A new dwelling used in conjunction with a marijuana crop; vi. A farm stand, as described in ORS 215.213(1)(r) or 215.283(1)(o), used in conjunction with a marijuana crop; vii. A commercial activity, as described in ORS 215.213(2)(c) or 215.283(2)(a), carried on in conjunction a marijuana crop; and viii. Agri -tourism and other commercial events and activities in conjunction with a marijuana crop. b. In the MUA-10 Zone, the following uses are prohibited: i. Commercial activities in conjunction with farm use when carried on in conjunction with a marijuana crop. c. In the EFU, MUA-10, and Rural Industrial zones, the following uses are prohibited on the same property as marijuana production: i. Guest Lodge. ii. Guest Ranch. iii. Dude Ranch. iv. Destination Resort. v. Public Parks. vi. Private Parks. vii. Events, Mass Gatherings and Outdoor Mass Gatherings. viii. Bed and Breakfast. ix. Room and Board Arrangements. (Ord. 2016-019 §1, 2016) Chapter 18.116 (2/2017) BLANK PAGE ATTACHMENT- 5 DCC 18.116.330 BLANK PAGE Chapter 18.124. SITE PLAN REVIEW 18.124.010. Purpose. 18.124.020. Elements of Site Plan. 18.124.030. Approval Required. 18.124.040. Contents and Procedure. 18.124.050. Decision on Site Plan. 18.124.060. Approval Criteria. 18.124.070. Required Minimum Standards. 18.124.080. Other Conditions. 18.124.090. Right of Way Improvement Standards. 18.124.010. Purpose. DCC 18.124.010 provides for administrative review of the design of certain developments and improvements in order to promote functional, safe, innovative and attractive site development compatible with the natural and man-made environment. (Ord. 91-020 §1, 1991) 18.124.020. Elements of Site Plan. The elements of a site plan are: The layout and design of all existing and proposed improvements, including, but not limited to, buildings, structures, parking, circulation areas, outdoor storage areas, bicycle parking, landscape areas, service and delivery areas, outdoor recreation areas, retaining walls, signs and graphics, cut and fill actions, accessways, pedestrian walkways, buffering and screening measures and street furniture. (Ord. 93-043 §22D, 1993; Ord. 93-005 §6, 1993) 18.124.030. Approval Required. A. No building, grading, parking, land use, sign or other required permit shall be issued for a use subject to DCC 18.124.030, nor shall such a use be commenced, enlarged, altered or changed until a final site plan is approved according to DCC Title 22, the Uniform Development Procedures Ordinance. B. The provisions of DCC 18.124.030 shall apply to the following: 1. All conditional use permits where a site plan is a condition of approval; 2. Multiple -family dwellings with more than three units; 3. All commercial uses that require parking facilities; 4. All industrial uses; 5. All other uses that serve the general public or that otherwise require parking facilities, including, but not limited to, landfills, schools, utility facilities, churches, community buildings, cemeteries, mausoleums, crematories, airports, parks and recreation facilities and livestock sales yards; and 6. As specified for Flood Plain Zones (FP) and Surface Mining Impact Area Combining Zones (SM1A). 7. Non-commercial wind energy system generating greater than 15 to 100 kW of electricity. C. The provisions of DCC 18.124.030 shall not apply to uses involving the stabling and training of equine in the EFU zone, noncommercial stables and horse events not requiring a conditional use permit. D. Noncompliance with a final approved site plan shall be a zoning ordinance violation. E. As a condition of approval of any action not included in DCC 18.124.030(B), the Planning Director or Hearings Body may require site plan approval prior to the issuance of any permits. Chapter 18.124 1 (09/2014) (Ord. 2011-009 §1, 2011; Ord. 2003-034 §2, 2003; Ord. 94-008 §14, 1994; Ord. 91-038 §1, 1991; Ord. 91-020 §1, 1991; Ord. 86-032 §1, 1986) 18.124.040. Contents and Procedure. A. Any site plan shall be filed on a form provided by the Planning Department and shall be accompanied by such drawings, sketches and descriptions necessary to describe the proposed development. A plan shall not be deemed complete unless all information requested is provided. B. Prior to filing a site plan, the applicant shall confer with the Planning Director or his representative concerning the requirements for formal application. C. After the pre -application conference, the applicant shall submit a site development plan, an inventory of existing plant materials including all trees six inches in diameter or greater and other significant species, a landscape plan and architectural drawings including floor plans and elevations. D. The site plan shall indicate the following: 1. Access to site from adjacent rights of way, streets and arterial. 2. Parking and circulation areas. 3. Location, dimensions (height and bulk) and design of buildings and signs. 4. Orientation of windows and doors. 5. Entrances and exits. 6. Private and shared outdoor recreation spaces. 7. Pedestrian circulation. 8. Public play areas. 9. Service areas for uses such as mail delivery, trash disposal, above ground utilities, loading and delivery. 10. Areas to be landscaped. 11. Exterior lighting. 12. Special provisions for disabled persons. 13. Existing topography of the site at intervals appropriate to the site, but in no case having a contour interval greater than 10 feet. 14. Signs. 15. Public improvements. 16. Drainfield locations. 17. Bicycle parking facilities, with location of racks, signage, lighting, and showing the design of the shelter for long term parking facilities. 18. Any required bicycle commuter facilities. 19. Other site elements and information which will assist in the evaluation of site development. E. The landscape plan shall indicate: 1. The size, species and approximate locations of existing natural plant materials proposed to be retained and new plant materials proposed to be placed on site. 2. Proposed site contouring. 3. An explanation of how drainage and soil erosion is to be dealt with during and after construction. (Ord. 2003-034 §2, 2003; Ord. 93-005 §7, 1993; Ord. 91-020 §1, 1991) 18.124.050. Decision on Site Plan. A. The Planning Director or Hearings Body may deny the site plan or approve it with such modifications and conditions as may be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan or the criteria and standards listed in DCC Title 18. B. The Planning Director or Hearings Body as a condition of approval may require that the applicant file with the County a performance bond or other security approved by the governing body to assure full and Chapter 18.124 2 (09/2014) faithful performance of any required improvements. The bond shall be for the dollar amount plus 10 percent of the estimated cost of the improvements. C. Planning Director or Hearings Body review shall be subject to DCC Title 22, the Uniform Development Procedures Ordinance. (Ord. 91-020 §1, 1991; Ord. 86-032 §1, 1986) 18.124.060. Approval Criteria. Approval of a site plan shall be based on the following criteria: A. The proposed development shall relate harmoniously to the natural environment and existing development, minimizing visual impacts and preserving natural features including views and topographical features. B. The landscape and existing topography shall be preserved to the greatest extent possible, considering development constraints and suitability of the landscape and topography. Preserved trees and shrubs shall be protected. C. The site plan shall be designed to provide a safe environment, while offering appropriate opportunities for privacy and transition from public to private spaces. D. When appropriate, the site plan shall provide for the special needs of disabled persons, such as ramps for wheelchairs and Braille signs. E. The location and number of points of access to the site, interior circulation patterns, separations between pedestrians and moving and parked vehicles, and the arrangement of parking areas in relation to buildings and structures shall be harmonious with proposed and neighboring buildings and structures. F. Surface drainage systems shall be designed to prevent adverse impacts on neighboring properties, streets, or surface and subsurface water quality. G. Areas, structures and facilities for storage, machinery and equipment, services (mail, refuse, utility wires, and the like), loading and parking and similar accessory areas and structures shall be designed, located and buffered or screened to minimize adverse impacts on the site and neighboring properties. H. All above -ground utility installations shall be located to minimize adverse visual impacts on the site and neighboring properties. I. Specific criteria are outlined for each zone and shall be a required part of the site plan (e.g. lot setbacks, etc.). J. All exterior lighting shall be shielded so that direct light does not project off-site. K. Transportation access to the site shall be adequate for the use. 1. Where applicable, issues including, but not limited to, sight distance, turn and acceleration/deceleration lanes, right-of-way, roadway surfacing and widening, and bicycle and pedestrian connections, shall be identified. 2. Mitigation for transportation -related impacts shall be required. 3. Mitigation shall meet applicable County standards in DCC 17.16 and DCC 17.48, applicable Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) mobility and access standards, and applicable American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards. (Ord. 2010-018 §2, 2010, Ord. 93-043 §§21, 22 and 22A, 1993; Ord. 91-038 §1, 1991; Ord. 91-020 §1, 1991) 18.124.070. Required Minimum Standards. A. Private or shared outdoor recreation areas in residential developments. 1. Private Areas. Other than a development in the Sunriver UUC Town Center District, each ground -level living unit in a residential development subject to site plan approval shall have an accessible outdoor private space of not less than 48 square feet in area. The area shall be enclosed, screened or otherwise designed to provide privacy for unit residents and their guests. Chapter 18.124 3 (09/2014) 2. Shared Areas. Usable outdoor recreation space shall be provided for the shared use of residents and their guests in any apartment residential development, as follows: a. Units with one or two bedrooms: 200 square feet per unit. b. Units with three or more bedrooms: 300 square feet per unit. 3. Usable outdoor recreation space shall be provided in the Sunriver UUC Town Center District on a district -wide basis as follows: a. A minimum of one hundred square feet of outdoor recreation space per Multi -family Dwelling unit or Townhome that is accessible to residents or guests staying in Multi -family Dwelling or Townhome units. b. Outdoor recreation spaces may include bicycle paths, plazas, play areas, water features, ice rinks, pools and similar amenities that are located outdoors. c. Outdoor recreation space must include recreation for children who are district residents, such as a maintained playground area with approved equipment such as swings or slides. 4. Storage. In residential developments, convenient areas shall be provided for the storage of articles such as bicycles, barbecues, luggage, outdoor furniture, etc. These areas shall be entirely enclosed. B. Required Landscaped Areas. 1. The following landscape requirements are established for multi -family, commercial and industrial developments, subject to site plan approval: a. A minimum of 15 percent of the lot area shall be landscaped. b. All areas subject to the final site plan and not otherwise improved shall be landscaped. 2. In addition to the requirement of DCC 18.124.070(B)(1)(a), the following landscape requirements shall apply to parking and loading areas: a. A parking or loading area shall be required to be improved with defined landscaped areas totaling no less than 25 square feet per parking space. b. In addition to the landscaping required by DCC 18.124.070(B)(2)(a), a parking or loading area shall be separated from any lot line adjacent to a roadway by a landscaped strip at least 10 feet in width, and from any other lot line by a landscaped strip at least five feet in width. c. A landscaped strip separating a parking or loading area from a street shall contain: 1) Trees spaced as appropriate to the species, not to exceed 35 feet apart on the average. 2) Low shrubs not to reach a height greater than three feet zero inches, spaced no more than eight feet apart on the average. 3) Vegetative ground cover. d. Landscaping in a parking or loading area shall be located in defined landscaped areas which are uniformly distributed throughout the parking or loading area. e. The landscaping in a parking area shall have a width of not less than five feet. f. Provision shall be made for watering planting areas where such care is required. g. Required landscaping shall be continuously maintained and kept alive and attractive. h. Maximum height of tree species shall be considered when planting under overhead utility lines. C. Non -motorized Access. 1. Bicycle Parking. The development shall provide the number and type of bicycle parking facilities as required in DCC 18.116.031 and 18.116.035. The location and design of bicycle parking facilities shall be indicated on the site plan. 2. Pedestrian Access and Circulation: a. Internal pedestrian circulation shall be provided in new commercial, office and multi -family residential developments through the clustering of buildings, construction of hard surface pedestrian walkways, and similar techniques. b. Pedestrian walkways shall connect building entrances to one another and from building entrances to public streets and existing or planned transit facilities. On-site walkways shall connect with walkways, sidewalks, bikeways, and other pedestrian or bicycle connections on adjacent properties planned or used for commercial, multi -family, public or park use. Chapter 18.124 4 (09/2014) c. Walkways shall be at least five feet in paved unobstructed width. Walkways which border parking spaces shall be at least seven feet wide unless concrete bumpers or curbing and landscaping or other similar improvements are provided which prevent parked vehicles from obstructing the walkway. Walkways shall be as direct as possible. d. Driveway crossings by walkways shall be minimized. Where the walkway system crosses driveways, parking areas and loading areas, the walkway must be clearly identifiable through the use of elevation changes, speed bumps, a different paving material or other similar method. e. To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the primary building entrance and any walkway that connects a transit stop to building entrances shall have a maximum slope of five percent. Walkways up to eight percent slope are permitted, but are treated as ramps with special standards for railings and landings. D. Commercial Development Standards: 1. New commercial buildings shall be sited at the front yard setback line for lots with one frontage, and at both front yard setback lines for corner lots, and oriented to at least one of these streets, except in the Sunriver UUC Business Park (BP) District and Town Center (TC) District and the La Pine UUC Business Park (LPBP) District. The building(s) and any eaves, overhangs or awnings shall not interfere with the required clear vision area at corners or driveways. 2. To meet the standard in paragraph (1) of this subsection, buildings developed as part of a shopping complex, as defined by this title, and planned for the interior, rear or non -street side of the complex may be located and oriented toward private interior streets within the development if consistent with all other standards of paragraph (1) above and this paragraph. Interior streets used to satisfy this standard may have on -street parking and shall have sidewalks along the street in front of the building. Such sidewalks shall connect to existing or future sidewalks on public streets accessing the site. The master plan for the shopping complex shall demonstrate that at least one half of the exterior perimeter of the site that abuts each public street, will be developed with buildings meeting the standards of paragraphs (D)(1) or (D)(3) of this subsection. 3. An increase in the front yard setback may be allowed where the applicant can demonstrate that one or more of the following factors makes it desirable to site the new building beyond the minimum street setback: a. Existing development on the site; b. Lot configuration; c. Topography of the lot; d. Significant trees or other vegetative features that could be retained by allowing a greater setback; e. Location of driveway access. Such an increase in the front yard shall be the minimum necessary to accommodate the reason for the increase. f. Architectural features, driveways, landscaping areas equal to or greater than the depth of the structure, and outdoor commercial areas, when at least one half of the structure meets the minimum street setback. 4. Off-street motor vehicle parking for new commercial developments in excess of 10,000 square feet shall be located at the side or behind the building(s), except in the Sunriver UUC Business Park (BP) District and Town Center (TC) District. Off-street parking proposed with a shopping complex, as defined by this title, and intended to serve buildings located in the interior or rear of the complex may have parking in front of the building provided the overall master plan for the site satisfies paragraph (2) of this subsection. (Ord. 2008-015 §4, 2008; Ord. 2006-008 §8, 2006; Ord. 2002-033 §1, 2002; Ord. 2001-044 §5, 2001; Ord. 97-078 §7, 1997; Ord. 93-063 §3, 1993; Ord. 93-043 §22B, 1993; Ord. 93-005 §8, 1993) Chapter 18.124 5 (09/2014) 18.124.080. Other Conditions. The Planning Director or Hearings Body may require the following in addition to the minimum standards of DCC Title 18 as a condition for site plan approval. A. An increase in the required yards. B. Additional off street parking. C. Screening of the proposed use by a fence or landscaping or combination thereof. D. Limitations on the size, type, location, orientation and number of lights. E. Limitations on the number and location of curb cuts. F. Dedication of land for the creation or enlargement of streets where the existing street system will be impacted by or is inadequate to handle the additional burden caused by the proposed use. G. Improvement, including but not limited to paving, curbing, installation of traffic signals and constructing sidewalks or the street system that serves the proposed use where the existing street system will be burdened by the proposed use. H. Improvement or enlargement of utilities serving the proposed use where the existing utilities system will be burdened by the proposed use. Improvements may include, but shall not be limited to, extension of utility facilities to serve the proposed use and installation of fire hydrants. I. Landscaping of the site. J. Traffic Impact Study as identified in Title 18.116.310 K. Any other limitations or conditions that are considered necessary to achieve the purposes of DCC Title 18. (Ord. 2014-017 §1, 2014; Ord. 2006-005 §1, 2006; Ord. 95 075 §1, 1995; Ord. 93 043 §22C, 1993) 18.124.090. Right of Way Improvement Standards. Any dedications or improvements to the road right of way required under DCC 18.124 shall meet the standards for road right of way improvements set forth in DCC Title 17 and any standards for right-of-way improvements set forth in DCC Title 18 for the particular zone in question. (Ord. 97-003 §4, 1997) Chapter 18.124 6 (09/2014) ATTACHMENT- 6 Mechanical Engineer's Report BLANK PAGE Jacob Jenkins Evolution Group LLC 21330 Young Ave Bend, OR, 97703 3/13/2018 RE: Evolution Group cannabis odor and noise per Deschutes County Code DCC 18.116.330 To whom it may concern, With respect to odor control methods and sound pressure levels at your cannabis cultivation facility at 21330 Young Ave, located within Deschutes County: Qualifications I am a mechanical engineer licensed in Oregon #65108PE. Facility Description • Structure consists of a proposed cannabis cultivation facility: four structures, approximately 124' long, 42' wide, and an average roof height of 13'. • HVAC system: o 13 5 -ton split system heat pumps will be used to condition each structure. o All air within the structure will be circulated through inline fans with activated carbon filter attachments to mitigate odor. o Of the four structures, two will operate lights and equipment simultaneously, and pairs will alternate every 12 hours. Cannabis Odor The Deschutes County code DCC 18.116.330(6)(10) reads: Odor. As used in DCC 18.116.330(B)(10), building means the building, including greenhouses, hoop houses, and other similar structures, used for marijuana production or marijuana processing. a. The building shall be equipped with an effective odor control system which must at all times prevent unreasonable interference of neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. b. An odor control system is deemed permitted only after the applicant submits a report by a mechanical engineer licensed in the State of Oregon demonstrating that the system will control odor so as not to unreasonably interfere with neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. COLE ENGINEERING c. Private actions alleging nuisance or trespass associated with odor impacts are authorized, if at all, as provided in applicable state statute. d. The odor control system shall: i. Consist of one or more fans. The fan(s) shall be sized for cubic feet per minute (CFM) equivalent to the volume of the building (length multiplied by width multiplied by height) divided by three. The filter(s) shall be rated for the required CFM or ii. Utilize an alternative method or technology to achieve equal to or greater odor mitigation than provided by (i) above. e. The system shall be maintained in working order and shall be in use. The odor control system will consist of activated carbons filters attached to inline fans that recirculate air within each structure. The capacity of this carbon filtration system will be no less than the volume of the space divided by three, in accordance with DCC 18.116.330(B)(10)(d). Space volumes and fan recommendations are tabulated below. Any similar carbon filtration system with equal or greater capacity may be used. Several sizes of Can -Filter will suffice, although we recommend Can 150 filters. Room Length (ft) Width (ft) Avg. Height (ft) Volume Flower 1 41 42 13 22386 1 Flower 2 41 42 13 22386 1 Vegetation 24 40 13 124801 Staging 18 40 13 9360 1 Room Req'd CFM Fan Selection # of Fans Total CFM Surplus CFM Flower 1 1 7462 12" Max -Fan 5 7975 1 513 Flower 2 1 7462 12" Max -Fan 5 7975 513 Vegetation 4160 12" Max -Fan 3 4785 625 Staging 1 3120 12" Max -Fan 2 3190 70 This system will satisfy code and mitigate all odor leaving the building. Maintenance for this system will be in accordance with manufacturer instructions.: "The life of a filter is determined by the concentration of the contaminant, the relative humidity and the volume of air being cleaned. Unfortunately, there is no indicator light on the filter that tells you when it is ready to be replaced. Typically 12-18 months is expected of the Original Can -Filter, although many of them have lasted much longer." COLE IT ENGINEER IN G Providing odor controas described above will satisfy the requirements of DCC 18.116.330(B)(10)(d)(i), and prevent unreasonable interference of neighbors' use and enjoyment of their property. Noise The Deschutes County code DCC 18.116.330(B)(11)(a) reads: Noise. Noise produced by marijuana production and marijuana processing shall comply with the following: a. Sustained noise from mechanical equipment used for heating, ventilation, air condition, odor control, fans and similar functions shall not exceed 30 dB(A) measured at any property line between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. the following day. 8asedonnTRANE4TVVA4S-tonheatpumAthesoundpower|eve|ofearhoutdoorunit is 74 dBA. By staggering the 12 -on, 12 -off operation schedule of these structures, 26 of these units will be running simultaneously, 13 on each side. The calculated sound pressure level of 26 units running simultaneously is 88 dBA. Under the assumptions of an 88 dBA point source of noise from the closest point of the structure to each property line, and a ground factor of 1 due to sand and light vegetation, the table below shows approximate sound pressures at each property line as calculated with the MAS Environmental Sound Calculator, with no sound mitigation. Distance from Sound Pressure at Property Property Line Structures Line (dBA) Sound Barrier Required South 325' 39.0 As Shown West 635' 29.1 None North 1,000' 24.6 None East 460' 32.2 As Shown Additionally, the east and wesproperty lines will be protected by the buildings themselves acting as sound barriers, lowering sound pressures further. A sound barrier 9.5' tall, spanning between the structures with no gaps will be required as follows: COLE ENGINEER /wm >-- EXISTING BUILDINGS 225' Proposed Equiprne Locations. 460 Proposed Sound Barriers With this sound barrier in place, the calculated sound pressure at the south property line drops to 29.2 dBA. By considering the structures themselves as sound barriers, the calculated sound pressure at the east line drops to 16.5 dBA. Given the calculations and sound barrier prescribed above, the facility will comply with DCC 18.116.330(B)(11)(a). Best Regards, Rob James, P.E. ColeBreit Engineering COLE ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT- 7 Site Traffic Report BLANK PAGE TRANSIGHT cg k o1"c��'� CONSULTING, LLC ': 7.L&1tE C Transportation Engineering and Planning Services a rti+� v"") 6•-•›-P, Date: December 26, 2017 74, ,a;t To: Peter Russell ' • From: Joe Bessman, PE MI/ ti-.: 12/31/1.0l`ti Project Reference No.: 1130 Project Name: Young Avenue Marijuana Production and Extraction Facility This memorandum provides a Site Traffic Report (STR) for the proposed Evolution Concepts marijuana production and extraction facility located at 21330 Young Avenue. The site is on the north side of Young Avenue just east of SW Canal Boulevard. The 62.61 -acre property is zoned for Exclusive Farm Use Tumalo- Redmond-Bend use, allowing the proposed marijuana production and extraction facility outright. Retail sales are not proposed as part of this application. The requirements for an STR are contained within Deschutes County Code 18.116.310. Figure 1. Proposed Site Vicinity Map. The overall property includes an existing residence and other outbuildings that will remain. The proposed development plan will add four 5,208 square -foot buildings to the site for marijuana production, and a 1,500 building for extraction. Figure 2 illustrates the proposed site plan. As retail sales are not proposed, the trip generation will only reflect employee trips (and other typical delivery and maintenance vehicles), typical of other agricultural operations within greenhouses. 1130STR Young Avenue Farm (ISTING BUILDINGS PARKING (10) sp 5' PARKING LANDSCAPE WELL EXIST. 40'X30' SUPPORT BUILDING (4) 42' X 124' BUILDINGS RP 11,7* 5' SILO EXISTING FARM PARKING EXIST ACCESS X4..1.ACCES._.._,...... ..,.._...__ �401,•••••• • EXISTING BUILDINGS 5' Figure 2. Proposed Site Plan. Source: Sun Country Engineering, December 22, 2017. Surrounding land uses include other rural residential and agricultural uses. The Pilot Butte Canal bisects the southeastern corner of the property, and a canal lateral extends toward the northwest. The structures are located in the southwest corner of the property. 74th Lane extends south from the southwestern property corner serving approximately six taxlots. TRIP GENERATION The standard reference Trip Generation, 10th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) was reviewed to estimate the trip generation potential of the proposed production facility. Deschutes County staff have developed a standardized trip generation approach to marijuana production and extraction facilities within Central Oregon. Deschutes County Planning staff have required the classification of greenhouse production space using ITE's Warehouse classification (ITE Land Use 150). The definition of this land use is as follows: "Warehouses are primarily devoted to the storage of materials, but they may also include office and maintenance areas." County planning staff further require that marijuana processing operations be classified using ITE's Manufacturing classification (ITE Land Use 140). The definition of this land use is as follows: 2 Young Avenue Farm "Manufacturing facilities are areas where the primary activity is the conversion of raw materials or parts into finished products. Size and type of activity may vary substantially from one facility to another. In addition to the production of goods, manufacturing facilities generally also have office, warehouse, research, and other associated functions." As shown, the generalized definitions within each of these land use classifications could be broadly applied to a wide range of uses. However, the characteristics of these uses are typically of shift -work that remains steady throughout the year, and reflects approximately two employees per 1,000 square -feet of building space within the manufacturing portion of the facility, and approximately one employee for every 2,000 square -feet of warehouse space. The ITE methodologies only apply to enclosed building area. Review of this methodology shows that it provides a reasonable employee density. Table 1. Trip Generation Estimates (ITE 10th Edition) ITE Size Daily Weekday PM Peak Hour Land Use Code (Metric) Trips Total In Out Warehousing 150 20,832 SF 36 4 1 3 (Marijuana Production) (1.74/KSF) (0.19 /KSF) _ (27%) (73%) Manufacturing 140 1,200 SF 5 1 0 1 (Marijuana Extraction) (3.93/KSF) (0.67/KSF) (31%) (69%) Total Trips 41 5 1 1 4 As shown in Table 1, the proposed site is expected to generate 41 daily trips, including 5 trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour (1 in, 4 out). As the ITE Trip Generation manual is based on cordon counts at similar facility access points, this trip generation estimate accounts for employees, visitors, and deliveries necessary to support, operate, and maintain the facility. The site will also continue to experience on-going trips related to existing agricultural use of the property. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT There are several travel options to access the site and major area transportation facilities. Young Avenue to 61' Street provides the most direct route to Bend via the US 97 corridor. Young Avenue east to SW 61' Street or west to Canal Boulevard provides connectivity to the City of Redmond, and Canal Boulevard from the south connects with Bend's west side. Based on the available connections and regional population centers, Figure 3 illustrates the weekday p.m. peak hour trip distribution and assignment, with 70 percent of site -generated trips destined to and from the south and 30 percent toward the north. 3 Young Avenue Farm OYOUNG AVENUE! SITE ACCESS_ 3�` 41 TEV:5 1 Figure 3. Estimated Trip Distribution Pattern and Net New Trip Assignment, Weekday PM Peak Hour. SAFETY ANALYSIS Historical Crash Data Historical safety of the surrounding intersections was reviewed using data from the ODOT Crash Analysis and Reporting database. Crashes required for reporting include those that involve at least one motor vehicle and result in $1,500 or more in property damage or some level of personal injury. This analysis summarized reported crashes that had occurred between January 2011 and December 2015. Review of the crash reports showed five crashes near the SW Young Avenue intersection with SW Canal Boulevard, and five crashes near the SW Young Avenue/SW 61' Street intersection. Nearly all of the crashes resulted in some level of personal injury. All of the reported crashes along the Old Redmond -Bend Highway were classified as "fixed -object" collisions, and are likely associated with the gentle horizontal curve, surrounding trees, fencing, and utility poles. A curve warning sign with a 50 mph advisory speed is posted prior to the curve to warn drivers of the maneuver. Deschutes County is currently conducting a safety review of the Old Redmond -Bend Highway corridor. It is recommended that the county review low-cost curve warning enhancements such as centerline or fogline rumble strips near the Young Avenue intersection. Similarly, all of the reported crashes at the SW 61' Street/SW Young Avenue intersection were also classified as fixed -object collisions surrounding the curve in the roadway to avoid the rock outcropping. Review of the road shows that curve advisory signs are posted with an advisory speed of 35 miles per hour, and chevrons are posted near the Young Avenue intersection. Based on this review, historical crashes within the area arenot associated with the SW Young Avenue intersection but appear to be related to the roadway curvature. Approximately half of the reported 4 Young Avenue Farm crashes occurred during icy conditions and are likely attributable to higher operating speeds than supported by the conditions. The County's ongoing study of the Old Redmond -Bend corridor is expected to further review area conditions as part of a roadside safety audit. Strategies to address County -wide fixed -object collisions were previously identified as part of the ODOT All Roads Traffic Safety (ARTS) project. The proposed development does not directly contribute toward these crash patterns, but transportation system development charge fees can help support area mitigation measures. Intersection Sight Distance Intersection sight distance was reviewed to ensure an adequate view of conflicting traffic was provided to drivers at the site access along Young Avenue. Sight distance information and requirements are based on the standard reference A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th Edition published by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 2011, commonly referred to as the Green Book. The sight distance review was based on existing conditions. While a posted speed was not observed, a speed of 45 miles per hour on Young Avenue was assumed given the rural local roadway characteristics. Sight lines were also found to be adequate if the assumed speed were 55 miles per hour. As summarized within this section, intersection sight distance exceeds minimum AASHTO recommendations at the SW Young Avenue access given the straight and flat roadway section. Intersection Sight Triangles Given the minor -street stop -control, intersection sight triangles were developed based on guidance cited within Conditions B1 (left -turn from minor road) and 132 (right -turn from minor road) of the Green Book. All distances were measured from a vertex point located 14.5 feet from the major -road travel way along the center of the approaching travel lane, accounting for comfortable positioning distance from the travel way (6.5 feet) and the distance from the front of the vehicle to the driver eye (8.0 feet). The assumed eye height is 3.5 feet above the departing road for passenger vehicles. The object height is also 3.5 feet above the major road, providing enough space on the approaching vehicle to recognize it. Figure 4 illustrates the intersection sight distance measurements at the stop -controlled driveway approach. 111 14.5 Ft Clear Sight Triangle "� �+uhilmlul III 5 Case B1: 500 Ft ...... . Case 82:430 Ft ------ Young Avenue Farm Figure 4. Intersection Sight Triangle Measurements for Case B1 (Left -Turn from Stop) and Case 82 (Right -Turn from Stop). Case B1: Left -Turn From Stop Recommended intersection sight distances are based on the distance an approaching vehicle travels during the time it takes a side -street vehicle to make a decision and safely accelerate into the travel lane without unduly interfering with major -street traffic. Given the flat slope of Young Avenue (less than 3 percent) and three -lane section a time gap of 7.5 seconds was applied. AASHTO Formula 9-1 summarizes the recommended sight distance along the major road of approximately 500 feet based on the assumed speed of 45 miles per hour. Intersection Sight Distance = 1,47 Vmajor (mph )tgop (sec) = 496.1 feet Field review identified that current sight lines easily exceed this distance from the existing property access. Case 82: Right Turn from the Minor Road Views for vehicles exiting the site to the left (eastbound on Young Avenue) must be adequate to accommodate a right -turn. A time gap of 6.5 seconds is applied to account for this maneuver, reflecting the shorter distance of crossing into a single lane and the shorter time gap acceptance by drivers turning right. Formula 9-1 also applies for this distance, resulting in a minimum recommended intersection sight distance of 430 feet. Intersection Sight Distance = 1.47 VmaJor(mph)taop(sec) = 430.0 feet Field measurements indicate that sight lines well beyond 430 feet are available today. Accordingly, no sight distance restrictions were identified. Figures 5 and 6 illustrate the views from the property access. Figure 5. Young Avenue facing west. Figure 6. Young Avenue facing east. 6 Young Avenue Farm SITE CIRCULATION The existing property provides a substantial gravel parking area capable of supporting employee trips, construction vehicles, and delivery vehicles. As shown within the site plan, ten dedicated employee parking stalls are available to support the proposed marijuana production and extraction operation. While continued agricultural use of the property may continue to serve larger farming equipment and trucks, the marijuana production and extraction will be served primarily with "sprinter" delivery vehicles. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Key findings are as follows: • The proposed development includes four new warehouses for marijuana production and a separate outbuilding for extraction. The overall operation will add 20,832 square -feet of marijuana production building space and 1,200 square -feet of processing space. • Application of the standard Deschutes County classifications for these uses results in 41 weekday daily trips and 5 additional weekday p.m. peak hour trips. • Field review did not identify any geometric or control deficiencies associated with crashes within the study area. Fixed -object collisions along Canal Boulevard are being addressed as part of the County's ongoing Old Redmond -Bend corridor plan. • No identifiable sight distance conflicts or impediments were identified at the existing access location. Study Recommendations: • The development should contribute toward County -wide transportation improvement projects based on the Transportation SDC. Please let me know if any additional information will be required to address County Site Traffic Report requirements. If you have any questions or comments please contact me at (503) 997-4473 or at ioe(mtransiehtconsultine,com. 7 BLANK PAGE ATTACHMENT- 8 Site Plan BLANK PAGE .Lb o -t. �6S'8 — ewe '10 Wi ^4t 6 3411YIN I TENTATIVE SITE PLAN cs\ceos—wuned,.\ew.NoeoNappem\wu\asn\a �^1 BLANK PAGE ATTACHMENT- 9 Agency Comments BLANK PAGE Kyle Collins From: Peter Russell Sent: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 8:49 AM To: Kyle Collins; Chris Doty; Cody Smith Cc: Peter Russell Subject: MJ grow by Young/Canal (17 -905 -AD) Kyle, I have reviewed the transmittal materials for 247-17-000905 for a marijuana production (growing) and processing operation in the Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Airport Safety (AS) zones at 21330 Young Avenue, aka 16-12-11, Tax Lot 800. The proposal will establish four (4) new buildings of 5,964 square feet each and convert an 1,200 -square -foot building to an accessory operations building. As I understand it, this application supplants 247 -17 -000 -939 -AD, which is on the same property. Deschutes County Code (DCC) at 18.116.330(B)(8) only requires proof of legal direct access to the property or access from a private easement for a grow of more than 5,000 square feet of mature canopy. The proposal is for 9,800 square feet of mature canopy, so the access requirement does apply. The traffic study requirements of DCC 18.116.310 are applicable for this marijuana production and processing operation as the application is going through site plan review and thus does need to show compliance with DCC 18.124.080(J), which references the County's traffic study requirements described below. The most recent edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook does not contain a category for marijuana production. In consultation with the Road Department Director and Planning staff, the County has determined the best analog use is Warehouse (Land Use 150) based on the storage requirements and employees of this activity. Warehouse generates daily trips at a rate of 3.56 trips per 1,000 square feet. The application indicates the site will use 23,856 square -feet of greenhouses for cannabis production (5,964 X 4). The resulting trip rate would be 85 daily trips (3.56 X 23.856). For cannabis processing, the County uses the ITE code for Manufacturing (Land Use 140), which has a daily trip rate of 3.82 trips per 1,000 square feet. The 1,200 -square -foot greenhouse will produce 4.6 daily trips (3.82 X 1.2). The combined production and processing will generate 89.6 daily trips (85 + 4.6). Deschutes County Code (DCC) at 18.116.310(C)(3)(b) states a traffic analysis is needed if there are between 50 and 200 new weekday trips generated from the use. The proposed land use will meet this minimum threshold for additional traffic analysis. The traffic analysis is based on p.m. peak hour trips. Warehouse generates at 0.32 trips per 1,000 square feet, which results in 7.6 p.m. peak hour trips (23.856 X 0.32) for production. Light Industrial generates 0.73 p.m. peak hour trips per 1,000 square feet, which results in 0.88 p.m. peak hour trips (1.2 X 0.73) for processing. The total p.m. peak hour trips for this use would be 8.48 p.m. peak hour trips (7.6 + 0.88). If the property does not already have one, the applicant should be required to obtain a driveway permit for this site. The property lies approximately 24,866 feet to the south-southwest of the Redmond Airport. The proposed buildings are 1'6 feet in height and the zoning allows 30 feet; this means no buildings will penetrate any imaginary surfaces related to the Redmond Airport. Board Resolution 2013-020 sets a transportation system development charge (SDC) rate of $3,937 per p.m. peak hour trip. The ITE rates quoted above are used to determine the SDC. The SDC for growing would be $29,921 ($3,937 X 7.6 p.m. peak hour trips). The SDC for processing would be $3,465 (0.88 X $3,937). Thus the total applicable SDC for growing and processing would be $33,386 ($29,921 + $3,465). The SDC is due prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; if a certificate of occupancy is not applicable, then the SDC is due within 60 days of the land use decision becoming final. 1 Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks Peter Russell Senior Transportation Planner Deschutes County peter.russell@deschutes.org (541) 383-6718 2 Kyle Collins From: Peter Russell Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2018 1:01 PM To: Kyle Collins; Chris Doty; Cody Smith Cc: Peter Russell Subject: Additional comments on mj grow & mfg on (17-905-AD/17-939-AD) Hi, Kyle, I have reviewed the requested Site Traffic Report (STR) for 17-905-AD/939-AD, which is a proposed marijuana production (growing) and processing operation in the Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) and Airport Safety (AS) zones at 21330 Young Avenue, aka 16-12-11, Tax Lot 800. According to the STR, the operation will result in 20,832 square feet of marijuana production and convert an 1,200 -square -foot building to an accessory operations building for processing. I agree with the STR's methodologies, assumptions, and recommendations. If the property does not already have one, the applicant should be required to obtain a driveway permit for this site to conform with DCC 17.48.210(A). The property lies approximately 24,866 feet to the south-southwest of the Redmond Airport. The proposed buildings are 16 feet in height and the zoning allows 30 feet; this means no buildings will penetrate any imaginary surfaces related to the Redmond Airport. Board Resolution 2013-020 sets a transportation system development charge (SDC) rate of $3,937 per p.m. peak hour trip. The Board in a policy decision in early 2017 decided to use the ITE rate for Warehouse (LU 150) for marijuana production and Manufacturing (LU 140) for processing. The County has not yet updated its trip generation rates to reflect the 10th edition of the ITE manual. The County's adopted rates are from the 9th edition, hence the discrepancy between the County's SDC rate and the applicant's STR for p.m. peak hour trips. The SDC for growing would be 6.7 p.m. peak hour trips (20.832 X 0.32) for an SDC of $26,378 ($3,937 X 6.7 p.m. peak hour trips). The SDC for processing would be 0.9 p.m. peak hour trips (1.2 X 0.73) for an SDC of $3,543 (0.9 X $3,937). Thus the total applicable SDC for growing and processing would be $29,921 ($26,378 + $3,543). The SDC is due prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy; if a certificate of occupancy is not applicable, then the SDC is due within 60 days of the land use decision becoming final. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks Peter Russell Senior Transportation Planner Deschutes County oeter.russellPdeschutes.ore (541) 383-6718 From: Kyle Collins Sent: Tuesday, February 6, 2018 11:30 AM To: Peter Russell <Peter.Russell@deschutes.org> Subject: Site Traffic Report for Files 17-905-AD/17-939-AD 1 Peter, After much trial and tribulation, I am reviewing the final pieces of the above files for the MJ production and processing facility at 21330 Young Ave. Your original comments on the proposal required them to submit a Site Traffic Report (*attached). At this point it appears there are some discrepancies between their engineer's findings and your own. Let me know what your comments are and how I should proceed based the final traffic assessment. If you need anything else from me, just let me know and I'll pass it along. The engineer's contact information is included in the STR. Thanks, Kyle Collins Assistant Planner Deschutes County Community Development Department 117 NW Lafayette Bend, OR 97701 Tel: (541) 383-4427 2 NOTICE: The Deschutes County Building Safety Divisions code mandates that Access, Egress, Setbacks, Fire & Life Safety, Fire Fighting Water Supplies, etc. must be specifically addressed during the appropriate plan review process with regard to any proposed structures and occupancies. Accordingly, all Building Code required items will be addressed, when a specific structure, occupancy, and type of construction is proposed and submitted for plan review. Randy Scheid June 1, 2018 Kyle Collins From: Jon P Harrang <jharrang@oda.state.or.us> Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2017 10:22 AM To: Kyle Collins Subject: Re: 247 -17 -000905 -AD - 21330 Young Ave/Bend 97703 To Whom it May Concern, The application does not state what type of marijuana processing will occur. Please be advised that marijuana processing facilities that produce food/beverage items and/or ingredients/extracts that can be consumed are subject to licensing and inspection by Oregon Dept. of Agriculture's Food Safety Program. If any food/beverage items and/or ingredients/extracts that can be consumed are produced at this location then the processing facility must meet minimum construction requirements as specified in 21 CFR 110/117. Proper construction must be verified, products evaluated for any significant food safety risk factors which may be present, and the license fee paid before the food processing firm is approved to operate. The applicant is encouraged to contact Jon Harrang, ODA Food Safety Program for assistance in walking through the plan review and buildout process. Mr. Harrang may be reached by calling 541-923-0754 or by email at iharrang(cr�,oda. state. or.us On Dec 28, 2017, at 9:58 AM, Kyle Collins <Kv1e.Collins(a,deschutes.org> wrote: Hey Jon, The applicant information was altered last minute at the request of the applicants themselves. The 2 proposals are coming from the same applicant on the same property. One application (905 -AD) is for a proposed marijuana production facility, while the other (939 -AD) is for a proposed marijuana processing facility. Our codes require us to process these as separate files as they have distinct approval criteria, but again each will be housed on the same property and within the same structures. The actual footprint of the proposed buildings do not change from one file to the other. Apologies for the confusion, as these files came in separately about 2 weeks apart, but the applicant wished to process them concurrently. I hope that clears everything up, but if you have additional questions let me know. Regards, Kyle Collins Assistant Planner Deschutes County Community Development Department 117 NW Lafayette Bend, OR 97701 Tel: (541) 383-4427 1 From: Jon P Harrang fmailto:iharrane@oda.state.or.usl Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2017 9:34 AM To: Kyle Collins <Kvle.CollinsPdeschutes.ora> Subject: 247 -17 -000905 -AD - 21330 Young Ave/Bend 97703 Hi Kyle, Quick question - I received 2 notices of application for the property located at 21330 Young Ave/Bend 97703. One of them is 247 -17 -000905 -AD The other one is 247 -17 -000939 -AD They show different applicants and slightly different info but were both mailed out on the same date. Which one of these is under consideration? Please advise, thanks, best, Jon Jon Harrang ODA Food Safety Div/Redmond 541-923-0754 iharranaeoda.state.orus Jon Harrang ODA Food Safety Div/Redmond 541-923-0754 iharran2(&,oda.state.or.us 2 Redmond Fire & Rescue 341 NW Dogwood Ave Redmond, OR 97756 541-504-5000 Fax: 541-548-5512 vvww.redmondfireandrescue.org Redmond Fire and Rescue Commercial Comments: Areas Without Hydrants Date: December 27, 2017 Location: 21330 Young Ave, 1612110000800 Subject: AD 247-17-000905, Synergy Concepts LLC, Establish a marijuana grow facility From: Clara Butler, Deputy Fire Marshal If there are questions regarding Fire Code issues, please contact the Redmond Fire and Rescue Deputy Fire Marshal at 541-504-5016 or email at clara.butlerazedmondfireandrescue.org Note: if processing occurs, the following codes will be required to be met. WATER: Area without Fire Hydrants: • NFPA 1142 Requirements o If the structure is being built in an area without a public water supply system, then the water flow requirements will come from NFPA 1142. o Note: The following information will need to be provided in order to determine accurate water flow requirements. • Building height, length and width • Use of the building • Type of construction • Whether the structure 100 sq ft or larger and within 50 feet of any other structures • Structures with Automatic Sprinkler systems — 2012 NFPA 1142 Chapter 7 o The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to waive the water supply required by this standard when a structure is protected by an automatic sprinkler system that fully meets the requirements of NFPA 13 • Fire Safety during Construction — 2014 OFC 501.4 o Approved fire department access roads, required water supply, fire hydrants, and safety precautions shall be installed and serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. • Fire Sprinkler Systems shall be installed per NFPA 13. o Separate permits will be required for the aboveground sprinkler system and the underground sprinkler supply line(s). o If there are greater than 20 sprinkler heads, the system is required to have a fire alarm monitoring system. o 2014 OFC 903.3.7 Fire Department Connections: The location of fire department connections shall be approved by fire code official. The FDC/PIV shall not be under any combustible projections or overhangs. 6/1/2018 1 Redmond Fire & Rescue 341 NW Dogwood Ave Redmond, OR 97756 541-504-5000 Fax: 541-548-5512 www.redmondfireandrescue.org o NFPA 14 — 6.4.5.4 Fire department connections shall be located not more than 100 ft from the nearest fire hydrant connected to an approved water supply. o NOTE — If the Building is sprinklered, the sprinkler system will need to be designed to the specific use that will be occurring in the building. If the sprinkler system is not designed appropriately it will limit the types of businesses that can occupy the space. This also includes the height of storage in the building. In order to have high piled storage (greater than 12 ft), the sprinkler system shall be designed accordingly. ACCESS: • Premises Identification — 2014 OFC 505.1 o Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background and visible at night. Number/letter shall be a minimum of 4" high and a 0.5" stroke width. • Fire Apparatus Access Roads — 2014 OFC Section 503 & Appendix D o Fire apparatus access roads shall extend to within 150 ft of all portions of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. o Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. o Fire apparatus roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of 70,000 lbs and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. o The required turning radius of a fire apparatus access road shall be 30 feet inside and 50 feet outside. o The grade of the fire apparatus access roads shall be within the limits established by the fire code official (10%). • Fire Lanes — 2014 OFC 503.3 & Appendix D o Approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads or prohibit the obstruction thereof Such signs or notices shall be kept in legible conditions at all times. The stroke shall be 1 inch with letters 6 inches high and read "No Parking Fire Lane". Spacing for signage shall be every 50 feet. • Recommended to also (in addition to Fire lane signs) paint fire lane curbs in bright red paint with white letters. o Appendix D Section 103.6.1 Roads 20-26 Ft. Wide: Shall have Fire Lane signs posted on both sides of a fire lane. o Appendix D Section 103.6.2 Roads more than 26 Ft. Wide: Roads 26-32 ft wide shall have a Fire Lane signs posted on one side of the road as a fire lane. • Aerial Access Roads — 2014 OFC Appendix D, Section 105 o Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads and capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and 6/1/2018 2 Redmond Fire & Rescue 341 NW Dogwood Ave Redmond, OR 97756 541-504-5000 Fax: 541-548-5512 www.redmondfireandrescue.org power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadways. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, all access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 26 feet and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. • Dead -Ends — 2014 OFC Section 503.2.5 o Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. Contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for requirements. o OFC Table D103.4 Dead Ends over 750 Feet- Require special approval. If approved, there shall be a turn -around no more than every 1000 feet with a bulb of 60 feet across and the width of the road shall be a minimum of 26 ft clear for fire apparatus. Additional Access — 2014 OFC Section 503.1.2 o The fire code official is authorized to require more than one fire apparatus access road based on the potential for impairment of a single road by vehicle congestion, conditions or terrain, climatic conditions or other factors that could limit access. • Emergency Access Road Gates — 2014 OFC Appendix D 103.5 o Minimum 20 feet wide. o Gates shall be swinging or sliding type. o Shall be able to be manually operated by one person. o Electric gates shall be equipped with a means of opening by emergency personnel & approved by fire official. o Locking devices shall be fire department Knox Key Switch purchased from A-1 Lock, Safe Co., Curtis Safe & Lock, on line at www.knoxbox.com. or contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for an order form. o Section 503.3: Install a sign on the gate "No Parking -Fire Lane" • Key Boxes — 2014 OFC Section 506.1 o An approved key box shall be installed on all structures equipped with a fire alarm system and /or sprinkler system. Approved key boxes can only be purchased at A-1 Lock Safe Co., Curtis Safe and Lock, on line at www.knoxbox.com. or contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for an order form. • Commercial & Industrial Development — 2014 OFC Appendix D 104 o Buildings exceeding three stories or 30 feet in height shall have at least 2 means of fire apparatus access for each structure. o Where 2 access roads are required, they shall be placed not less than 1/2 the length of the overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. 6/1/2018 Redmond Fire & Rescue 341 NW Dogwood Ave Redmond, OR 97756 541-504-5000 Fax: 541-548-5512 www.redmondfireandrescue.org Redmond Fire and Rescue Commercial Comments: Areas Without Hydrants Date: December 27, 2017 Location: 21330 Young Ave, 1612110000800 Subject: AD 247-17-000939, SP 940, Evolution Group LLC, Create a marijuana grow and processing facility From: Clara Butler, Deputy Fire Marshal If there are questions regarding Fire Code issues, please contact the Redmond Fire and Rescue Deputy Fire Marshal at 541-504-5016 or email at clara.butleraredmondfireandrescue.org . Note: All fire code requirements must be met for the processing facility. Not enough information provided to give accurate comments. WATER: Area without Fire Hydrants: • NFPA 1142 Requirements o If the structure is being built in an area without a public water supply system, then the water flow requirements will come from NFPA 1142. o Note: The following information will need to be provided in order to determine accurate water flow requirements. • Building height, length and width • Use of the building • Type of construction • Whether the structure 100 sq ft or larger and within 50 feet of any other structures • Structures with Automatic Sprinkler systems — 2012 NFPA 1142 Chapter 7 o The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to waive the water supply required by this standard when a structure is protected by an automatic sprinkler system that fully meets the requirements of NFPA 13 • Fire Safety during Construction — 2014 OFC 501.4 o Approved fire department access roads, required water supply, fire hydrants, and safety precautions shall be installed and serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. • Fire Sprinkler Systems shall be installed per NFPA 13. o Separate permits will be required for the aboveground sprinkler system and the underground sprinkler supply line(s). o If there are greater than 20 sprinkler heads, the system is required to have a fire alarm monitoring system. 6/1/2018 1 Redmond Fire & Rescue 341 NW Dogwood Ave Redmond, OR 97756 541-504-5000 Fax: 541-548-5512 www.redmondfireandrescue.org o 2014 OFC 903.3.7 Fire Department Connections: The location of fire department connections shall be approved by fire code official. The FDC/PIV shall not be under any combustible projections or overhangs. o NFPA 14 — 6.4.5.4 Fire department connections shall be located not more than 100 ft from the nearest fire hydrant connected to an approved water supply. o NOTE — If the Building is sprinklered, the sprinkler system will need to be designed to the specific use that will be occurring in the building. If the sprinkler system is not designed appropriately it will limit the types of businesses that can occupy the space. This also includes the height of storage in the building. In order to have high piled storage (greater than 12 ft), the sprinkler system shall be designed accordingly. ACCESS: • Premises Identification — 2014 OFC 505.1 o Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with their background and visible at night. Number/letter shall be a minimum of 4" high and a 0.5" stroke width. • Fire Apparatus Access Roads — 2014 OFC Section 503 & Appendix D o Fire apparatus access roads shall extend to within 150 ft of all portions of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building. o Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. o Fire apparatus roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of 70,000 lbs and shall be surfaced so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities. o The required turning radius of a fire apparatus access road shall be 30 feet inside and 50 feet outside. o The grade of the fire apparatus access roads shall be within the limits established by the fire code official (10%). • Fire Lanes — 2014 OFC 503.3 & Appendix D o Approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided for fire apparatus access roads to identify such roads or prohibit the obstruction thereof. Such signs or notices shall be kept in legible conditions at all times. The stroke shall be 1 inch with letters 6 inches high and read "No Parking Fire Lane". Spacing for signage shall be every 50 feet. • Recommended to also (in addition to Fire lane signs) paint fire lane curbs in bright red paint with white letters. o Appendix D Section 103.6.1 Roads 20-26 Ft. Wide: Shall have Fire Lane signs posted on both sides of a fire lane. o Appendix D Section 103.6.2 Roads more than 26 Ft. Wide: Roads 26-32 ft wide shall have a Fire Lane signs posted on one side of the road as a fire lane. 6/1/2018 2 Redmond Fire & Rescue 341 NW Dogwood Ave Redmond, OR 97756 541-504-5000 Fax: 541-548-5512 www.redmondfireandrescue.org • Aerial Access Roads — 2014 OFC Appendix D, Section 105 o Buildings or portions of buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access shall be provided with approved fire apparatus access roads and capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located within the aerial fire apparatus access roadways. At least one of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building, all access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 26 feet and shall be positioned parallel to one entire side of the building. • Dead -Ends — 2014 OFC Section 503.2.5 o Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with an approved area for turning around fire apparatus. Contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for requirements. o OFC Table D103.4 Dead Ends over 750 Feet- Require special approval. If approved, there shall be a turn -around no more than every 1000 feet with a bulb of 60 feet across and the width of the road shall be a minimum of 26 ft clear for fire apparatus. • Additional Access — 2014 OFC Section 503.1.2 o The fire code official is authorized to require more than one fire apparatus access road based on the potential for impairment of a single road by vehicle congestion, conditions or terrain, climatic conditions or other factors that could limit access. • Emergency Access Road Gates — 2014 OFC Appendix D 103.5 o Minimum 20 feet wide. o Gates shall be swinging or sliding type. o Shall be able to be manually operated by one person. o Electric gates shall be equipped with a means of opening by emergency personnel & approved by fire official. o Locking devices shall be fire department Knox Key Switch purchased from A-1 Lock, Safe Co., Curtis Safe & Lock, on line at www.knoxbox.com, or contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for an order form. o Section 503.3: Install a sign on the gate "No Parking -Fire Lane" • Key Boxes — 2014 OFC Section 506.1 o An approved key box shall be installed on all structures equipped with a fire alarm system and /or sprinkler system. Approved key boxes can only be purchased at A-1 Lock Safe Co., Curtis Safe and Lock, on line at www.knoxbox.com, or contact Redmond Fire & Rescue for an order form. 6/1/2018 3 Redmond Fire & Rescue 341 NW Dogwood Ave Redmond, OR 97756 541-504-5000 Fax: 541-548-5512 www.redmondfireandrescue.org • Commercial & Industrial Development — 2014 OFC Appendix D 104 o Buildings exceeding three stories or 30 feet in height shall have at least 2 means of fire apparatus access for each structure. o Where 2 access roads are required, they shall be placed not less than 1/2 the length of the overall diagonal dimension of the property or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. 6/1/2018 4 Kyle Collins From: Perkins, Parneli <pperkins@cec.coop> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2018 8:54 AM To: Kyle Collins Subject: File Numbers: 247 -17 -000939 -AD & 247 -17 -000905 -AD Kyle, CEC requests the applicants apply for a new electrical service by calling Bob Fowler at 541-312-7778 and provide electrical load and demand requirements for this activity's. CEC will determine if capacity is available. Thank you Parneli Perkins • Central bac c triic 0©,npa, atiiyze, :il-i:c„ • Lands Specialist Office: 511.312.777 1 Fax: 54J ,923.35549 1 poerkinscec.cooD 2098 N Hwy 97, PO Box 8z;6, Redmond OK 97756 www.cec.c000 This e-mail message contains information that may be confidential. Use by parties other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and prohibited. 1 BLANK PAGE ATTACHMENT- 10 Public Comments BLANK PAGE Kyle Collins From: Monika Piatt <monika@rescueresponse.com> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2017 4:22 PM To: Kyle Collins Cc: Nick Lelack Subject: Application 247-17-000905AD ; 247-17-000393AD Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Dear Kyle and Nick: Please add this letter to the file opposing the application of the grow/processing application at 21330 Young Ave. Friends of mine share a well with this property and they have already been without water, electricity and replaced 2 water heaters! A facility of this magnitude will have detrimental affects, minimally to their water, as this has already been an issue. Here is my friend's e in correlation with the shared well. .;�� FJ Z Wk. , shv 1 4 ,�� rYountq AV� v ypun.'A, maw Y rYgTAC,elraSSWAYC?i1t11:..; Please look deep and hard into this one and please deny this application. Evolution Concepts has at least one other application which has been appealed at HWY 126 in Redmond. How 1 much marijuana do they need to grow in Deschutes County, using massive amounts of water and other precious resources. Sincerely, Monika Piatt 2 Frank Brian 21255 Young Avenue, Bend, OR 97703 (541) 389-4120 December 6, 2017 Deschutes County Planning Division Community Development Department 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, OR 97701 Re: File Number 2417 -1 247 -17 -000940 -SP at2l83OYoung Avenue, Bend, OR 97703 Application to establish a majuana production and processing facility four new buildings and conversion of existing structure To Whom It May Concern: 1 have the foliowing concerns regarding the approvalof this application. To me, it seems that if someone wants to grow marijuana, it should only be allowed on owner -occupied property. There is a qualitative difference between that and an emplovee-occupied property. 1 live across the street from this property, which currently has marijuana being grown inside a forrner milking barn. Since the property's purchase and subsequent conversion to a marijuana property, the only people living on site appear to be employees. That may seem like a small difference, but such a shift erodes the current character of rural property in the area. To employees, this is just a job. To an owner/farm dweller, this 15 where they live, this is their life. In order to not adversely impact traffic, there should be a limit on the number of trips per day. In my opinion, the new structures should not be any closer to a neighbor's house than twice the distance from the owner's residence to the structure. Regardless of the measures taken to reduce the odor produced by the plant, it cannot be completely contained. Netghbors should not be subjected to anything that the owners themselves are not exposed to. In the summer when we drive out of our driveway, if the door to the grow area is open (and sometimes even when it is not), we can smell it from the street. Finally, since the structures are bulit for a specific purpose, if they cease to be used for that function, after twelve months they should be removed from the property. This kind of industrial agriculture000HsthehucoUomatmpepfrure||iving. I hope you will take my concerns into consideration in making your decision. Sincerely, / Frank Brian 20 November 2017 J. Lee & Kristina A. Casebeer LIV Trust Casebeer, J. Lee & Kristina A TTEES 63528 Vogt Rd. Bend Oregon 97701-8210 Kyle Collins, Assistant Planner Community Development Department P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97908-6005 Ref.: File Number 247 -17 -000905 -AD Dear Mr. Collins, I'm responding to the Notice of Application, File Number 247 -17000905 -AD regarding proposed development at 21330 Young Ave., Redmond, Oregon. I am strongly opposed to the proposed development on the above mention property based on concerns that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not have established air quality standards for such a facility. The air pollutants from such an operation could migrate onto my property at 8151 S. Canal Blvd., tax account No. 130463, causing unpleasant orders & diminish the property value of our land. Once there are established specific EPA air quality standards on marijuana production & processing operations, then !would re-evaluate my position on such a development. Thank you for considering my position on this proposal. h c ng reg J,Le Casebeer 503-4 91332 ATTACHMENT- 11 Will Serve Letters BLANK PAGE ABC Lightning, LLC 19724 Nugget Ave Bend, OR 97702 ph: 541-420-0882 fax: 775-890-9513 Name / Address Synergy Concepts LLC Jacob Jenkins 915 Southwest Rimrock Way Suite 201 Redmond Oregon 97756 Estimate Date Estimate # 8/2/17 58 Project Description Qty Cost Total ABC LIGHTNING LLC is able and willing to adequately supply 0.00 0.00 Synergy Concepts LLC an estimated 12000 gallons of water each month for the intended purpose of use in an indoor marijuana production facility To: 21330 Young Ave Bend Oregon 97703 Cost To Be determined Total Customer Signature $0.00 I", 'V IL 4C> P4 NA, TU L F. irJ --.1111111wafter, 60813 Parrett Rd • Bend, OR 97702« Ph: 541-382-5342 • fax: 541-382-5390 • Email: avion@avionwater.com February 6, 2018 Evolution Group LLC Ref: (Marijuana Production) for 21330 Young Ave Bend, Oregon 97703. Also known as tax lot: 1612110000800. To Whom It May Concern: Avion Water Company, Inc. is willing and able to provide potable water to the above described production, provided all requirements by Avion Water Company are met and all monies due are paid in accordance with Avion's approved tariff. Avion is aware that the applicant intends to construct a cannabis production/processing facility and that the water will be used for agriculture purposes. Avion is also aware that the applicant plans on having Avion water delivered by ABC Lightning Water during the non -irrigation season months. The water usage for the above described production is estimated at 4,000 gallons per month. Avion has the capacity to meet the potential demand. Sincerely, / //'/t., Mike Heffernan Engineering Department Avion Water Company, Inc. geAis CENTRAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. www.cec.coop • PO, Box 846, Redmond, OR 97756 • Office: 541.548.2144 • Fax: 541,548,0366 July 27, 2017 Evolution Group LLC 21330 Young Ave Bend OR 97703 RE: Will Serve Letter for 21330 Young Ave, '1'.16., R. 12., Section I L, 'Fax Lot 800. In response to your inquiry, please he advised that the property located at T.16., R. 12., Section 11., 'Fax Lot 800 in Deschutes County, Oregon, is within the service area of Central Electric Cooperative, Inc, Central Electric Cooperative has reviewed the provided load information (New 3,000 amp 'Three phase 480 volt service) associated with the submitted recreational marijuana grow facility and has determined that this service will require system upgrades to our facilities in the area. Central Electric Cooperative is willing and able to serve this location in accordance with the rates and policies of Central Electric Cooperative, Sincerely, Lane . Woodcrson rihution Engineer June 13, 2018 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, Oregon 97703 KARNOPP PETERSEN LLP 4, 1 0 4 y 4 Y d AT t.40 Re: Applicant's Hearing Submittal — File No. 247-18-000412-A (247 -17 -000905 -AD, 17- 939 -AD, 17 -940 -SP) Dear Commissioners: This office represents Evolution Group, LLC, the applicant ("Applicant") in the above - referenced appeal. Please accept the following information and enclosed supplemental evidence for the record in this matter. 1. Water Information. As noted in the Findings and Decision for the Application, the applicant has provided sufficient evidence that water will be supplied from a public or private water provider. Applicant would like to further explain that it proposes to utilize water saving strategies as a measure to conserve the County's water resource. (See Attachment 1, for example.) Applicant will not utilize the on-site well for any production activities. Last, Applicant plans to install reverse osmosis filters to ensure that irrigation water can be utilized safely in the production. (See Attachment 1, for example.) This information along with the condition of approval that requires compliance with all applicable state statutes and regulations regarding water usage will ensure that the water usage on site is both responsible and meets the County's code requirements. 2. Processing. Applicant proposes to utilize CO2 extraction. Attached is information about this technology. (Attachment 2.) As explained in the attachment, this extraction technology is non-flammable and does not present an elevated explosion or fire hazard. As noted in the staff report, applicant is also required to meet the requirements of the Redmond Rural Fire Protection District. 3. Odor and Noise. Applicant has included site-specific information regarding noise levels and abatement. The application includes sound buffering from both buildings as well as constructed sound barriers and takes into consideration the topography and vegetation of the site. The odor control system is being designed with surplus CFM and includes engineered designs. Appellants note that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has not issued standards for 360 SW BOND STREET, SUITE 400, BEND, OR 97702 541.382.3011 17389.00211317805 5.docx FAX 541.388.5410 1 WWW.KARNOPP.COM Deschutes County Board of Commissioners June 13, 2018 Page 2 odor pollution. The EPA does not regulate odor.' If it did so, it would affect many farming operations. Instead, the County has imposed odor control requirements in its code applicable to marijuana production and as noted above, Applicant's proposal meets those standards. 4. Traffic. Applicant's Site Traffic Report prepared by Transight Engineering evaluated that proposed uses on the site are expected to generate 41 daily trips and that there were no safety or other transportation facility deficiencies associated with the site and use. In reality, the trip generation will not exceed this amount. Staff has imposed a maximum shift size not to exceed 10 persons. Applicant confirms that its staffing plan projects employment of approximately five full-time production employees, approximately two full-time processing employees, and approximately ten part-time seasonal harvest employees with no more than ten employees working during any given shift. Sprinter vans will be utilized for deliveries of its products and seasonal water delivery traffic will be nominal. It is estimated that 4,000 gallons will be required per month during the non -irrigation season, delivered by trucks with capacity of 3,000 gallons. This level of traffic is not materially different than other farm uses that may be allowed or were historically employed on the site. For example, this traffic generation is consistent with a wholesale nursery, a fire and rescue station, or a church. (Attachment 3.) 5, Site Status and 0112.011114 Use. While not directly related to the approval criterion, Applicant would like to clarify that known code violations have been resolved and the property taxes are current. (See Attachment 4.)2 It is the intention of Applicant to continue to irrigate the property as the enclosed picture evidences. (Attachment 5.) It is important to Applicant that the site continue to reflect its rural agricultural location. The property was previously used for dairy operations, which is an intensive farm -use operation, and included numerous facilities such as a feed lot, silo, and milking barn. It also involved shift employees, deliveries, and the operation of refrigeration and other mechanical and electrical equipment. The area contains other, similarly - sized agricultural operations and is traversed by an irrigation canal for active water deliveries to the other ongoing agricultural activities. On site, Applicant will, without limitation: continue to irrigate the pasture, increase farm uses within new indoor production facilities that are clustered with and partially screened by the site's existing development, establish a modestly sized 1 The Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq.), administered by the EPA, regulates 187 hazardous air pollutants (ht(v://wv, w3epa.2ovitt nia t 1 wit.h tn)I). However, these pollutants are regulated for their toxicity, not their odor. The primary concern of agencies that enforce national standards are public health and safety; issues such as odor, aesthetics, and land use are governed at the State or local level, if at all. "This reference guide to odor thresholds has been prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Air Risk Information Support Center (Air RISC) as a resource tool [...] to identify information regarding odor thresholds for hazardous air pollutants." (emphasis added)(Reference Guide to Odor Thresholds for Hazardous Air Pollutants Listed in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, p. ix, 1992) 2 The City of Bend Community Development Department received a Marijuana Production Complaint on November 8, 2017, and upon investigation determined it was "unfounded." The Applicant resolved a building permit violation by applying for, and receiving, an agricultural exempt structure status. The Applicant otherwise resolved compliance issues by removing unpermitted improvements. 17389-00211317805 5.docx Deschutes County Board of Commissioners June 13, 2018 Page 3 processing facility within an existing structure, install a vegetation landscape buffer on the west side of the parking area, and install noise and odor abatement. The application will not disturb existing vegetation, obstruct views, or change the topography of the site. 6. Applicant intbrination. Applicant intends for its operations to be a component of a closed-loop, vertically -integrated operation—viz., production, processing, and retail. This will contribute to safely produced and processed marijuana products for sale in Oregon as intended by Oregon's regulatory scheme. Applicant's representatives include Central Oregon residents and US citizens who happen to reside in Costa Rica (which is known primarily for its eco - tourism industry). These individuals have come together to invest in burgeoning industry in Oregon. It is unfortunate that appellants have submitted misleading and irrelevant information about Applicant members. Such information is being thoroughly reviewed by the OLCC licensing division and has been acknowledged to be eligible for expungement. We appreciate the opportunity to further describe the proposal and Applicant's desire to be a responsible operator and to fully comply with County requirements. Kind Regards, ELLEN H. GROVER EHG/ehg Enclosures Attachment 1: Summary of water -saving strategies Attachment 2: Summary of CO2 extraction Attachment 3: Traffic comparison Attachment 4: Compliance documentation Attachment 5: Property photograph 17389-002\1317805 5.docx Attachment 1 Water -saving Strategies for the Eco - conscious Hydro Grower In an era when droughts are commonplace worldwide, conserving water has become increasingly important. There are many water -saving strategies employed by eco -conscious consumers, and hydroponics has emerged as one of the most effective technologies for farmers and growers concerned with water use. Everyone needs fresh produce for a healthy diet, and hydroponic food production has proven to be an effective solution for water conservation. One of hydroponics' main benefits is that it allows growers to maximize yields while minimizing water use. Hydroponics is a growing technique that feeds plants with elemental nutrients dissolved in water and delivered directly to the root zone without the use of soil. The technique gives growers greater control over the feeding process as well as the quantity and frequency of water delivery. There are several different hydroponic systems. Most of them recirculate water so that it gets used multiple times before it's completely absorbed, lost to evaporation, or dumped. The most efficient hydroponic systems result in water conservation in the garden. Hydroponic systems can be built in a variety of sizes and shapes. They can also be customized to fit almost any grow room or greenhouse. Deep water culture is a hydroponic method that uses buckets connected with PVC pipes to transport water from one plant to the next. The plants are placed in porous net pots that allow the roots to grow through an inert medium — like perlite or Rockwool — through the holes in the pot. Once they penetrate the exterior of the pot, the roots dangle down to touch a shallow layer of water that flows through an outer bucket. All of the plant containers in a grow system are connected to one another with PVC pipe. This multi -plant configuration is then connected to a "brain bucket" that controls water flow using pumps and a timer. The nutrient solution flows from plant to plant at set intervals throughout the REVERSE OSMOSIS WATER AND GROWING GREAT CANNABIS. Water quality is important when growing cannabis. Reverse osmosis filters put you completely in charge of the mineral profile of your water. Lets look at reverse osmosis. REVERSE OSMOSIS TO WATER CANNABIS To guarantee your experience with reverse osmosis water doesn't turn into a time and money wasting experience that fouls all your hard work raising cannabis, here is some excellent information to make sure you get great yields from healthy plants. From dean clones or from seed to flower, reverse osmosis puts you entirely in charge of the water for your grow. REVERSE OSMOSIS GOOD OR BAD? Reverse osmosis is a water filtering process that is said to cause argument among growers. Saying there is a division in opinion over reverse osmosis would be unfair to the generally loving nature of cannabis enthusiasts. The use of reverse osmosis is quite country dependant. With no need for contention. it is not surorising to ind reverse osmosif3 in uoe far more often in countries where the tap water is generally considered not potable, It makes sense that if you can't drink it, your plants, that are dependant on you for their entire ecosystem, probably can't drink it eithr. Meters of course do not inform you of the pollutant, radioactivity, microbial or bacterial content, which may need to be considered. WHAT IS REVERSE OSMOSIS (R0)? Reverse osmosis is a filtration method than can remove up to 95-99% of dissolved salts in any water sample. It is the preferred method for desalinating water on an industrial scale for manufacturing and domestic water supply. Reverse osmosis uses high pressure to force water through a semi -permeable membrane, leaving the salts on one side of the membrane, which goes to a waste water or brine stream. Pure water on the other side of the membrane is the usable water for you and your plants. The brine stream can be fed back through some systems to save water. Reverse osmosis can be wasteful if you have restrictive water access. Six litres of feed water are needed to create one litre of pure water. More, if the source water is very contaminated. Thankfully the burgeoning popularity of indoor cannabis cultivation has seen the drop in price and lift in efficiency of home reverse osmosis filtration units designed for the cannabis enthusiast. P -4,10,160a 0 '47). 4J co X (1.) • _ 0 co 0 to OP 4-1 4— c CO E o (NI _E 0 0 0 —.V - o EL2 0 cr) 0 0 - C (1) 0 • (11 c CO LU +-• I V) Lfl (t 73 c > cu a) +-1 co CL 73 2 eNJ CN CN • • 1 0 % of customers • 1MPM•• • ,m.• CO 0 L.% cn 0 CY) Cr c-1 00 CN CN • • in Johnstown Ohio o new manufact err. 0 9 0 w Q ,CD la) N Li) Lr * , • LO Lt c 0 00 c\c' m rn c 2 tre 0 rt3 x LLJ ,4 0 4-41 o 0) W 4a) CtS aA +w) i1 v O3- cu o a) v.. ca °+_, c W V� 0 r on .3 CO a co • S ccs • • (/) 0 ro 7-1 ro 4-0 ro 0a co CD —C • — Fractiona — Short path distillation C 0 Z V) C W 0 0 > C c u -4-5 5 r° o 0.. .— x ... u.) Q. 4-:;s0 0 maw= a) x • = ra 2 c a) ,..._ E c CO 0=262.819 &um a) .12 44- (10 CA > X - VI r% 5 ▪ C (13 C Tij u vs I - • iv 0 6 Q.) = 4....)''' a) I I a) r,v) aj ..... 0 0 c (...) L.... " 2 co V) ds C E co co 4-) • mom, CL) • E 4..,* u 0 u(3) v3.' 0 ul 4-) S.- 4.7 0 = _ _,.... 0 • Ca) r.: I- O- D ▪ 4-, ...0 Z: e •-.00 • I 1 / I / / 0 / 1 0 v) • v) v) v) v) v) (1) a) (0 2 o C 4-8 C 4-0 20 c20 c (C.? oc E4.....4-: -co ita- L.) CIJ cl. (....) a) 0_ (....) (3) 0- 0 u.0 a) > > = ca 00 0 * 0 *. 9 0 (or) V) V) O 0 • .10111 10•111 CO2 Phase Diagram a a a o a a a a 0 ,- - (1St!) 3N1ISS311c1 • 1•••113 s-- (1) 0 11000128 WHIM1.* 11 Low press, low temp o -0 c ECD O(r) ro 11 as 0 v) .72 Lfl a) 10 w o w Q. 0 • MUM 0 Cr Ct. = High press, high temp 0 4 Step Process tyo 0-44 us3sor. 4 Step Process 0 u (1,J IX X LLI N0 u 4,4,4444 oes operate at high pressures oys 4 levels of safety protection E cu 1) 0 Proper design per ASME, NFPA and pressure relief valves Backup mechanica Operator training LLi is always gasket Nothing goes "boom" • ••••••• •••••"••••• (13 (T3 i.••.• —,•,.....; 0 a) • bilIMP 2 0 E 0 Protects pressure containing portions of the system ASME requires setting at 10% above working pressure tr _--4fl tf 0 n w — Simple, no electrical controls 0 taxes.s4 LU u0(/) cu (1) L_ G) 4J co E i3 0 • — Generally well built systems „ ARM.Inie oOldran, • •0 MRX XTRACTOR5 977 4 23 491 I Home About IVIF1X Xtra,tors -tor Manufacturers Wry c02 Extraction $afety & Quality Supercritical CO2 Extractors and Accessories Why CO2 Extraction Supercritical CO2 Extraction, also known more simply as CO2 Extraction, is already a standard extraction method for the food, dry cleaning, and herbal supplement industries. If you are searching for pure cannabis concentrates, there's no better method than CO2 Extraction. 1 200 250 300 350 ternperature T(K) 400 Carbon dioxide (002) can be heated and compressed into a supercritical fluid, meaning that it can effuse through solids like gasses but still dissolve material like liquids. This phase diagram shows where traditional indications of physical state become homogenous, though it can be Carbon Dioxide Colorless compressed gas. Simple asphyxiant (reduces oxygen available for breathing) Eye/skin contact with the compressed gas can cause frostbite. CAS No 124.39-9 CO2 is non-toxic so there's no need to purge any of the solvent from the concentrate after the processing, but it should also evaporate/sublimate once warming above -78.5C making removal automatic. This saves time and leads to the purest concentrates since it requires no post -processing purging. This is why CO2 is the best method of cannabis concentrate extraction. Supercritical CO2 is chemically stable, reliable, low-cost, non-toxic, non- flammable and readily available, making it a desirable candidate working fluid. It's easier, more effective, and the safest method because CO2 is naturally occurring. You're not risking the inhalation of any other chemicals or substances other than pure cannabis extract. And, its not just safer for consumers, but also for manufacturers; CO2 is both less explosive and Tess flammable than the vast majority of alternatives. High natural abundance keeps costs low; our generators are able to replace any gas lost from the atmosphere. • • • • MRX' XTRACTORS 4 TRA N S 8 G HT CONSULTING, LLC nv"x,",u/w,c.u,"°e,."o^`.'et,,r,,,""o��,^,�'" Date: June 12, 2018 To: Ellen Grover, Karnopp Petersen, LLP From: Joe Bessman, PE Project Reference No.: 1130 Project Name: Young Avenue Farm (Evolution Group, LLC) Attachment 3 ---- p.XP1��317�1/zo'� l -__ ._ � The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a comparison between the trip generation potential of the Young Avenue Farm site with the proposed marijuana production and extraction operation to other uses allowed within the Exclusive Farm Use zone. As summarized in Table 1 of the December 26, 2017 Site Traffic Report (shown below for context) the overall operation generates approximately 41 weekday daily trips. Table 1. Trip Generation Estimates (ITE 10th Edition) ITE Land Use Code Warehousing 15" N*,rijvu^u/)vuv^») Manufacturing 140 Vwurou/,u�Xtrv/mm/ Total Trips Size Daily (Metric) Trips 36 20,832 SF //�/��'; 1,200 SF 5 41 Weekday PM Peak Hour Rural uses within agricultural lands couid vary substantially depending on the season and use. Common trip referencessuch as the ITE Trip Generation Manual are based on suburban or urban uses and generally do not include rural uses such as farming or ranching. � A 5i900 square -foot church would generate an equivalent number of weekday daily trips (significant!y higher daily trips on Sunday). O A 10,000 square -foot fire and rescue station generates an equivalent number of weekday PM peak hour trips. • A wholesa}e nursery with a 1,050 square -foot building would generate an equivaJent number of weekday daily trips, As summarized abovetrips from the proposed Voung Avenue Farm site are roughijy equivalent to other rural uses allowed within the EFU-TRB zoning. Please let me know if you have any questions on this letter at |oe@t/anaightconsu|t/ne.com or at (503) 997-4473. 21]0TDP[O8Vf Attachment 4 Marijuana Production Complaint Property Address, ID, or Tax Lot number: :)/ 5} 0 /721/711e. Is grow visible? If so, how many plants? //i /1,/t4;A it) Date: When did operation begin? 1',/A4/r- /Lir. LJ If operation is not visible, what characteristics suggests production activity? S ///k' ,ii r '? ',V 4, 0 iii) Sere-- /1/2)-4:1i2,/ Are there other code compliance issues?* *Marijuana production must be substantiated for CE to act on non -production related code compliance issues originating from anonymous complaint investigation. Exception: imminent threat to public health and safety. Staff may, however, document other alleged violations for consideration by CE Manager. Note: CE will not contact anonymous complainants on status of investigations, but can provide update upon request. Investigation Comments Assigned Staff:•..`t Land Use Approval? Y N (f Q— MAR? Y N Characteristics of license (cards, etc.): Is growing operation visible? Y Unfounded Referral Notes: ),'i/i ,rr No of plants? Substantiated CE Matter** Other code compliance issues*"r: 71-.)61:1:. ,�?7 e../.4-7/ 4':"°4:-G.` z/(. **An employee complaint form should be Manager. /IV Date: Referred/ Date 7 completed for a!lsuh`stanfidted anonymous complaints and submitted to CE ***CE to stand down on other code compliance issues on referred complaints until deemed appropriate by DA. John Griley From: John Griley Sent: Tuesday, December 26, 2017 9:38 AM To: 'jacobjenkins12@hotmail.com' Subject: 21330 Young Ave Jacob, Following up from our conversation last week regarding the code enforcement case on this property... I talked with the Building Official and am confirming that you can apply for an AG exempt structure for the structure built without permits. Regarding the ductless heat pump units, he recommends that permits are obtained to legitimize the units. If you elect to remove the units to resolve the issue, however, he will require a special inspection permit to verify a safe disconnect and removal of work performed without permit. You can obtain the special inspection permit by seeing a Permit Tech at our office. Please confirm in return response (or by phone) which actions will be taken to resolve these issues. We can extend 30 days for you to obtain the necessary permits and/or inspection. John Griley Code Enforcement Technician Community Development Department Deschutes County (541-617-4708) e-mail: John.Griley@deschutes.org Attachment 4 STATEMENT OF TAX ACCOUNT DESCHUTES COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR DESCHUTES SERVICES BUILDING BEND OR 97703 (541) 388-6540 7 -Jun -2018 ATP LLC 21330 YOUNG AVE BEND, OR 97703 'Fax Account # 130459 Lender Name Account Status A Loan Number Roll Type Real Property ID 2004 Situs Address 21330 YOUNG AVE BEND 97703 Interest To Jun 7, 2018 Tax Summary Tax Tax Total Current Interest Discount Original Due Year Type Due Due Due Available Due Date 2017 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,516.64 Nov 15, 2017 2016 ADVAI,OREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,428.90 Nov 15, 2016 2015 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,183.54 Nov 15, 2015 2014 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,030.48 Nov 15, 2014 2013 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,598.51 Nov 15, 2013 2012 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,665.90 Nov 15, 2012 2011 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,600.14 Nov 15, 2011 2010 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,568.78 Nov 15, 2010 2009 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,387.11 Nov 15, 2009 2008 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $3,008.68 Nov 15, 2008 2007 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,869.60 Nov 15, 2007 2006 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,714.30 Nov 15, 2006 2005 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,705.99 Nov 15, 2005 2004 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,616.64 Nov 15, 2004 2003 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,446.80 Nov 15, 2003 2002 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,387.13 Nov 15, 2002 2001 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,258.32 Nov 15, 2001 2000 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 80.00 $2,24922 Nov 15, 2000 1999 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,21394 Nov 15, 1999 1998 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,134.55 Nov 15, 1998 1997 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $2,075.85 Dec 15, 1997 1996 ADVALOREM $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 80.00 $2,037.31 Nov 15, 1996 Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Deschutes County Property Information Report, page 8 (For Report Disclaimer see page 1) Attachment 5 247-18-000412-A 21330 YOUNG AVE, BEND, OR 97703 Map and Taxlot: 1612110000800 i 5‘..10.( c'NGE Subject: Name Address Phone #s BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony 6? sza Cii5i E-mail address In Favor se>3-4s-- --/534 - L q44-4,tc Neutral/Undecided 3-1418 Opposed Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes El No If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. SUBMIT COMPLETED REQUEST TO RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE MEETING BEGINS o BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony Subject: MC✓6 riictllQ &Cow Uoc45C_,_. Date: G7/37/F Name keen t2i Thor r(� (1 U Address 214,66' 6u. Atm - 6 end, Ots 9 7703 Phone #s 547 - 479 - a57 E-mail address In Favor Neutral/Undecided Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes ,i)( If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. Opposed No SUBMIT COMPLETED REQUEST TO RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE MEETING BEGINS BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony: Please complete and submit to Recording Secretary. SubjJ ect: Date: b r Name 06 E - (I oleic_ Address 7 2-./0 5 CAJ �cI Phone #s E-mail address In Favor ,lz(r 3` 7 Neutral/Undecided Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. Opposed No BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REOUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony: Please complete and submit to Recording Secretary. Subject: 4 / 1-,-/41-A-,/ 4 / AL ‘1 Name .Cr r' i d(, . Hi/ y d Address tl"i/ / 7 4/ r ;r d772�, Z2 Phone #s 9 5/ —c -N> 7 7 / 0 /1/ ,/J i19 &1 e i c 25 ? E-mail address In Favor Neutral/Undecided Y'° '/Date: e / 4.5Ax /Y1 , M Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. Opposed No -(ES o c 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 June 13, 2018 DATE: June 7, 2018 FROM: Nick Lelack, Community Development, 541-385-1708 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING: CDD Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19 This public hearing is to provide an opportunity for public input on the draft Community Development Department Annual Report and Work Plan for FY 2018-19. Board of County Commission deliberations are scheduled for Monday, June 25 at 1:30 p.m. MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Nick Lelack, AICP, Director DATE: June 13, 2018 SUBJECTS: Community Development Department (CDD) Work Plan FY 2018-19 Public Hearing This public hearing is to provide an opportunity for public input on the draft Community Development Department (CDD) Annual Report and Work Plan for FY 2018-19 (Attachment 1). Board of County Commission (Board) deliberations are scheduled for Monday, June 25 at 1:30 p.m. (work session). I. CDD ANNUAL REPORT & WORK PLAN Each spring, CDD prepares an annual report describing accomplishments from the prior year and proposed work plan services and projects for the coming fiscal year. The work plan describes the most important objectives and proposed projects in each CDD division based on: 1. Board of County Commissioners' (Board) annual goals and policies (February 2018); 2. Carry-over projects from current or prior years; 3. Changes in state law; 4. Grants/funding sources; and 5. Public comments. It also serves as the context within which new projects that arise during the course of the year are prioritized and undertaken. 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS Below is a summary of public comments on the draft Work Plan prior to the packet deadline. Environmental Soils Division • Support for initiating a public education, information, and outreach effort regarding allowed uses on vacant, recreational lots in Southern Deschutes County to residents and realtors. Planning Division • Support for "any plan that quickly makes new lands available for Affordable Housing is a good plan." Please find attached an email from Habitat for Humanity supporting this concept. • Support and prioritize initiating a process to develop and adopt a grading ordinance. • Oppose initiating an agricultural lands re-evaluation and potential re -designation. • Support to initiate a process to develop and adopt an Urban Reserve Area for the City of Bend. • Support and prioritize coordinating with the City of La Pine to jointly update the Newberry Country Plan similar to the Sisters Country Horizons Vision. • Support growth management coordination with cities, county departments, state agencies and organizations. • Support initiating an ordinance to establish livestock limitations in rural residential and similar zones. • Support implementing amendments to Deschutes County Code and policy regarding wildfire mitigation. • Oppose initiating an "amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that allows for new rural industrial designations." • Support consider developing a heritage tree ordinance. I11. DRAFT WORK PLAN MATRIX Table 1 summarizes the Planning Divisions draft 2018-19 Work Plan. The matrix includes: • Staff project notes. • Estimated project resources, which include: o A minor rating equates to 2-6 months to complete and 0.25-0.75 full time equivalent (FTE) of long range planning staff. o A moderate rating equates to 4-8 months to complete and 0.5-1.0 FTE or more. o A significant rating spans 6-12 months or longer and requires 1.0-2.0 FTE with possible consultants. • Planning Commission and Historic Landmarks Commission (HLC) recommendations. • A Board "decision" column to identify projects to keep or remove from the Work Plan. Additional rows at the bottom of the matrix are provided for new Board priority projects. Staff will meet with the Board to seek direction on projects to initiate as resources become available. IV. BOARD DIRECTION / DECISIONS Staff is not seeking a decision from the Board at this public hearing. Deliberations and Work Plan adoption are scheduled for Monday, June 25, at the 1:30 p.m. work session. Attachments: 1. Draft FY 2018/2019 Annual Report and Work Plan 2. Public Comments -2- '0 4 0 0 0 . ccaoD Z au o E s✓ ao �oU p do) . av u. �0N O, R0,, rL 4 0 0 sO -1a 0- cc, CO s • o 0 -0 m o OC. N N it u .T. 4) Y @ L iia 7r G N .0 - o a? 0 v O a0A 4) 0 E. mN y '� a) N N i+ o O t 3 .. '3 25 w -t5:1-, t):°T O O rte+ O 6 -_0 '' m ..2.u 0- oc '4-.' -O O N V O 131) 0 G. mon t0 a) qA , 7 = a) G os: N y °u on -0 0 o 3 T ` 0 N O .0 'O .O o 7 O m '' N 6 G v m md, v T? o° 0 totrl O N oA v u of O 0 oA U N a U c". C{, .- -o v °; c • 0 co Y N '0 OyJ YCO J, T x C CO --0 t 00 G o v@ SI a 0- c O v O cG v Q @ "0c Y Y T C� 06 Y .9 sO 'G E @ N f" d 2 co m 'o l) u 4- a v s Y N 44 co u r6 0- v� <- 0 - a O o C co O u O cri N N' o 00 c o '✓ � -4 03 4 0- 0-00, @bA O O O S. O m c6 0 c u O o 4.. d ' svT C .�' 0 G 0 u °_ ° ° 3 °n *0 o v CO i= '"4 • 0.• .0 v 0 m • R -0 Ql ✓ 4 C a 0 ° y m o C �v., O -0 m +' 0- 0 o 0 cii V_ 0'.'v 0 o> lc o 0 '0 G j 0), 'a C V N u 0 ty, y O C 0 s 0 O v v C O Ou CO 0- O 0 N oa o , -0 o to 0 v o v t11 Y 4-4 G an vs. C� 0Y 0 • v +' T3 N V v n -6 N N r 0 v y c N v'� Z ty 0 C v 0 0 `a.' O O o G N O O v CO a c v o 0 N CO 'f' bvA {Y6 = `� N °Y v Q- a� a o m m Q 60 4 '-:30) T to •—.3 Y C6 u 6A C6 p� 0 3 u O C d G0 p 0 v 7, ,a) 0- tri vv p m a d u Y O '^ cO O C CIOCO 0- 0 e E o 0. c -0 co Q C 0 0 O 0 L. .0 C ' 0 0 ^O 00%00)c n v u -O co u co '0 N N o O r v c0 v o ", m C op v 0 X00.. 0 '� C Y ply N 0- E c - * O i u~. CG 0- e-4 d ca ca r - N O 6C, O6) mc 4+ C Q1 tll 0 L l (t C 0 O 1 - C 1 a d E v, s.+ v1 0 k. tS 0 N 0 C Uf 0 0 0 J L3 `/1 O .4-. N N 0, C. cc v 0 o CC 0 0 S a O ot E a 0 z , o E 0 0 w "4 0 0 a 0_ H 0 0. 1- N 0 0 C7.. Table 1— DRAFT FY 2018-2019 Long Range Planning Projects Board Decisions d B Brief Description / Comments 44./ 0 Not prioritized Moderate to ro k 2 Not prioritized Not prioritized Not prioritized \ 2 { CO kC 0 -\ &3 / Initiate amendment to DCC 17.16.105 and related code sections regarding access requirements to rural subdivisions Transportation Text Amendment = 2 0 = #c �b \\ \/ Update the County's Sign Code Board Priority Project: Board Priority Project: Attachment 1 L, ES c0 a -G COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: APRIL 3- DUNE 6 Send comments to: Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org 117 NW Lafayette Ave., Bend, OR 97703 PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULE 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, OR 97703 Planning Commission: April 26, 5:30 p.m. Board of County Commission: June 6, 10:00 a.rn. Elected and Appointed Officials 3 Introduction 4 Overview 0 Executive Summary / Population Growth 8 Board of County Commissioner's 2.018-19 Goals & Objectives 9 Community Development Performance Measures 2018-19 10 Administrative Services: Accomplishments and Work Plan 12 Coordinated Services: Accomplishments and Work Plan 13 Code Enforcement: Accomplishments and Work Plan 15 Building Safety: Accomplishments and Work Plan 19 Environmental Soils: Accornplishrnents and Work Plan 22 Planning: Accomplishments and Work Plan 25 Community Involvement Report 30 Staff Directory 40 2 \ E S c0 o � Tony DeBone, Chair Philip G. Henderson, Vice Chair Tammy Baney, Commissioner Ton? Anderson, County Administration I Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator Dale Crawford - Redmond ( Chau) Maggie Kirby - Bend (Vice Chair) Steve Swisher - Sisters Hugh Palcic - South County Jim Beeger - Bend Susan Tunno - Redmond Les Hudson - At Large Chris Horting-Jones, Chair - Unincorporated Sharon Leighty, Vice Chair - Unincorporated Kelly Madden - Ex -Officio Bill Olsen - Pioneer Association Dennis Sch nidling, Secretary - City of Sisters Rachel Stemach - Ex -Officio Liz Fancher 1 Gregoryj. Frank I Stephanie Hicks I Dan Olsen I Will Van Vactor Cheryl Howard - Chair Christopher Cassai ci - Vice Chair Brad Tower Katrina Lagencierfer Greg Svelund Ann Marland Mark Smith Katie Hammer Michelle DeSilva Rick Root Wendy Holzman Scott Ferguson Dave Thomson 3 Introduction The Annual Report & Work Plan highlights the department's 2017-18 accomplishments and 2018-19 Work Plan. The Annual Report & Work Plan is developed to: • Report on the department's achievements and performance the prior year; ® Implement the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) goals and objectives; ® Implement the Deschutes County Customer Service "Every Time" Standards; • Effectively and efficiently manage organizational assets, capabilities, and finances; ® Fulfill the department's regulatory compliance requirements; • Enhance the County as a safe, sustainable, and highly desirable place to live, work, learn, recreate, visit, and more; and ® Address changes in state law. Summaries of CDD's performance measure results are provided in each division's section as well as in the CDD Scorecard in the Appendix. A summary of the department's overall Work Plan is also provided in the Appendix. The BOCC adopts the Annual Report & Work Plan after considering public, stakeholder and partner organization input, and Planning Commission and Historic Landmarks Commission recommendations. The Work Plan often includes more projects than there are resources available. CDD coordinates with the BOCC throughout the year to prioritize and initiate projects. Projects not initiated are often carried over to future years. Deschutes County Community Development Locations MAIN OFFICE 117 NW Lafayette Ave. Bend Mon., Tues., Thurs., Fri. 8:00-5:00 Wed. 9:00-5:00 REDMOND CITY HALL 437 SW 9th St., Suite 202 Tuesday 8:00- 4:30 4 LA PINE CITY HALL 16345 Sixth Street Monday & Thursday 9:00-4:00 SISTERS CITY HALL 520 East Cascade Ave. Tuesday & Friday 9:00-4:00 Department Overview The Community Deveopment Department (CDD) oversees building and eectricaI services, planning and zoning, environmental reviewcode enforcement and administrative servicesfor Deschutes County.CDD consists of six divisions which provide coordinated planning and development services. 4. The divisions include the following: ° ° ° ° Provides oversight for aH departmental operations and facilities, human resources, budget, custorner services, technology and performance measuresAnalyst staff are responsible for the integration oftechnology across all CDD divisions and coordinates vvith the cities as well as providing direct service to rhe public via application training and support, web -based rnapping, reporting services and data distribution Provides coordination of permitting and "front line" direct services to customers at the rnain office in Bend and at the Redmond, Sisters and La Pine City HaMs. Code enforcement isresponsible for investigating code violation complaints to ensure cornpliance with each of the codes and statutes administered by CDD, and provides direct service on contract to the City of La Pine for solid waste violations. Provides construction plan reviews, consuftation and inspections to assure compliance vvith federal and state building codes in the rural County and cities of Sisters and La Pine. ° Regulates on-site wastewater treatment (septic) and monitors environmental factors for public health and resource protection. ° The Planning Division is set di totwooperaUona| areas, Current and Long Range Planning. Current Planning processes individual land use applications and provides information to the public on all land use related issues. Long Range Planning addresses the future needs of the community through updates to the comprehensive plan, changes to County Code and other special projects. 5 Department Overview Art61'01804 on' Application System Analyst I 1.001 -It Appicabon System Analyst III 1.00 FTE I Management - Analyst 1.00 FTE Community Development Director 1.00 FTE Administrative Assistant 1.00 FIE Senior Planner 5.00 FTE Assistant Planner 4.00 FTE Associate Planner 5.00 FTE Safety Direstor 1.00 FIE Asst Pacing Safely Director 100 FTE Comm/ Residential Plan Review 4.00 FTE &siding Safety Inspector III 9.00 FTE Environmental Health Specialist II 1.00 FTE Environmental Health Specialist I 1.00 FIE Pernit Technician 1.0 FIE c!I uri:n 6 ,00 F.„_iIE Administrative Support Technician 1.00 FTE Perri* Technician aoo FIE Code Enforcement Speciabst 3.00 FTE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Key Department Issues Key CDD fiscal issues and operational challenges in FY 2018-19 are summarized below, as well as emerging departmental and community issues. These issues directly affect CDD's 2018-19 work plan. • Ensure costs are fully accounted for and recovered through fees and other revenue sources. • Ensure financial stability and ongoing operations through establishing a long term financial plan. • Maintaining high customer service levels with appropriate staffing levels. ® Responding to new regulations and laws as outcome of 2018/19 legislative sessions. • Processing complex and controversial land use applications and decisions and code enforcement cases. • Preparing for workforce turnover through succession planning and staff retention strategies. ® Addressing affordable housing. • Improving website, development statistics, and other reports. • Managing population growth and demographic changes • Addressing a growing need for affordable housing ® Preserving and protecting natural resources, water quality and quantity ® Improving transportation systems • Anticipating new economic and agricultural opportunities • Maintaining and enhancing high quality of life ® Reducing natural hazard risks, preparing for disaster resilience ® Planning for healthy and safe communities ® Regional planning, coordination, partnerships ® Expanding recreational opportunities ® Facilitating access to health care and higher education Population Growth TOTAL DESCHUTES COUNTY POPULATION & FORECAST: 1960-2065 Central Oregon is a dynamic region and an extraordinary place to live, work, learn, recreate and visit as clearly demonstrated by the sustained population growth the region has seen over the past six decades. This page provides a snapshot of the County's growth since 1960 and the preliminary 50 -year Portland State University, Oregon Population Forecast Program, through 2068. HISTORICAL AND PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY FORECAST TRENDS Deschutes County 116,277 157,905 3.1% 187,621 301,999 432,930 Bend 52,163 77,010 4.0% 91,373 162,336 255,291 Redmond 15,524 26,508 5.5% 29,364 51,617 82,575 Sisters 961 2,038 7.8% 2,691 5,169 8,431 La Pine 899 1,653 6.3% 1,833 3,954 5,894 Unincorporated 45,280 50,524 1.0% 62,360 79,236 80,739 8 L�� ES C0G -< Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner SAFE COMMUNITIES Protect the community through planning, preparedness and delivery of coordinated services 1. Provide safe and secure communities through coordinated public safety services. 2. Reduce crime and recidivism through prevention, intervention, supervision and enforcement. 3. Collaborate with partners to prepare for and respond to emergencies and disasters HEALTHY PEOPLE Enhance and protect the health and well being of communities and their residents 1. Support and advance the health and safety of Deschutes County's diverse populations. 2. Promote well-being through behavioral health and community support programs. 3. Help to sustain natural resources in balance with other community needs. ECONOMIC VITALITY Promote policies and actions that sustain and simulate economic vitality 1. Support affordable housing options through availability of lands and appropriate regulation. 2. Administer land use programs that promote livability, and sustainability. 3. Maintain a safe, efficient and sustainable transportation system. 4. Partner with organizations and manage County assets to attract business development, tourism, and recreation. SERVICE DELIVERY Provide solution -oriented service that is cost effective and efficient. 1. Ensure quality service delivery through the use of innovative technology and systems. 2. Support and promote Deschutes County Customer Service "Every Time" standards. 3. Promote community participation and engagement with County government. 4. Preserve and enhance capital assets and strengthen fiscal security. 5. Provide collaborative internal support for County operations. 9 \5T E S CO(, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Performance Measures The Community Development Department's 2018-19 goals are reflected in the performance measures below. These performance measures strategically and comprehensively align all of CDD's operations with the Board of County Commissioners' (BOCC) 2018-19 Goals and Objectives and the County's Customer Service Standards. The performance measures address service delivery expectations from the perspective of CDD's customers; ensure the department fulfills its regulatory compliance requirements; effectively manage the organization's assets, capacities, and finances; and preserve and enhance the County as a safe, sustainable, and desirable place to live, visit, work, learn and recreate. CDD performance measures implement the BOCC's FY 2018-19 goals and objectives. Each performance measure references the applicable BOCC goal and objective. For example, CDD performance measure 4, which is to achieve 85% voluntary compliance in Code Enforcement cases, implements the BOCC's Safe Communities Objective 1 to provide safe and secure communities through coordinated public safety and services will include the reference "SC -1" in bold type. • SAFE COMMUNITIES (SC) • HEALTHY PEOPLE (HP) • ECONOMIC VITALITY (EV) • SERVICE DELIVERY (SD) 1. Complete single family dwelling permit process from Application Acceptance to Ready to Issue in 30 days. (SD -1) 2. Cornplete commercial structural permit process from Application Acceptance to Ready to Issue in 35 days. (SD -1) 3. Achieve a customer feedback rating of 2.9 (out of 3,0) or better. (SD -2) 4. Achieve 85% voluntary compliance in Code Enforcement cases. (SC -1) 5. Resolve 75% of Code Enforcement cases within 12 months. (SC -1) 6. Complete Code Enforcement Procedures Manual amendments. (SC -1) 7. Complete structural permit Ready -to -Issue turnaround time of 4 days. (SD -1) 8. Achieve an average of 6-10 stops at different construction job sites per day for each Building Inspector. Each stop may consist of multiple inspections. (SD -1) 9. Achieve an average turnaround time on building plan reviews of 8-10 days. (SD -1) 10 ojES C0 { COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Performance Measures (Cont.) 9. Issue new onsite septic system permits within 15 days of receiving a complete application. (SD -1) 10. Achieve compliance with the ATT operation and maintenance reporting requirements of 95%. (HP -3) 11. Issue all planning administrative (staff) decisions for land use actions requiring prior notice within 45 days of determination of complete application. (SD -1) 12. Issue all planning administrative (staff) decisions for land use actions that do not require prior notice within 21 days of determination of complete application. (SD -1) 13. Coordinate with cities regarding growth management. (EV -1, EV -2, EV -3, EV -4, HP -1) 14. Coordinate with the City of Bend to implement the Bend Airport Master Plan.( EV -2, EV -4) 15. Coordinate with the City of Redmond to entitle a large lot industrial site. (EV -4) 16. Re-evaluate agricultural land designations. (EV -2, SD -3) 17. Complete Sisters Country Vision Plan in coordination with the City of Sisters and Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council. (EV -2) 11 45 AM 11 Please Leave us Feedback! What was your overall impression of our service today? Please rate our: Ri Courteousness/Respectfulness: Good; Good Good Grief Great Great yt reat 11 Administrative Services Administrative Services provides oversight for all departmental operations and facilities, human resources, budget, customer services, technology and performance measures. Administrative Services includes the Community Development Director, Senior Management Analyst, two Systems Analysts, and one Administrative Assistant. • Monitored new performance measures to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of departmental operations and processes. • Completed departmental Business Processes Audit and implemented 90% of recommendations. • Implemented new accounting, human resources, and timekeeping software. • Began remodel of CDD lobby to improve safety, customer services, and efficiency. • Distributed performance measure reports to internal and external customers. • Complete implementation of Business Processes Audit recommendations. • Worked with the County's database administrator to implement the use of genealogy vvithin Accela and DIAL, allowing reverse chronological research of parcel changes. • Complete remodel CDD lobby to improve safety, customer services, and efficiency. • Monitor a new performance measure to target the number of days from building permit acceptance to ready to issue of 30 days. • Implement CDD information technology strategic plan. • Update CDD website, including division and project webpages. • Create a new web -based CDD newsletter to report department news, development statistics, performance measure results, notable quasi-judicial land use decisions, long range planning updates, and department news, 12 Coordinated Services The Coordinated Services Division provides service to customers at the main office in Bend, as well as in City Halls in Redmond, La Pine and Sisters. The Division consists of nine permit technicians. Staff work to ensure minimal wait times, provide accurate information to the public and ensure the efficient operation of the front counter and coordination among all divisions. Staff also perform basic building plan reviews. • Permit Technicians currently staff three satellite offices one day per week each, increasing to two days per week due to permit volumes. The ability to be co -located in each jurisdiction's city hall has greatly enhanced communication while processing permits. A significant number of projects have been initiated in cities, requiring a substantial amount of staff time. The Redmond satellite office continues to see only a minimal number of customers each week. • There was increased use of our online permitting services this past year. • Maintained a high level of customer service during a period of increased activity and new staff training. • In coordination with Administrative Services, Coordinated Services continues to assess equipment used by staff to ensure operational needs are met. The team developed project lists that will enhance service, staff efficiency and communications. Projects included: ® Providing smart phones to building and environmental health inspectors and code enforcement technicians in the field to provide real-time inspection results; making data available to inspectors in the field; and irnproving communication, photography and printing tools; ® Reviewing business processes and procedures and making several adjustments to accommodate and fully utilize Accela. ® Continued to create efficiencies using the Accela 13 Coordinated Services (cont.) permitting software. As the software evolves and new tools become available, Deschutes County continues to be a statewide leader in offering training opportunities to our customers and regional agency partners using the software. Deschutes County has created an Accela ePermitting Advisory Group that will be looking at the future of State ePermitting systems and how it can best fit the needs of the jurisdictions statewide. This is both an opportunity to discuss system issues and to offer suggestions for improvements to meet Deschutes Count's needs. The state has been supportive of this group and its suggestions. • Percentage of permits applied for at counter target is 40%. Results: 70.1 %. Did not achieve performance measure. • Continue to coordinate and conduct public outreach and education on Accela and related elements to increase customer use of ePermitting, and encourage submittal of applications for participating jurisdictions. • Continue to monitor customer and permit volumes in City of Sisters and City of La Pine to ensure resources are allocated to those locations ensuring customers are served in a timely and efficient manner. • Increase customer and public education on Accela and online permit applications in coordination with Information Systems staff to achieve performance measure. • Continue to explore options for improving efficiencies for permit applications submittals. ® Work with the new City of La Pine Community Development Director to improve efficiencies for reviewing building permit applications, the issuance of complex permits and Certificate of Occupancies for properties located in the City. ® Continue working with the City of Sisters to improve efficiencies in review of permit applications and issuance of those permits. • Serve on statewide ePermitting committee, participate in national Accela conference, and pursue other actions to ensure Accela meets Deschutes County's needs. • Continue to cross train permit technicians to perform simple plan reviews and participate in statewide permit technician training programs and Central Oregon Planners Network Training. • Achieve 25% of all permits being submitted electronically, with the exception of planning applications (the capability does not yet exist). • Establish and monitor a new performance measure—the target number of days for structural permit ready to issue turnaround time for Coordinated Services of four days. 14 Code Enforcement The Code Enforcement program consists of three Code Enforcement Specialists plus a volunteer. The program is managed by the Coordinated Services Administrative Manager and is supported by a law enforcement technician from the Sheriffs Department and operating divisions. Code Enforcement is responsible for investigating code violation complaints associated with building, land use, onsite wastewater disposal and solid waste codes (by contract with the Solid Waste Department). The program's overriding goal is to achieve voluntary compliance. If necessary, citations are issued for prosecution in Circuit Court or before a Code Enforcement hearings officer. The program continues to adapt to the County's challenges of growth and diversification, incorporating new measures to ensure timely code compliance. With the legalization of marijuana, Code Enforcement has been the leading entity for receiving and investigating signed and anonymous complaints. Code Enforcement closely coordinates with CDD divisions, the Sheriff's Office, the District Attorney's Office, and state agencies to achieve code and legal compliance of marijuana operations. Voluntary compliance remains the Code Enforcement program's core objective and staff continue to refine best practices to achieve this outcome. However, an ever-growing number of cases require further code enforcement action because of lagging correction or non-compliance. Through the continuing development and refinement of Procedures for Administrative Civil Penalty, Code Enforcement is obtaining expedited compliance from citations, a contrast to court adjudication and greater cost recovery. A disconcerting trend is the necessity for County abatement in some cases. In abatement, the County affects the cure of violations with prioritization on cost recovery. Abatement action is reserved for matters of chronic nuisance and public health and safety. In response to this trend, Code Enforcement is closely coordinating with other County departments in the development and enactment of abatement plans. " pa:05.2018 14:24 15 Code Enforcement (cont.) � [odeenforcernentresohed45OoaseSinZO17. ° Staff fo dh - volunteers in the the proac0ve code enforcement program prograrn was once again a great success. Volunteers directly enhanced the program's productivity and efficiency through reviews of Temporary UsehzrcDnnp|iancevvithcondiUnna|usedecisions,indmedical removal of manufactured homes for storage permits and for living in RVs. ° Successfully coordinated with the inmate work crew to resolve solid waste cases. This partnership between two County departments helps resolve difficult cases and helps homeowners come into compliance. The County Road Department is also also involved in heping to abate properties with hazardous structures. Created a new anonnnousnnarUuanacornp|aintforrn'providingpartiestheopUnntosubrnitthe anonymous complaints. ° Created a new case type for marijuana complaints in order to monitor- those cases. This wil allow for easier and consistent reporting. ° Staff started issuing e"Notice n[Civil Penalbefore a Hearings Officer rather than Circuit Court. This new process has aUovvedstaff toschedule multiple he i- day, which expedites cases. |talso allows staff to have 8hen placed Onth�propertyif the property complied with[Ounty[0de8nd pursue further action, as needed. 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 252 241 2OU 0 - ------` 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 +29% +18% 457 366 284 +27% 581—' 16 Code Enforcement (cont.) • Achieve 85% voluntary compliance. Table 1 below shows the program performance measure with 83.66% of cases resolved voluntarily. • Resolve cases within 12 months of opening a case. Table 2 shows that months. The program is in within range of achieving this performance 100% 90% 80% 85%........ 84% 85% 70% 60% - 50% 40% - 30% 20% -- 10% 10% 0% 100% -- 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% - 40% 30% 20% 2012 7% i2% 6% 10% - -1395 0% 2013 2014 :1% 8% 2012 2013 82% 11% 17% 92% 88% '84% 6149F% C33/f4961 % �4 is within range of achieving this 84% of cases were closed within 12 measure. 2015 2016 2017 ;1% 2014 2015 1 ! 85% 67% 32% 18% 17 - 34% '0!4 :34'6 20% 2016 2017 Voluntary ❑ Warning ❑ Citation Inj unction Closed within 30 Days ❑ Closed within 60 Days ❑ Closed within 180 Days Closed within 1 Year Code Enforcement (cont.) • Achieve 85% voluntary compliance in Code Enforcement cases. • Resolve 85% of Code Enforcement cases within 12 months. • Continue coordinating with the Sheriff's Office, District Attorney, Legal Counsel, and Planning staff to track, process, and resolve marijuana complaints in a timely fashion and revisit the approach to marijuana code violations with the BOCC. • Update the Code Enforcement Policy and Procedure Manual and County Code, if applicable, to implement: Y BOCC direction on the approach to marijuana code enforcement and associated procedures to process violations; Land use procedures code amendments; Other housekeeping amendments to reflect business practices. • Continue to utilize the inmate work crew to resolve solid waste cases where the property owner is unable to comply with County Code due to medical issues. ® Continue proactive efforts in investigation of illegal second dwellings, review temporary use permits, and follow up on replacement dwellings. • Continue to establish relationships with homeowners' associations, including offering to speak at meetings to share information and enforcement operating procedures. Survey other jurisdictions and incorporate innovative enforcement practices where appropriate. This effort includes direct involvement with the Oregon Code Enforcement Association (OCEA) conference participation and networking. • Administer the Volunteer Program, focusing on reviewing temporary land use approvals for medical hardships which require the submittal of annual reports and similar cases. • In cooperation with the Building Safety Division, participate in the development of a text amendment on the County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. The amendment will update tables to include compact florescent lighting and LED options. ® Consider proactive review and enforcement of non-compliance with land use decision's conditions of approval. ® Create a tracking system for code enforcement cases submitted and processed as part of the land use application process. Submit report to the BOCC in early 2019. ® Refine property abatement process to cure violations. 18 -CES Building Safety The Building Safety Division interprets and enforces the state -mandated building codes through a process of education and a clear and fair application of the specialty codes. The Division provides all of these services throughout the rural county, the Cities of La Pine and Sisters, and various services to Lake, Jefferson, Klamath and Crook counties, the Cities of Bend, Redmond and the State of Oregon Building Codes Division on an as needed basis. The Division consists of the Building Safety Director, Assistant Building Safety Director, and 15 Building Inspectors. • Issued 580 new single-family dwelling permits in 2017 for all Deschutes County building jurisdictions. These include 43 new homes in City of La Pine and 91 new homes in the City of Sisters. • Nominated Angie Havinear as Oregon Building Officials Association as Permit Technician of the Year. Ms. Havinear earned the award. • Continued to enhance Accela's capabilities through identifying issues, articulating business needs and finding solutions and opportunities with this emerging building inspection software. • Continued to cross -train all staff members to improve efficiencies. • Continued to diversify division staff with the hiring of our newest Fire & Life Safety Plans Examiner. ® Hired the division's first licensed Architect as a Fire & Life Safety Plans Examiner. i Facilitated the approval of the Sisters' Assisted Living Facility. • Participated in the preconstruction meetings for dozens of marijuana related facilities. ® Participated in the construction process for The Cloud Chaser, Mt. Bachelor's newest ski lift. • Participated in the construction process for a new medical facility in La Pine. ® Maintained inspector certifications. ® Presented to: ® CCB licensed contractors through CCB's local educational program at COCC. 19 Building Safety (cont.) • A well -attended educational program that included all local buildingjunsdictions and the local design professional community through a partnership with the local International Code Council chapter. • Local chapter of International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials. Redmond Proficiency Academy Tiny House class in 2017. 700 600 500 400 300.-...... 200 100 +89% 297 157 2012 2013 +8% 320 2014 1800 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 +19% +38% 523 441 2015 694 2012 +35% 934. 2013 20 2016 +9% 1014 580 2017 +23% 244:. 2014 2015 +12% 1390 2016 • 1534 2017 Building Safety (cont.) • Achieve 6-10 stops at different construction job sites per day for each building inspector. Each stop consists of multiple inspections. Achieved: 10.28. • Complete 2-4 residential plan reviews per day per plans examiner. Achieved: 1.3. • Percentage of permits applied for electronically: 20%-40%. Achieved 29.9% • Percentage of inspections scheduled electronically: 50%-80%. Achieved 60.4%. • Residential plan review turnaround time in days: 2-8. Achieved 12.32. ® Inspections completed same day as requests: 90-100%. Achieved 98.9%. Manage staffing resources to meet increased business demands, particularly with a diversity of projects in Sisters and La Pine. ® Continue succession planning, cross -training, and technology and vehicle investments to maintain and improve efficiencies. ® Achieve an average of 6-10 stops at different construction job sites per day for each building inspector. Each "stop" includes multiple inspections. • Achieve an average turnaround time on building plan reviews of 2-8 days. • Coordinate with Information Systems staff to promote and educate customers on hovv to apply for permits and inspections electronically. • Participate in public, community, and customer -specific education and outreach efforts. • Continue to serve in regional and statewide and statewide leadership positions to support Deschutes County and Central Oregon interests. 21 TES < Environmental Soils The Environmental Soils Division is staffed one Environmental Health Supervisor, one Environmental Health Specialist, one Environmental Health Specialist Trainee and one on-call inspector who provide site evaluations, design review, permitting, inspection, education and coordination with DEQ for onsite wastewater treatment and dispersal systems. Additional support staff include a permit technician. Staff also inspect sewage pumper trucks, report on the condition of existing wastewater systems, maintain an Operations and Maintenance tracking system, provide the public vvith information on wastewater treatment systems and regulations, and investigate sewage hazards. Staff are also engaged in the proactive pursuit of protecting the groundwater in Deschutes County. by • Assessed 229 sites for onsite wastewater treatment and dispersal systems, a decrease of approximately 20% from 2016, and issued 1,361 permits and authorizations for new and existing onsite treatment and dispersal systems, an increase of 11% from 2016. Assessed sites in 2016 included two new subdivisions. In general, applications are more complex and technical compared to recent previous years. • Regularly coordinated with Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), including the hydrologist in the Western Region office, to determine the circumstances in South County requiring protective onsite wastewater systems. Staff continued to support and work with DEQ staff on South Deschutes/Northern Klamath Groundwater Protection Steering Committee recommendations. • Continued coordination with the Deschutes County/Neighborlmpact Loan Partnership program that provides financial assistance to South County property owners when a nitrogen -reducing AI I system is required to repair a failing onsite system. • Made available to property owners in South County a rebate of $3,750 per property for upgrading conventional onsite systems to nitrogen reducing pollution reduction systems. No property owners pursued this opportunity in 2017. • Coordinated with the City of Bend to assess sites eligible for onsite wastewater treatment and dispersal 22 Environmental Soils (cont.) systems due to their distances from a sewer collection facility. Coordinated on proposed developments with City staff. • Updated Operation & Maintenance database for systems required to have service agreements and annual reporting. Achieved 96.5% compliance on 657 accounts. Multiple Environmental Soils staff are familiar with the database and most communications with service providers occur electronically. 300 250 . 200 150 100 50 0 +23 % +65% 140 114 +21% 170 +68% 285 -20% 229 69 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 1600 1400 1000 800 600 926 400 200 - 0 +15% -13% 935 - 810 +4% +27% 1188' 1231 1361 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 • New septic system permit process control turnaround time: 5-15 days. Achieved: 11.02. 23 Environmental Soils (cont.) ® Percentage of permits applied for electronically: 15%-50%. Achieved: 5.5%. ® Percentage of inspections scheduled electronically: 35%-65%. Achieved 37.9% • Pre -cover inspections completed same day as request: 90-100%. Achieved 94.9%. ® Continue to maintain or exceed service level goals and permit application processing time for site evaluations, design review and inspection of onsite vvastewater treatment and dispersal systems. O Achieve a 10 -day turnaround for new construction permits. • Prioritize addressing sewage health hazards and protecting public health and the environment. ® Continue working with the DEQ on permitting protective onsite wastewater systems in South Deschutes County. ® Participate with DEQ in the pursuit of groundwater protection solutions and possible implementation of the South Deschutes/ Northern Klamath Groundwater Protection Steering Committee recommendations. ® Provide financial assistance opportunities when needed and appropriate to assist South Deschutes County property owners who do not qualify for conventional loans to upgrade conventional onsite systems to nitrogen reducing pollution reduction systems (Nitrogen Reducing System Rebates and the Neighborlmpact Non -conforming Loan partnership). O Participate in the City of Bend Storm Water Public Advisory Group. ® Continue coordination with the City of Bend and DEQ regarding the southeast sewer interceptor and sewer expansion, and the impact on homeowners with onsite wastewater systems. ® Maintain and update the South Deschutes County Groundwater Protection Annual Report. ® Participate in DEQ Accela task force to improve efficiency and clarity with the electronic permit system across the onsite program. ® Participate in the Upper Deschutes Agricultural Water Quality Management Area Local Advisory Committee. ® Coordinate with Information Systems staff to promote and educate customers on electronic permit submittals and inspection scheduling. ® Long -Term Projects: Update the DEQ contract for the Onsite Wastewater Treatment System Program to be more consistent with current rules and requirements (current contract dates from 1981). 24 v0. ES c O Q -< Planning The Planning Division consists of two operational areas: Current Planning and Long Range Planning. The Division consists of 16 employees: a Community Development/Planning Director, 1 Planning Manager, 3 Senior Planners, 1 Senior Transportation Planner, 6 Associate Planners, 4 Assistant Planners, and an Administrative Assistant CURRENT PLANNING is responsible for reviewing land use applications for compliance with Deschutes County Code (DCC) and state law, including zoning, subdivision and development regulations, and facilitating public hearings with hearings officers and the BOCC. Staff is also responsible for verifying compliance with land use rules for building permit applications and septic permits; coordinating with Code Enforcement to respond to complaints and monitor conditions of approval for land use permits; performing road naming duties and assisting with addressing; and providing assistance at the public information counter, over the telephone and via email; and addressing in the rural County and city of Redmond, under contract. LONG RANGE PLANNING Is responsible for planning for the future of Deschutes County, including developing and implementing land use policy with the BOCC, Planning Commission, community and partner organizations. It is in charge of updating the County Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations, coordinating with cities and agencies on various planning projects taking place in the region, including population forecasts with Portland State University and cities. Staff also monitors and participates in annual legislative sessions, and serves on numerous local, regional and statewide committees primarily focusing on transportation, natural resources, growth management and economic development. Three specific disciplines support both Current and Long -Range planning, including transportation, wetlands/floodplains, and Information Systems. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING provides comments and expertise on land use applications, calculates System Development Charges (SDC's) as part of land use application review process or upon request; provides comments to the County's Risk Management Department regarding traffic issues for permitted events; participates in the annual County Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) process with the Road Department; applies for grants for enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities in coordination with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC); participates in Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) funded refinement planning; coordinates road issues with Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the United States Forest Service (USFS) for urban interface plans; and serves on several local and regional transportation committees, most notably BPAC, the Bend Metropolitan Planning Organization Technical Advisory Committee, and Central Oregon Area Commission on Transportation (COACT) Technical Advisory Committee. FLOODPLAIN AND WETLANDS PLANNING is responsible for providing comments and expertise on land use applications, code enforcement, and general property inquiries that require development, fill, or 25 Planning (cont.) removal in mapped floodplain and wetlands. Staff maintains certification as an Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM) Certified Floodplain Manager to provide customers with up-to-date and accurate information regarding FEMA regulations, surveying requirements, and construction requirements. Coordination is frequently required with external agencies including FEMA, US Army Corps of Engineers, Oregon Department of State Lands, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the US Forest Service. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS The Planning Division processed: • Plan amendment and zone change re -designating a property zoned Exclusive Farm Use to Multiple Use Agriculture near the eastside of Bend. • Plan amendment and zoning text amendment relating to churches within the Wildlife Area Combining Zone. • Plan amendment and zone change re -designating a property zoned Surface Mining to Multiple Use Agriculture near Bill Martin Road, • Zone Text amendments addressing lot of record standards and process. • New urban holding zone for lands recently brought into Bend's Urban Growth Boundary, but not yet annexed. Also included minor amendments to Deschutes County's sign and subdivision ordinances. LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS • Six appeals were filed with the Land Use Board of Appeals in 2017, compared to eight in 2016. Staff also processed in 2017 a LUBA remand pertaining to Thornburgh Destination Resort. 1200 1000 800 600 .......... 400 200 ...... . 392`.. _. LAND USE APPLICATIONS +18% 463 10% 511 +30% 663': +22% 809, +19% 963' 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 26 Planning (cont.) �w��NmV� MARIJUANA BUSINESSES The following marijuana applications received approval in 2017: 24for marijuana production ° Iwo for marijuana processing • Three for marijuana whoesaling • Cnn or marijuana retail The Board of Commissioners also heard five appeas in 2017 pertaining to marijuana production and processing. NON-FARM DWELLINGS The Pannng DMsion received 21 nonfarm dwelling applications in 2017, compared with 39 for 2016. PARTITION AND SUBDIVISION PLATS FKteenfina|p|a[svvererecordedin2O17orareinLheprocessofbeingrecorded,creoLingatota|of48 residential lots. PR0K8UM]ENTAPPLUCATUOYVS Noteworthy land applications in2O17included, asolar photovoltaic system, dog kenn e[temporary use/ medicaldvve|on�MazanaBed and Breakfa�/[anpgrnund' at -risk youth school, water ski lake/ duster development, lot of record (Kine), Thornburgh LUBArenand, and marijuana production, processing. and retail applications. 1.1-(�`� • Process land use applications without prior notice in 14-35 daystarget 21 days. Achieved. 28.7 days. • Process land use applications with prior public notice in 30'60 days; target 45 days. Achieved 33.8 days. k� ��, Y� •�� AGRICULTURAL LANDS RE-EVALUATION & POTENTIAL REDESIGNATION: Re-evaluate agricultural lands, including sein on state committee(s) to define non -resource lands, initiate a local non -resource |andspro|ect,andrnonitorOoug|asCounK/snonfesource|andsprojec{. COMMUNITY & AREA PLANS: CornoeteSisters Country Vision P|an Engage Turna|o.Terrebonne. � Nevvberry[ountrand/or Deschutes 'Junction residents todetermine ifcommunity plans, goals, and policies meet the current and future needs of the area. Only one or two such planning efforts may be initiated each fiscat year. 27 Planning (cont.) AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Consider developing a County housing strategy based on Tillamook and Coos County's plans. Participate in state committee(s) to consider rural accessory dvvelling units. DESCHUTES JUNCTION: Initiate amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that allows for new rural industrial designations. MARIJUANA REGULATIONS: Update the County's marijuana land use program. NATURAL RESOURCES / WATER: Complete the series of regional panel experts addressing water resource and conservation issues with a particularly emphasis on the relationship to land use and population growth and development. Consider initiating a review of County Goal 5 inventories and protection programs. GRADING ORDINANCE: Consider and evaluate vvhether to develop a grading ordinance. GROWTH MANAGEMENT COORDINATION: Coordinate with cities, County departments, state agencies and organizations to develop and implement growth management plans. CENTRAL OREGON LARGE -LOT INDUSTRIAL LAND NEED: Continue to coordinate with the City of Redmond to initiate a UGB amendment for a regional large lot industrial campus. TRANSPORTATION • Continue to coordinate with the City of Bend to amend the County's Comprehensive Plan and Development Code to allow new airport -related businesses at the Bend Airport through a streamlined permitting process. • Initiate County Transportation System Plan (TSP) update in coordination with County Road Dept. if funded by the Oregon Dept. of Transportation. • Serve on the US 97 Parkway facilities management plan technical advisory committee. • Participate in the County Road Dept.'s Transportation Safety Action Plan (TSAP) process. • Initiate amendment to DCC 17.16.105 and related code sections regarding access requirements to rural subdivisions. NATURAL HAZARDS: Consider implementing the recommendations from the University of Oregon's Community Service Center's review of County Codes and polices regarding wildfire mitigation. 28 Planning �~N��mmNN�N0�� (cont.) OUTDOOR MASS GATHERING PERMIT AMENDMENTS: AmendUeschutesCounTy[ode81Gpenaining to Outdoor Mass Gatherings in coordina0on with County Legal CouneI. HISTORIC PRESERVATION—CERTIFIED LOCAL GOVERNMENT (CLG) GRANT: � Administer the 2017-1 B [LG Grant from the State Historic Preservation Office, including managing the Sisters historic inventory project, and supporting Historic Preservation Month. ° Apply for 2019-2020 CLG Grant, including coordinating with the Historic Landmarks Commission and City of Sisters on priority projects to including in the grant proposal. PLANNING COMMISSION & HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION POLICY & PROCEDURES MANUALS: Develop on|icyand procedures nnanua|s for rhe Planning Connnnissionand Historic Landrnarks [onnnnissionvviLhsubcommittees o[eachbody.Thepurposeo[thernanua|isprovideahe|p[u|reference guide pertaining to each commission's unique purpose, authorities, roles, decision making processes, applicable lavvs/regulations and documents, public meeting requirements, etc. ONGOING ANNUAL PROJECTS ° Consider implementing legislative amendments stemming from laws enacted by the 2017 and 2018 Oregon Legislative Sessions ° Population Forecast: Coordinate with the CounAssessor and Administration Office to cornplete the Portland State University, Population Research Center, annual Housing Unit and Population Questionnaire. TRACKING SYSTEMS: DEVELOP, MAINTAIN, AND IMPROVE TRACKING SYSTEMS FOR: = Comprehensive Plan and Community/Area Plan implementation activities, updates, necessary revisions, and potential areas for new plans. • Destination Resort overnight lodging units. ° Limited Use Permits: Agri -tourism and other commercial events and activities. o Manjuana Annual Reports. � Non-farm dwellings. ° Medical Hardships. � Conditions ofApproval, as necessary 29 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Statewide Planning Goal 1, Citizen Involvement, requires cities and counties to create a citizen involvement program that provides opportunities for community participation in land use planning processes and decisions. Land use legislation, policies and implementation measures made by Oregonians over 40 years ago helped shape Oregon's urban and rural environments. Likewise, choices made today will ultimately shape these areas in the future. Successful land use planning occurs through an open and public process that provides room for information gathering, analysis and vigorous debate. Deschutes County's Community Involvement program is defined in Section 1.2 of the Comprehensive Plan. This chapter identifies the County Planning Commission as the committee for citizen involvement. It also contains the County's Community Involvement goal and corresponding five policies that comply with Goal 1. This report briefly discusses the noteworthy community involvement actions undertaken by the Planning Division in 2017. The report is intended to provide county residents and stakeholders vvith a tool to assess its effectiveness and offer additional suggestions the County can utilize to ensure that its diverse communities remain actively involved in land use planning discussions. CURRENT PLANNING Administering the zoning code requires the Current Planning Division to process individual land use applications, zoning review and sign -off for building and septic permits. Current planners maintain legally prescribed turnaround times on land use applications (150 -days) and provide customer service through assistance at the front counter, phone conversations, and appointments. Phone messages are returned within 24 hours. MARIJUANA REGULATORY ASSESSMENT In dune 2016, the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners (BOCC) adopted eight ordinances to regulate the marijuana production, processing, wholesaling, and retail industries. Recognizing the unique development patterns in the rural county, regulations mitigate sight, sound, odor, water, waste disposal, and access, among others. They are unique among Oregon counties in three ways: 1. Discretionary standards allow the industry to utilize emerging technologies for growing and processing marijuana to demonstrate regulatory compliance; 31 ��vT E S 0 o COMMUNITY ..`�- DEVELOPMENT 2. Applications require notification to neighboring property owners which provide opportunities for public involvement in land use proceedings; and, 3. Development standards take into consideration rural zoning, lot patterns, a high desert climate, and agricultural practices. After adopting the ordinances, the BOCC committed to re- evaluating the marijuana regulations. The purpose of the regulatory assessment is twofold: ® Summarize comments from stakeholder, residents, interested parties, and state agencies and law enforcement regarding the effectiveness of the marijuana regulations; and ® Identify regulatory options. Commencing in October 2017, the Community Development Department (CDD) prepared an Existing Conditions Report. It described the marijuana applications submitted to Deschutes County from September 2016 through September 2017, The document also summarized the County's marijuana regulations and code enforcement philosophy. Upon its release, CDD initiated a public involvement process to identify prevailing opinions among industry representatives, stakeholders, and residents. PLANNING COMMISSION The Deschutes County Planning Commission held 22 meetings in 2017 discussing an assortment of issues, including: • Text amendment to allow existing buildings as a medical hardship in the Forest Zone • Fifty-year history of agricultural lands in Deschutes County • Planning Division annual work plan • Destination Resort overnight lodging unit tracking • Community open houses and workshops in Sisters, La Pine, and Redmond discussing flood plain amendments • Bend Urban Holding Zone ® Lot of Record amendments ® Flood Plain Zone amendments ® Wildlife Area Combining Zone amendments ® Deschutes Basin work group update ® Sisters Country retreat • Code Enforcement work session 32 2017 Deschutes County Community Involvement Report HISTORIC LANDMARKS COMMISSION The Historic Landmarks Commission held 5 meetings in 2017 discussing: • Certified Local Government grant • May Preservation Month • Cline Falls Kiosk • Hindman Barn stabilization • Northwest Deschutes County tour • Training on Certified Local Government and the National Register of Historic Places • Nomination of Central Oregon Canal Segment for the National Register of Historic Places 33 Planning Commission Tour of Sisters Country, Fall 2017 Historic Landmarks Commission tour of Sisters Country & Cline Falls, Fall 2017 35 11 E Deschutes County Community Development Performance Measures - Customer Perspective 1/1/2017 To 12/31/2017 Meeting Target Within Range Not Meeting Target Planning Division Days To Process Administrative Determination Applications Without Prior Notice Days To Process Administrative Determination Applications With Prior Notice Building Division Residential Plan Review Turnaround Time - Number of Days Building Division LOWel Limit 14 Days 30 Days Lower Limit 2 Days Loner Limit Inspection Request Completed By Inspector On Day Requested By Customer 90% Environmental Soils Division Loner Limit Pre -Cover Inspection Request Completed By Inspector On Day Requested By Customer 90% Target Upper Number of Days Limit To Process 21 Days 35 Cays 29.6 45 Days 60 Days 72.9 Target 5 Days Upper Limit Days UPPer Target Lenit 95% Target 100% Upper Limit 95% 100% 1,7 e s,r. prt r.oessa 12.91 % Completed On Time 98.9% % Completed On Time 94.9% Deschutes County Community Deve opment Performance Measures - Internal Organizational Assets 1/1/2017 To 12/31/2017 ?I') Meeting Target Coordinated Services Percentage of Permits Applied For At The Permit Counter Building Division Percentage of Permits Applied For Electronically 81) Within Range j Not Meeting Target Building Division 'Percentage of Building Division Inspections Scheduled Electronically Environmental Soils Division Loser Limit 60% Lanier Limit 20% Loser Limit Target 40% Target 40% Target 50% 65% Looso Limit Percentage of Environmental Soils Division Pemiits Applied For Electronically 15% Environmental Soils Division 'Percentage of Environmental Soils Division Inspections Scheduled Electronically 36 Loner Limit 35% Target 35% Target 50% Upper Utrit 20% Upper Limit 60% Uppor Limit 80% Upper Limit 50% Upper Limit 65% IL Applied For At Fermit Co -"ter 70.1% % Applied For Cane 29.9% % stheausea Eleatroa;oaay 61.2% % Applied For Online 6.9% % Soiotr4od Electronically 39.9% Deschutes County Community Development Performance Measures - Internal Processes 1/1/2017 To 12/31/2017 Meeting Target Code Enforcement Achieving Voluntary Compliance Resolving Cases within 12 Months Building Division !Residential Building Inspections - Number of Stops Per Day Building Division Within Range Not Meeting Target Laval Lime 75% 75% UMW Lire 6 /Day Lcwat !Residential Plan Review - Average Number of Plan Reviews Per Examiner Per Day I 2/ Day Environmental Soils Division New System Permit Process Control - Turn Around Time in Days 37 I tewet Lime I 5 Gaye Tariet Uppel Comp/ane tere Rate 65% 100% 85.005 65% 100% 63.2% Target Avg Stops Pet Day 6/Dar 10/Day 1628 Target /005 Target 10 Days Swat •;,r_,1) Uppes Plan Reviews I Soore teen Per Day 4 /Day 23 1 UpperIs'st'ibP'etme I 15 Dap 1 11.0 u , a) MS 0 Q) o M- S in L.) t 0 0 .0 O a) . .6_, if, o_ . a. , . vi 7 0 0 4-, _ E (., ,-,:, . 0 'rT3 O in Ea) C a, .! oLcu0 o ) 0. ,c -o • 2 O 0 0_ IA U L/1 0 < E >, .v, ir) V ca b.0 4--• EU ( -0 _. O M Q) CU 0 , 16 a) Lil L-45_ -C (.9 0_ r li >. E 10 MS -0 0- -0 5 a) c 2_..) 0 0 a, c ro m cu cu _a c (7, u u a) 0 o ca 0 c bo c cy O .c c in § C in kr, in C 0 4__, o 0 49, E M 0 0) a) c ▪ .c 0 -o7 rE vC t c> C4r .0 a, - a, 6(0 8_, ca. E - in ,- LA' W V) 0 0 C W U C 4- 5, 0 _C E0 0 u -(1) cu 0 Ln •- -47_.- "--',-, ,._ 0_ m 4-,' -0 0 ,-, „ CU l_.) ro - CU (13 kr) S '- 0 cu -1"2 ,--, -0 ±4=-, o (Li E co w a) .0 C eir: ,El) vi c 2 5., 0_ t -0 r0 Ec7- '- 0_ 4- -0 '4-7-' r0 M O 00 a) c _J -0 W CU E -;c2 0.-a 00 E vi m ,4_ D 0) -I-' s_ )--• '-C.) 0_ (0 u -i 0 in QJ •- L.) s_ 0 Q.) w .0 160 71) 0 00-- > 4--, 2 0 o_ 0 rD C - -47-, tfi E 0 -0 CU CD C C iD-- C -0 E E ) ct 4V52 0-' . . 0L7 cC "sME-''.l' t '(r2,5 >aro :)70 L .a 7 -0C 0 c -o W(0Cv vi _ 7E a)16 T1°) _-.4-c'0 E0 0)0upR 4- 6- , 8_,b-oE c ro a) - co 4--, 0- u 4.,.. 0 a) ‘c.) , u c) c .E C) C C . - L7I 7--0 v 0 0__ CU L v) „ . v-, .,.) 0 ra o ,73 -_cCC CU - -0 0 -a — ,_, '0 s..) )•c5 v-) -0 ' 0 Tv- u a) a 0 0 2 , ti < 0 0 a) 0 2 E ' 0) cu ,-- -- 0 .•'-'.E.o.o a_ t„.0 4— 0 0 2,-,,,7, 0_ a) 0 0 Do—a),----?,-,oFIQ virocro 0 E ° "4= >'' E Lci) •,., ay- a- ° " O 1.) 10 . - l- .,-, 0a5 rt y k,.., .--4-2 4-' tap (T) a-, ,a) VI CU 0 "- 04-0 813 ±-' '- a t (L) 0- 2- a, - o E z5J a-) *E :(7.)- E trl LI 0_ ,_ — •, 0•, E -0 -. Cau -- E L.) U v) t'- '.- • (0 -C *ty- (1) I- -0 To C C • t: W -0 '-' L.) 0 O o0>cc -, 00.0 0 C n0) LE_0J .1vf720 „?_,-, 0 4- _0)C1602 0 y--0 _O -0 0 r--, U 0 D L.) - .-., •- 0 C '-,C3 0 0 q- E cu -ff ',E, 0 c '°aEECW ° c 2 cuc,@0_>.,(1.) 4--' (0 V E 0 0__c 10 MI CU u 4-, W 0 00000_6 -C -- a) 0 a CU o-.-- >, -EL E cu w u 0 - -o 22 M ci)C 8 (13C rDC DJ c0 CU ul CU .., CD CU C CU r4 M 0"5. 7 cu . cb-00a)c>cc ,,,c» a) .,%' .6_, .7 ..6, .c ..,-,, v-) '4= ro -4----, ,CL) -0 '47-, . _0 Q) .0) c-Ltc00,F,00,-,:aic_0 0000 o , _ 2 0000%---(nOwW0uu Ul.) CDU .7 uE u -;=_,- LI IL, kJ (!) C l J « Lri LIJ LI) MS, ''E3 vl . 4--, C _.= r0 CU C 4E' 0 0 7 CU l/1 : --. _ W •b.o a, c -. o c (o a) 4--, -0 E c E00 ru a) in > _C u- . -0 0) 0) ia0 o CUa) E c 0 _C .:-J 0_ 0 > ,--, a) o -o w .-= . @ 8 0 0 ,-, r0 ,.. 2 u "D E ti '5 0 vi vi o_ -0 0- a) 0 4u C • Vi § c C E3- 24 ) • 0 (0 C .- 0 un _c cp )...) ...,' 0 LI m 10 C (i) E 0 o L) -5 _ • .47, o .>- o L/1 0 l) U1 0 0 0 > .0 o_ v, 0= 4.-, LE Q) 0 — 4-0 0- u -0 C 4,- c c a, r‘a 0 ri3 cu .6_, - a) °- o a, • 0 ro Q) vi ..c CD 00 CD vi Lil -0 E. (..) 1.,1 .- (0 -- 4) - E ECC ,C, ,, 4- 0- `,-) - 0 4-) • - ,--- C '4=3 ±-2 I WC1-Cli v,0_15 '8-2 I ; ra), :L W 0.) E C •- _0 v, c 0 >, 0 C • u L._ JU LU , 4, ..-- 0 (0U .0_ C .rDa -g-0 0 00 ca -0o 60)o0 •E %2� 2 -' _ @ a., u a3 ro a) .0 , °- o t:uo w _, a) E 4- TA '-' il,)3 ts5;1 C ..1--, •-, co C4_, (11 tC3) 03 .2, 7 2./..), () 4,- (DU La.:1 —0 0) CD_ 0 73 0- 4_, -0 U 0 >, 0 C ..0 i_j•-_. c EL, -,_-_:ro ,_0_ c 00 _, o 0 0 (c) u a) cu rts a • VI •- (1) CU —I TrD -0 E u co .- ,ii >-:.:5 C '_13 - 47_, 0 Q) L._ 0 0 a, cu .),-4- E 9_-) 0- Et 4- 3 - (1) w E LI E -o T„ o L._ in -, rovio0oc o_ ra 0 _E 0 0 .,`0.7' bL2 4 g - - w " 03 C1M '-r13 'ff t' 'E' ,--'C 2 .,7 a) v 0 a) 7 VI MI )- V b-0 r'T3' E o__0 c c 0_ 0 E W 0 4--, no P .0 -(3 t:.-) CU < -5 -,-_-, c...) 0 E E - cu 0 L7, 0 ,;,' -cu__. >cu bu scl .t- _ow y wit' vi a, ,_ U 0 '4-W-(IIVI .z • g 0c`. c -c_4_, - ca.— ...., - o L.) 0 0 rty a) CSC 0 oc 75 w= • E4-5' bro .- a) § E:.-.-_-- 0.- ro 0 it 0 0 - ,c r13 .p,r-ucau,00 ,i-7o-,E!_I3-1 )J ' -•c4c-av-n),1 -4>a'c'zo' "-),-'_.,,,„L_j..uL- v,ca-uJ))a"csc-.' / 0:;a9:5• )-•'0) -_,-°u))3, ,cL(Euu°3 _:' Uu2I!-:II n :0 l'ui20,jE,,1rocu(D i:L.0)0Dj7V sE.)S 2-3 WW•E 3o0=2T,.,WcE4-0-00_'5_„ '7 CU 0 0a_E-E2umE00,E- u:':))• LUC.,.I• !0C-.O.,.).•_oc('°a7'J3i) _L, -C -w'1.,,; •z4oCc0(-1_--)", '.0oc0W_ -'.4.oC-6a-(_n-,(' •r'Q-0ct-1) ;0 -,,5ta,,FTs,j)-., _ou4CCt0-0xV, '.-au_c,0D_')l 0Dr0va, - _.-L0Oarc-_D,),.-.(c0cE1.) -•.soa-5"cEn.j _i' ,) rm a u2C-UQ-u E•:aDoo )- ,c_E_'2,,,-o-:z0C:'-2 >g j77I6Z. 0 (0 = s 8zo)S)aE'`82uD ) - a0fa60o o0 °coco D)u H :-,0E>E:i•cUU gc4cH .' C) °WOOD- < cL.)LiD - - . (....)U.C_L..ri < 0 cUt..)c)x . . cri - cri q5 oi . • Lri 38 Li) 0 0 ENFORCEMENT 2 4/1 H u LU 0 4. Z J Q 0 X Z W a a , -p O E cu - - Q) to t1.0 d vi a) 0) ° a) E -c 0c .c c Q C U `' to p in C ''_' -0 a) C 0 a) >, 0 in c *v -- b-0 o ,T+ to 'tn C r6t Q N C C 0 + O Et_.' ) a) -c 4-4 O O u Q t''-'' > , V1 C Vl p_7 a1 in Cil O s C C to 0_ U O O_C a) a) O a) Cr6 'Z, U 4_, C U cu E w c o O O 0 a) r6 -4-'a) O to QJ c - > L .� to - -c N - O c a) in O Q > U 0_ -(.5Q J w C c O T + c n c o O Q.) _C 5 N•_ V2 cu 5 O -c a) C O Q -o F a) p Qc a) 9. 5 O l/1 E 0 0) L C Q 0 Q _ _ r6 -O 1 0.0 > '� a) O C o- s -LI) C To ro C -C 0 N N Vl C a) 0 0 CU U 'in E .� ,f O r6 CO J Ev a) _c o.� J v v� to i U +-J >, Q rro U7 C b-0 -'' C v 2 T > yO O -O , -O O p C r6 Q a) ,--, co- .c > V. O_ r6cii C N 0 a) C Y C T C 1 .�-, r6 N ,;C O QJ �v� 0 O , 6 nE�E�o o �E .-ELE v as c v o E.� v, o 0 v bJ0 r6 QJ Q O _U L v,-'i+� OU Q T U a) to ..' r6 Q -o a) 00 Q vi U N C v 2O N C Q_�, d° 0 C C in 0_ O Q p t✓ p c6 C ' �O (o E a) to a) 0..4-2 O UU0 ,a--) U 2 N �' C C cu co vi Z r6 L -6 T OO O N n C to p +� -O p U V d p C ,.j Q -a_C.o v -0 °vv-�ouv.° .ovE0�v� v 0 C v QO Q000 c O-oLu dv� v.� vv u) -o n Q cO Its �o QO v-� C CaaU0 ,n >,,,>_:,, i73 v> c C ti0 r6 -6 .0 ,- a) .o,0-- 0 C 10 r6 O C O -6 u c O_ T a) c O Q) _o c Q1 O to a) rB 0 uo� LtrIaco-0vi-C a) v0 aU > o °;.-v 73.5,-- :EWC �a��c��lEu. �v �Q� r0CL. vc� po o�vvvvE� v o N E -v !LC wmn v.v CaJv two + C � r6 � '>O 00c Nr O u �� v4-.,-, C 5 -FA O p p �-+-,Q M E w 2 c c O ct w a) v Q +- ro O D O to O U to 0 .0 0 4-, -6 O a) a) Q C -Q to a) C _C r6 4- E bb 2 c v a, , 4- -C 8-_<2 ro p � ._ O C to c tai ro v 0 Q O _�_ O CO CZ vcV (0 v-'0 C.,_,ccovm a)ErO L (73 l0 c p rB r6 a) ,_ c �, to O C YO v a) D 0 0 E bow. 2 n v�.�_.a c v� U Q vo0 a0)0�� aoa��U �o�vd� c v co o o •-�� v Qcw� �v v O� °)2 .0 U 0, . E ° two U r6 O r6 E �O� 0 3(DC"T�.c p o -c C c c O "d ro— O_c c„=.-. rra c c c rasa)�c_�a)ucraravv v QJ vl 0 a) Q a) C O a) .IN 0 Q 0 W p fl- - O 'r6 to .9-.0- 0 U > �, C - r6 -10 N C N -}, a) 0) -0 -,_, . -C�, o O }U-) ' r6 C N �U, ',U-, C C c 0 O C i,_> i C O_'- to r6 p v aJ v O, U -C O r6 O L O (DOR r6 ln r6 r6 2UQ 0-Q U.�QaUaZa.-oz0_U. �Qa-a . O N - r -i 00 d" - r 00 ' Lri LO h- 00 0) — J H Z Z Z_ a. Z p J_ o N Ncc m 5 Z w 39 X ce Lo) Lu 0 2 c e cL. 0 X 2 0 0 20 401 in c 6 _c ( 6 fa -6 (1) o u e '--) u E n3 ) _C 0 0 - 4_ .0 c a) o a) ir, _,o_ u" w LE Crc m a) E ms ° --QUO E. E' 0 , > t--, CD 0 (1) kn. (.0,fl° :0 717u) '._ jc)i >_IL C E . a) a) a c u o -C) a L- c °- (1) L.- E D c (1) Ci3 2 4= > -,v) v) CL 0 C CLi_,‘8_, 0 0_ rj > c ---,_ c 0 E co '-) b.0 > r0 b.° L.) 0 ›, • - r0 773 w Q.) L_ 0 W -0 -0 a '-• -0 0 -0 E 3 _, c v, , c,_ CLJ c 49, a) . - 5 c c o a7 .4='' 0 0 RD 4_, ._10 (0 CD 0 0_ 6 cu 9 ro _1 -0 0 0:1 iLj 3 1 't'TJD '5 E cu -0 0.) i. -ii E -L- .,.i• !,•-,-, (0 . 4--, 0 Ll ,•-• 13 a) c c (...9 in 4-_, ..,.) Cu --, 0 -P- D cll r' +73 '-' cL)) --E, L,1)1 (c--; u-, >, 0 E' -0 .0 L,I) . Ln U 13 '13 VI Lil .-C- ,- L'-,-, (1) -0 -0 !,.4 o j .•, CU _0 ,),3 0_ .---- U c c CI) -0 7 45.....0 0 _C Lr) (11 -0 E 4,-.6 -E- '6 -F, E c o ,,,, 2 co -(2 E•- -. >, a) c E) oa) c --L.7 tLom --c 2 o .-6 .% o 0- ,---- 11 0 0_ C 13 13 a) 7 0 5 E L' L-- z a_ bz 0 b..0 0 0,0 o •c > ._ 0 -- 5 2 ,._ -c-, u>.' -1- E 0 CI- CU 4- '-' E - ,14; c c _o a) U 4-j '-. > -0 o E 0 ',-- ,....,- .0_ c -i- ._- (4\J w 2 '5 _o 3 w ii-) 0 • ,A i-- 0 J--, 0 4-,--2 --s----' 0 1:) CU -C a) 0 ,-; LA o .t10_ Z,, a.) e 0 -o '' c rz ca -c U o ,-• '4- o 0_ cu c _c -1-' cZa./ 0 C0Ohn ..til 0-I-- C >- 4-4 ro r0 4 --,,ii C '- -,- w -0 -W- 7 (...) - - U ,__-, - '.,-- ..._ a) 0 vl C -o ro ra -o -.„- -c_)- E 0(0 vi U C 7 C ‘- - c ru CU L.) -2 ,.0 -D cl) P its ,..... b.0 13 :4•_.7J 7 W W W C -0 Go --J - .E7 .11)> 0 L.7) a) E L.7 ton) a) a) -c .,7, -0 a. ro c o Vi 5 ro 6- r'-ci Ey a) E tK)0_ - m Q.) -I-, CO l-.4 Cl 9. _.C-.-4 ID rOL) 8 a_ er g C F CU a) 0 L'-- 1) 0 0 L-- 1.7- .?", VI' t,_.) tfT C 0 -1--, > 0 (t , L- ' * _ 7 '-'• ° CU 0 - 0 -0 48--o' 0 0 1- u .1i, L" Ui x ,- u V) G - Lo ,-- r-,. 2a, ,zu 0) 1- ,--- if) -6 vi CO 2:".e.::: v) ,, 7 -- 1._. vl • c C r, 0 E 0- ,,v! 4-_-_,- ii' o 0 c l'' cu (1-.) 8 .? f -.Ewa' .:4 51 -7 C ) 6C L ) _), ); _ 0: 'cat°. u ,),,c)CCDE 2, _i_v7C icur)° !" 4 -' - :rEC i ‘4,- 8: (13 E k_ -C '0 7-0 CU ° 0 E -4--'--. 0 u 0 0 -0 , Ln m co ''''E c m tvo E c ,bc a) ° -c- c o_ ,6 to_ 4-, o v ,.._, E W -0 4_, ,... ',-71 >--, 0 v) 13 -0 c ,--; a) _C C 0 4_, .L., _ Qj ._, c (s) ,.., 0 0 CJ 't -i' -0 C1.0 t---' > cu -0730 >-, 0 .L_. CL. W E -C tio ro u C , ; 4--, L. •- a M, E .- --, 0 L_ U 4-.1 .5 La: co o , _--,,-,- ,) .ff,,,s c 2 0CE oc:6E',;(x E tio 4' a) 0 ..c 0 < , 2 -'-' i- i-- 4-, Ll Lrl W -- 0 Ll' l_ I- E-- o .- Lt 0 0 .0_ '- C a) --, • 73W < ro.,' in0 22 -ora o 0 .-c)cEm o c ._ 2 cu .5 -o 0 m c 0 0_ 0 LC' 45 - •c2- If' < c u 7 8 2 a) c -> ° M -0 01 0 L., 0 _Lel c _0 0.0 0 L__ ro CD > , ,-- )-j (0 V) 047j 'DC -,-7C1 _cW 49 a_CLI (1) CV C , a) .. 2 (D 0 (1) (3-1 r0 ,,,L1 -Eo- (au 0 7 t L- ',-, C rC5 L71 '13 0 EJCX5 -0-- 7 C 0 -0 (9) ,..--,.. C LC? ftUD 12 C -8 C '13 '2 bk) G) 5 vi 0 0...0 (1-' 0 0 -CJ .g_ CI) C -0 -1 '' .- .L11 E o v) Li E ° c -.-,_7, a) .,...., cU o ca) IL) W -4-' 0 .., C _C - ,--- ..1/1 E V) .° 4--' CI 4E..L-'' 8 '= 13 0 § U 0b0M c w -, 0c 13 < +1-, 0 _C Cei--- QJ. iCI) , o ouatio W •• 1-).-4-7,‹ ci) _CE°0 t3.0 (i)f) .E. r_a- K-c3c ba' -g E 84y, E 5 u40 "r-, °- Et- mE_0 m 'It L_ .E.' C w 0_ 0 -0 CU Lifil w w c v) -C2 .(2 Lri E E1 ar- .< , J3 i421--,1' L) .-21u.-, ' ..(sUi) tWao a' -i- 'r'a-' • ci3.i0 .4•.0_! C1acO0) 4,0, T.o.:)0roa nc-: .''rFC-' r(Ia E''9EE0 'c u -0Uo-.0 ) r0 ic2 u -r•T,` a) ci; >, c v3 CO V' -0I .. 4-E-: k.--9 ',-.`12 2 .3., -F__, 6 r_ti (i, 0- 14-,54-',9,-• C)._490LnOW o 13 C c C C CU --, (-J. 2 f_ Cud 2 Go 0 C 0 a- - ''' C 0 Lu2 I- • Ln _c E 0 c -4•-, ,',1 r- --: il - ili'll .4115) cm >, T. EE -a QJ in E E ci7 cv 0 u U u c c £L0 u .2•ea Go0) 0 . C -V 4? 0 -- `1-- '47 i 0 NI cri •cr v-- r- •k- w _0 8 2 v >iv o_, 0 u E • rx >, - c •- u a) co tin E trj to r.„ in (f) =t4 c L_J. .0 (.77 -1°°641.!2,0°u 7:2 w ° EL) E E -o - nrcu cu o E ,a) ,ra •-c-u- u E <Li= (-) ".C:: ro 0 coom 0 Z ‘6_ ri Lri N re as -c u 6 E LL L-) C c C C -7.173 'ort5 C. (6 13 0›.1=M•< vl 7 f Lni c2L._ ,4s, 2 46 0Q) 8 to 0 eL f2< 10 z z 40 Lri Name Nick Lelack, AICP Krista Appleby Tiny Berg Keri Blackburn Todd Cleveland Kyle Collins Rainer Doerge - Scott Farm Lori Furlong Brandon Gilmore Owen Gilstrap Chris Gracia Tracy Griffin John Griley William Groves Peter Gutowsky Judy Hackett Angie Havniear Tim Heck Zech Heck Rodney Hines Larry Howard Steven Jensen Brandon Jolley Diane Justus Jennifer Lawrence Michael Liskh Izze Liu Nicole Mardell Matt Martin Nate Miller Brian Moore Lisa Petersen Sherri Pinner Anthony Raguine Tank Rawlings Jacob Ripper Kiley Rucker Clamons Title Community Development Director Building Inspector I Applications System Analyst HI Permit Technician Environmental Health Supervisor Assistant Planner Building Inspector IH Building Inspector III Administrative Manager Applications System Analyst I Building Inspector III—Electrical Assistant Building Official Administrative Assistant Code Enforcement Specialist Senior Planner Planning Manager Permit Technician Permit Technician Building Inspector IH Associate Planner Permit Technician Environmental Health Specialist II Building Inspector III—Plumbing Building Inspector III Admin Support Technician Permit Technician Building Inspector III Associate Planner Associate Planner Associate Planner Assistant Planner Building Inspector III Permit Technician Management Analyst Senior Planner Assistant Planner Senior Planner Environmental Health Specialist I Phone (541) 385-1708 (541) 385-1701 (541) 330-4648 (541) 388-6577 (541) 617-4714 (541) 383-4427 (541) 385-1702 (541) 385-1402 (541) 317-3122 (541) 317-3193 (541) 388-6614 (541) 388-6578 (541) 388-6573 (541) 617-4708 (541) 388-6518 (541) 385-1709 (541) 385-1713 (541) 330-4611 (541) 388-1047 (541) 385-1704 (541) 383-6710 (541) 330-4666 (541) 385-1700 (541) 322-7182 (541) 385-1730 (541) 385-1405 (541) 388-1047 (541) 388-6554 (541) 317-3157 (541) 330-4620 (541) 323-5221 (541) 317-3188 (541) 385-1712 (541) 617-4739 (541) 385-1759 (541) 383-6709 41 Email Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org Krista.Applelay@cieschutes.org Tim.Berg@desclautes.org g Ken.Blackburn@deschutes.org Todd.Cleveland@deschutes.org Kyle.Collins@deschutes.org Rainer.Doerge@deschutes.oi g Scott.Farm@deschutes.org Lori.Furlong@deschuttes.org Brancion.Gilmore@deschutes.org Owen.Gilstrap@deschutes.org Chris.Gracia@deschutes.org Tracy.Griffin@deschutes.org John.Griley@deschutes.org \Nilliarn.Groves@deschutes.org Peter.Gutowsky@deschutes.org Judy.Hackett@deschutes.org Angela.Havniear@deschutes.org Tim,Heck@deschutes.org Zechariah.l-leck@deschutes org Rodney,Hines@desclautes.org Larry.Howarcl@deschutes.oi g Steven.Jensen@deschutes.org Br andontolley@deschums.org Diane.Justus@deschutes.org Jennifer.L.Lawrence@deschutes.org Michael.Liskh@deschutes.org Isabella.L.iu Dcieschutes org Nicole.Mardell@deschutes.org Matt.Martin@deschutes.org Nate.Miller@deschutes.org Brian.Moore@deschutes.org Lisa.Petersen@deschutes.org Sherri.Pinner@deschutes.org Anthony.Raguine@deschutes.org Tarik.Rawlings@deschutes.org Jacob.Ripper@deschutes.org deschutes.org Kiley Rucker-Clamons@deschutes.org Peter Russell Todd Russell Randy Scheid Martha Shields Tanya Saltzman Cynthia Smidt Dan Smith Dan Swarthout Chris Tiboni Jennifer Tidwell Nether Ward Laurie Wilson Richard Wright Senior Transportation Planner Building Inspector III Building Safety Director • Permit Technician Associate Planner Associate Planner Code Enforcement Specialist Building Inspector III Code Enforcement Specialist Permit Technician Assistant Planner . Building Inspector I Building Inspector IH (541) 383-6718 (541) 385-1700 (541) 317-3137 (541) 385 1706 (54 1) 317-3150 541) 325-1710 (541) 385-1745 (541) 383-4397 (541) 385-1714 (541) 383-6711 (541) 617-4746 42 Peter.Russell@deschutes.org Todd.Russell@dcschutes.org Randy.Scheid@deschutes.org Martha.Shields@deschutes.org Tanya.Saltzman@cleschutes.org Cynthia.Smidt@deschutes.org Dan.Smith@deschutes.org Dan.Swarthout82deschutes.org Christopher.liboni@deschutes.org Jennifer.Tidwell@cieschutes.org Hether.Ward@deschutes.org Laurie.Worley@cleschutes.org Richarci.Wright@deschutes.org Attachment 2 -8- r, it E'';. I°, LANDWATCH April 25, 2018 Deschutes County Planning Commission Nick Lelack Community Development Director 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, OR 97703 re: Draft CDD FY 18-19 Annual Report/Work Plan Dear Chair Crawford and Planning Commissioners, www.centraloregonlandwatch.org Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Community Development Department Annual Report and Work Plan. Our comments are confined to the work plan for the Planning Division. Agricultural lands re-evaluation and potential re -designation In the interest of efficient use of County resources, we recommend that the County wait to see the judicial resolution of the Douglas County case before proceeding on this issue. To the extent the County seeks to correct any potential mapping errors in its Comprehensive Plan the County should follow the process outlined in ORS 215.788. There is no indication the lands of Deschutes County are incorrectly mapped. The last time the County examined the issue it was apparently decided there were no mapping errors. LandWatch recommends the County instead direct its resources to the study and identification of lands suitable for urban reserves. Deschutes Junction The item on the work plan states "initiate amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that allows for new rural industrial designations." As the County has previously stated, this item is intended to address the desires of one individual landowner in the Deschutes Junction area. That landowner has twice received approval from the County to re -designate his property, and those approvals were twice remanded or reversed by the Land Use Board of Appeals because those approvals did not comply with state law. There are currently hundreds of acres of land zoned for industrial use, including large lot industrial land, inside the urban growth boundaries and unincorporated communities of Deschutes County where such intensive development belongs. LandWatch does not believe it is good policy for the County to initiate a County -wide legislative process to achieve the goals of one individual landowner. 2 Growth Management Coordination This work plan item states that CDD will "coordinate with cities, County departments, state agencies and organizations to develop and implement growth management plans." LandWatch supports any County efforts to develop and implement growth management plans to plan for population growth. We also support any potential urban reserve areas planning process in coordination with the City of Bend to provide long-term certainty about future potential urban growth boundary expansions. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Best regards, /s/ Carol Macbeth Carol Macbeth Staff Attorney Central Oregon LandWatch www.centraloregonlandwatch.org LANDWATCH May 1, 2018 Deschutes County Planning Commission Nick Lelack Community Development Director 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, OR 97703 Re: Draft CDD FY 18-19 Annual Report/Work Plan Dear Chair Crawford and Planning Commissioners, www.centraloregonlandwatch.org Thank you for hearing comment from the public at your April 26, 2018 meeting on the CDD FY18-19 Annual Report/Work Plan. In addition to the comments we relayed at that meeting, Central Oregon LandWatch has one additional concern to submit to you prior to the May 3, 2018 closing of the written record period. Natural Hazards We support the proposed Planning Division work item to consider implementing amendments to Deschutes County code and policy regarding wildfire mitigation. Specifically, we recommend incorporating higher standards for wildfire risk found in model code from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), including NFPA 1141 and 1144, and the International Code Council (ICC), including the ICC Fire Prevention and Control Plan and International Fire Code. Incorporating NFPA 1141 would require most new development to achieve fire risk mitigation standards including access, building separation, fire protection, and water supply. Incorporating NFPA 1144 would further require most new development to include defensible space zones, use non-combustible construction materials, and complete hazard mitigation assessments and wildfire mitigation and action plans. Both NFPA 1141 and 1144 would require these fire protection standards prior to development approval. The ICC Fire Prevention and Control Plan includes additional or alternative standards of risk avoidance and mitigation for new development. Other potential code changes could include a prohibition on flammable building materials, more stringent defensible space standards, and a new Wildfire Hazard Combining Zone. Our region's wildfire risk will likely remain high as our climate becomes more arid and variable. Development in areas of high wildfire risk creates unnecessary risk to residents, firefighters, and first responders, and also results in the use of public money to protect private 2 property in the likely event of wildfire. Deschutes County should prioritize implementing code and policy changes to prevent risks to public safety, minimize private property damage, and prevent public firefighting expenditures. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Regards, Rory Isbell Staff Attorney Central Oregon LandWatch www.centraloregonlandwatch.org From: Scott Rohrer To: Nick Lelack subject^ Annuai Report and Work PIan Draft Date: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 4:05:45 PM Attachments: /mwaeooxipo /manenoo./oo Nick,Nick, reviewed the Annual Report and Work Plan draft, and 1 have one comment. Given that Habitat for Humanity's exclusive focus is affordable housing, you can guess what my comment relates to: Land for Affordable Housing. Deschutes County contains four Habitat affiliates, Bend, Redmond, Sisters, andandSunriver/Lapine. am the Executive Director of Bend Area Habitat for Humanity. Our biggest need and challenge in the battle for affordable housing is land. In Bend, the cheapest build -ready lot currently costs $125K. That's the cheapest. Land cost is a big problem. The other problem is that there are very few $125K lots currently for sale. And unfortunately for me, the Bend area has the greatest land shortage of an town in Deschutes County. I personally think the Tillamook County Housing Plan is a bit overkill, but any plan that quickly makes new lands available for Affordable Housing is a good plan. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions or desire additional input. Regards, Scott Rohrer Executive Director 224 NE Thurston Ave., Bend, OR 97701 Office: 541-385-5387 From: )eff Pokorny To: Nick Lelack; Board Subject: Community Development Department Work Plan Date: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 4:1720 PM I have a few thoughts for you regarding this... With growth and real-estate expansion comes the need for MORE agricultural land to feed more people... and your plan seeks to reduce it. This is counter intuitive. A cities real estate is not required to expand to keep the economy strong. A city must transition to a sustainable economy that is NOT based primarily on Growth (which is unsustainable in most every aspect) in order to keep the economy strong and sustainable. Our local wildlife depend on agricultural lands to migrate... which its critical to their very existence. A city is not valued for it's SIZE, it's valued for it's desirability. This often has an inverse relationship with growth. Lastly, Humans always choose the easiest path. If we designate more lands as "developable" it will take away the incentive to engage in the conversations about how to grow UP instead of OUT. I feel transitioning lands from Ag to Developable is NOT in the best interests of the future of our city. Working within the boundaries of land we already have that is developed/developable is the responsible thing to do for our future as a desirable/sustainable city depends on it. Have a Great Day, Jeff Pokorny 67255 Bass Lane Bend, OR 97703 From: Mary Ann Kruse To: Nick Lelack; Board Subject: Proposed re-classification of ag lands Date: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 5:18:11 PM Nick Lelack & Deschutes County Commissioners: Agricultural lands are valuable resources. Reclassifying to allow inappropriate development is absolutely not in Deschutes County community or wildlife's best interests. Ag lands provide local food, provide deer & elk herds with migratory corridors & these lands also provide a living for hundreds of Deschutes County families. I would call these ag lands a resource. Seriously, would you call these valuable lands non - resource? Thanks for the opportunity to comment. M.A. Kruse junehoa9@gmail.com "War is a virus Si imagination is the cure." Gandhi From: Susan Altman To: Nick Lelack; )3oard Subject: Public hearing June 13th - request for information Date: Thursday, June 7, 2018 2:22:31 PM Good afternoon, Nick: I understand there is a public hearing next Wednesday where the commissioners will be discussing reclassifying agricultural lands. Unfortunately I will not be able to attend. Do you have a briefing, please, that you could email me so that I can understand what is being proposed, what the possible outcomes would be, the purpose of reclassification, the timeline for hearings and public comments, how the state is involved, who is proposing this, who benefits, who suffers, what the tax implications would be, etc.? For the record, I am opposed to anything that takes away our valuable resources of open space, wildlife habitat / corridors, and/or agricultural lands in exchange for adding density for housing developments. Would this be a way to bypass the UGB? Thank you, Susan ea 0 oCn 00 C$ N co >- 0111 .0 4. Next steps Written comment period? iberations & adoption Staff drafts Work Plan based on: ra Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) goals and objectives Changes in state law Grants / funding sources Public comments (customer, stakeholder, citizen) Carry-over projects from prior year ic hearing, recommendation Planning Commission work session, pub co Historic Landmarks Commission work session & recommendation BOCC work session '17 ,j. ifi if i N r- CV .E>N >. G) G) .- co re C C < 2 ..„ ......, 0 3 oZi 40)Y 0 cus N !pow% O O ass 0 OG � oiS � 4) 0)I_ soi le OA) 00 s N � 0 4> 12, d '' V 0 Ca oro co 4) 17 1 ie 0 o risk u- :00V N `�- 0) 0. a) 0 4— O a) O 'r • (113 S v 0 ado cu 05 � C ' v)u s(_, - tto v _c 0 D ru o a) = O a) L N N E s 4., v v co u O •C ., D Q Etili co u •limo > Q 0 D_E O -4-J O c CD u V uco ' E E 4.4 N i Z a, 0 Q y,0, —o p c tus 0-0 V "C3o E V > o H- Q ‹ Ct. E • CDD Lobby Remodel: Improve safety, customer service & efficiency. Hours of operation in Sisters & La Pine: Doubled. CU a) v, II N 0 C 2 M r13 +7) 0 U w w o CU O (f)Qv 0 0 �_ II '1(1) a-+ O N -o J oo a /''[ o_ a) -oC RV E I I > • to D al a) p v o +,E v ' a d a) -C c ' o _ a) ro t{. O o 4-, �+� o v E N 0.0 a) cu _ O X '� u u E o E £. N Li— o D O U N p - O - �, N 4J O < a) o a) r� r0 O' N `- (13 b.i0 a� Q 10-0 0 p CU ou r6 L b0 — QJ•a--+ > > O — N n 4_' u aj 10C to c O 0) v o > •L c a) :(19= B bb E ( f) rC5 V) 75 75 N — a) E N O _' O °J > o 0 D 0 O co -o p n c u 4--) E E L u O C v) � -0 Uo Q ,i; - p Qua) vi c u 0m a cu a) ,-o °S Qa rm -0 L O U L co O 0 U O VI 1.°C 4--, bOLL fa W O i v O. a) •0 V •C a1 N V u COw con a CC Draft Work P oa r O Q^ L E Ln Q E u O — -a c • O O T- 1- •u a .Q _ -0 aw - O - 7 mo`" O oO 4-1 ta o o_0 uoQ Performance measures h a) L h fa au to c c u O r▪ a fa c �O o i 'u Q w a, E c o u l c i di oa o 4- c c o a Report results • ii; i-+ N a c oa$ a; c;+_ O to Zi w E i 1 o LA c O o aJ E O O }, VI u u = w O ca E 'a E Q = u 1/1 c0 .:471 0 • residentia Continue cross training staff to perform a • r•I CO tt) 0 L Environmenta t O N W W O a, CL C C C V ▪ .▪ 0 a u a oa. TS ISSUED I• • 00 M 00 O 00 8 8 00 O 0 0 N O 00 t0 y H H 8 N co L CI IA w u ._ L w v) -a w wia fa a :730 0 V C 4-' E cu a) 0 O ra 0 v oa 0 rai = N O 0 0 -O •i Sisters & La Pine CU V) L 0 CU v O 0 v c u o NE 0°) > o +.1'u CZ 4., u = t i4= 4 •u , • a) a) a S.. O w - O LA 47- O > O MC O 4-' 0 CL oL. o v Q) o2i a- O Q O a) O L. 0 E c o o c O 4-'a _+ u N u J c� C ,V) O O o N = 0......-2 17i in u 73 1- N O v c n- Depends on: - o o ..-. E cu >., -4-, -o o c '47, >, --c._ (1) c -cu Ri ro o.0 c Le) s_. •— b0—b0 n3 — . 0.0 in a) c CU ro cc l_. 00 IT ... 1... (13 • • • tTo N W tn • —0 o 4a co C E 06 R3 s.. 0 cu co C 4.1 C2. _c ..... 4J L__ ro •- 4.-J c-C 67 O .-i-J >lb • MM. : 0_ L.7 • (7) 4 a) u -4-J CU CU (t3 -S --E E rtl •—• . E *6 o L.. -0 • . > - E cp_ c 1... Ms ,.... o Er - ▪ t10 'V ro s- (r) •— cU< a._ R3 E -cc O . • _.;' 0 CO el : L) NJ • Resources Written record open? • Business meeting or work session? • www.deschutes.orgicd Sherri Pinner From: Sent: To: Subject: 1ES C5 Nick Lelack Tuesday, June 12, 2018 8:46 AM Sherri Pinner FW: Re-evaluation of agriculture land classifications Nick Lelack, AECP I Director DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 117 NW Lafayette Avenue 1 Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel: (541) 385-1708 1 Cell: (541) 639-5585 0 Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. From: Robin Vora <robinvoral@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2018 1:32 PM To: Nick Lelack <Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org> Cc: Board <board@co.deschutes.or.us> Subject: Re-evaluation of agriculture land classifications Nick, I would like to offer a few brief comments on the county's effort to re-evaluate agriculture land classifications. My principal point is that classifications need to be consistent to be defensible and credible. As part of Bend's urban growth boundary expansion evaluation I commented on how the Miller Tree Farm was not classified as forest land even though it was, and how the State's section 11 was classified as forest land when it is not. With irrigation, almost all land in Central Oregon is farmland except a rock pile, very steep slopes, or lands with no possible future access to irrigation. It would be inconsistent and indefensible to have a different classification for these lands if they happen to be located around the perimeter of a city. Farm uses can include crops, hay and grass, and even honeybee production. Re-classification cannot reduce the capacity of surrounding properties for farming. Farm and forest lands are also important wildlife habitat that we keep reducing with development. Juniper may become forest land with improvements in utilization technology. Land use and climate change mitigation policies need to direct future development towards redevelopment of the interiors or central areas of cities, and not continued sprawl and suburban expansion. Thank you for your time and consideration. Robin Vora 1679 NE Daphne Ct. Bend, OR 97701 1 Sherri Pinner From: Sent: To: Subject: Nick Lelack Tuesday, June 12, 2018 8:45 AM Sherri Pinner FW: Community Development Department Work Plan 0 is C0 Nick Lelack, AICP I Director tom ° -i. DESC:HUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT o ' -c 117 NW Lafayette Avenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel: (541) 385-1708 I Cell: (541) 639-5585 CO Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. From: Cort Vaughan <jcortvaughan@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2018 1:05 PM To: Nick Lelack <Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org>; +board@deschutes.org Subject: Community Development Department Work Plan I am concerned that re-evaluating agricultural lands will lead to suburban sprawl. Just because the high desert is dry and rocky does not mean the land should be reclassified as non -resource. These lands still provide value as open space and wildlife migration corridors. Please do not disrupt Oregon's land use planning. Agricultural lands should not be developed without going thru proper land use planning, like the process required for cities to expand their urban growth boundaries. Sincerely, Cort Vaughan Bend, OR 1 Sherri Pinner From: Sent: To: Subject: Nick Lelack Tuesday, June 12, 2018 8:52 AM Sherri Pinner FW: Do not include 'Agricultural Lands Re -Evaluation and Potential Re -Designation' on work plan Nick Lelack, AICP ( Director 117 NW Lafayette Avenue ( Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel: (541) 385-1708 l Cell: (541) 639-5585 Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. From: Michele McKay <michemckay@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2018 12:47 PM To: Nick Lelack <Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org>; Board <board@co.deschutes.or.us> Subject: Do not include 'Agricultural Lands Re -Evaluation and Potential Re -Designation' on work plan To Deschutes County Staff and Board of Commissioners: As a 29 year resident of Deschutes Counry I value our designations of open space, agricultural farm/ranch land, and wildlife habitat. These values should not be weakened, and I ask you to NOT include 'Agricultural Lands Re -Evaluation and Potential Re -Designation' on your work plan. Thank you, Michele McKay Bend, OR Sherri Pinner From: Sent: To: Subject: Nick Lelack Tuesday, June 12, 2018 8:45 AM Sherri Pinner FW: Community Development Department Work Plan Nick Lelack, A1CP I Director DESC;HHUTES COUNTY C;OMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT 117 NW Lafayette Avenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel: (541) 385-1708 ( Cell: (541) 639-5585 0 in Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. From: Cort Vaughan <jcortvaughan@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2018 1:05 PM To: Nick Lelack <Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org>; +board@deschutes.org Subject: Community Development Department Work Plan I am concerned that re-evaluating agricultural lands will lead to suburban sprawl. Just because the high desert is dry and rocky does not mean the land should be reclassified as non -resource. These lands still provide value as open space and wildlife migration corridors. Please do not disrupt Oregon's land use planning. Agricultural lands should not be developed without going thru proper land use planning, like the process required for cities to expand their urban growth boundaries. Sincerely, Cort Vaughan Bend, OR 1 Board of County Commissioners for Deschutes County RE: 2019 County Work Plan 6/9/2018 Dear Commissioners: As property owners and residents of unincorporated Deschutes County, we do not have a City Council to go to. You the County Commissioners are our direct representatives. For over two years now, we the residents of Deschutes River Woods and its neighborhood association, members of Save the Lava, residents from other unincorporated neighborhoods and environmental groups have been coming before you to advocate for the adoption of a grading ordinance. We have collected over 400 signatures, attended numerous county planning meetings and met with county staff so often that many of them know us by first name. Now is the time to hear our voices! The grading ordinance we ask for is just common sense in a county were the growth rate of unincorporated residential communities is out pacing that of the larger cities. An ordinance will establish clearly defined parameters and guidelines for grading within residential neighborhoods and significantly reduce the risks and liability for developers, builders and property owners. This is why all cities and many counties already have grading ordinances in place. Because Deschutes County does not one, it has created a large grey area that unscrupulous developers are more than willing to take advantage of. The only opposition to a grading ordinance has been the legal counsel for a development company that has already taken advantage of this grey area and walked right through the loopholes. Their only argument was that an ordinance was not needed. If this were the case, the issue of the Tumalo ski lake development would not have made headlines. The County has stated repeatedly that they take citizen input seriously. For two years, we the citizens of unincorporated Deschutes County have repeatedly pleaded our case to County Planners and Commissioners. The County Planning Commission has heard us and overwhelmingly voted to make the grading ordinance a high priority, we are asking you to hear us as well and approve this high priority item on the 2018/2019 workplan. Sincerely, Julie Kisic in representation of; Members of Save the Lava, Deschutes River Woods Neighborhood Association and Residents of unincorporated Deschutes County. Sherri Pinner From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: vI E S Nick Lelack Tuesday, June 12, 2018 8:43 AM Sherri Pinner FW: County Work Plan 2018/2019 2018 WorkPlan advocation.docx Nick Lelack, AICP 1 Director DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 117 NW Lafayette Avenue 1 Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel: (541) 385-1708 1 Cell: (541) 639-5585 II 9 Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. From: Julie Kisic <jkisic@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2018 12:11 PM To: Nick Lelack <Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org> Subject: County Work Plan 2018/2019 Hello Nick, I will be working when the workplan comes before the board of County Commissioners but wanted to make sure my group's support for the grading ordinance is hear. I have attached a letter that I would like the Board to see. We will be having people from both Deschutes River Woods Neighborhood Association and Save the Lava attending and presenting but please know that due to this being in the middle of the work week many will not be able to attend in support. Thank you very much for your time! Julie Kisic (970) 301-8100 19410 Comanche Ln. Bend, OR 97702 i Sherri Pinner From: Nick Lelack Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 7:42 PM To: Sherri Pinner Subject: Fwd: Community Development Department Work Plan Nick Lelack, AICP Deschutes County Community Development Director 541-639-5585 Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Eva Eagle <eva.eale(a,mac.com> Date: June 12, 2018 at 5:20:03 PM PDT To: nick.lelacka,deschutes.org, boarda,deschutes.or2 Subject: Community Development Department Work Plan Having been out of the country, I submit these brief comments to you about the work plan on the annual work plan of the Community Development Department. There are two areas where I would like to offer specific comments: code enforcement and the approach to agricultural lands. As to Code Enforcement, it is good to see this emphasized more than in the past and to see a more proactive approach in some cases. Sadly, there are far too many cases where land owners have no intention of following the code. So it is good to see that there will be clear goals and a tracking report. And I urge you to make sure that new land use approvals are denied to those with code violations. Unfortunately, the plan contains a proposal to re-evaluate agricultural lands, presumably to reclassify many EFU lands to a "non -resource" designation. This concept was rejected by a citizen outreach process some years back, and it is still a bad idea. Our EFU lands are not only vital to our local agricultural economy, but also insure that deer and elk have ways to migrate across the landscape, even where land is privately owned. These lands are an important resource to Central Oregon, and they should not be reclassified to permit development. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. I would like to attend the hearing, but I came back from our trip with a very bad cold which I do not want to pass on to others. Eva Eagle 17212 Pine Drive Sisters, OR 97759 1 Board of County Commissioners for Deschutes County RE: 2019 County Work Plan 6/9/2018 Dear Commissioners: I am a resident of Deschutes River Woods, living directly adjacent to the Lava flow on the West end of Comanche Circle. I am a member of the DRW neighborhood association, and a member of Save the Lava. The Save the Lava group and residents from other unincorporated neighborhoods and environmental groups have been coming before you to advocate for the adoption of a grading ordinance. We have collected over 400 signatures, attended numerous county planning meetings and met with county staff so often that many of them know us by first name. The grading ordinance we ask for is just common sense in a county were the growth rate of unincorporated residential communities is out pacing that of the larger cities. An ordinance will establish clearly defined parameters and guidelines for grading within residential neighborhoods and significantly reduce the risks and liability for developers, builders and property owners. Many cities counties already have grading ordinances in place. Because Deschutes County does not currently have a grading ordinance, it has created a large grey area that unscrupulous developers are more than willing to take advantage of. The only opposition to a grading ordinance has been the legal counsel for a development company that has already taken advantage of this grey area and walked right through the loopholes. Their only argument was that an ordinance was not needed. If this were the case, the issue of the Tumalo ski lake development would not have made headlines. Thank goodness the purchase of 90 acers of a privately -owned section of the Lava by a local gravel company near the end of Comanche Circle fell through. We have good reason to believe that without a grading ordinance in place, this natural portion of the Lava Butte lava flow could easily have been used as a source of gravel. The County has stated repeatedly that they take citizen input seriously. For two years, we the citizens of unincorporated Deschutes County have repeatedly pleaded our case to County Planners and Commissioners. The County Planning Commission has heard us and overwhelmingly voted to make the grading ordinance a high priority, we are asking you to hear us as well and approve this high priority item on the 2018/2019 workplan. Sincerely, Thomas K Powell, And representing the 400 signatures of others in support of Deschutes County adopting a Grading Ordinance. Sherri Pinner From: Nick Lelack Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 7:42 PM To: Sherri Pinner Subject: Fwd: Grading Ordinance Attachments: SavetheLavaJune2018.docx; ATT00001.htm Nick Lelack, AICP Deschutes County Community Development Director 541-639-5585 Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Thomas Powell <tkpArchery@msn.com> Date: June 12, 2018 at 4:29:03 PM PDT To: "Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org" <Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org> Subject: Grading Ordinance Hi Nick, I met you a couple times last year and earlier this year along with others in support of Deschutes County adopting a grading ordinance. I was hoping to attend the Commissioners meeting tomorrow morning but a quick carpal tunnel surgery may interfere. Please present the attached letter to the Commissioners. Since our subject may not come up until toward the end of the meeting, I may be able to make it. Best regards, Thomas Powell Central Oregon Archery Academy USA Archery Level 4 NTS Coach 1 LAN DWATC H June 13, 2018 Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners c/o Nick Lelack Community Development Director 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, OR 97703 077:i2 wwwd.centraloregonlandwatch.org Re: Community Development Department (CDD) Work Plan FY 201849 Dear Chair Debone and Commissioners, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Community Development Department Work Plan. Central Oregon LandWatch submitted comments on the Work Plan to the Planning Commission, several of which we reiterate below. We also have a new procedural concern with the Work Plan item "Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow new Rural Industrial," also discussed below. Agricultural lands re-evaluation and potential re -designation Just as we commented to the Planning Commission, we recommend the County do not initiate an agricultural lands re-evaluation and potential re -designation. In the interest of efficient use of County resources, we recommend that the County wait to see the judicial resolution of the Douglas County case before proceeding on this issue. To the extent the County seeks to correct any potential mapping errors in its Comprehensive Plan, the County should follow the process outlined in ORS 215.788. There is no indication the lands of Deschutes County are incorrectly mapped. The last time the County examined the issue, in 2014 and 2015, it was apparently decided that no mapping errors exist in Deschutes County. At its May 10 deliberations, the Planning Commission agreed that initiating this Work Plan item at this time is unwise because it is fraught with legal uncertainty. The Planning Commission recommended waiting to see the outcome of pending significant developments, including the resolution of the Douglas County case, the 2019 legislature, and potential LCDC rulemaking. Deschutes County is home to the fastest growing metropolitan area in the western United States. In this context, LandWatch questions the need for re-evaluating and potentially re - designating agricultural lands. Allowing greater development on the County's agricultural lands is unnecessary for economic development. If the County seeks to plan for where future urban 2 development should occur, we recommend the County instead direct its resources to growth management coordination and the study and identification of lands suitable for urban reserve areas. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to allow new Rural Industrial Designations In April, CDD sought input from the public on which items should be prioritized, added, or removed in its draft Work Plan for fiscal year 2018-19. One of these draft Work Plan items entitled "Deschutes Junction" would "initiate amendment to the Comprehensive Plan that allows for new rural industrial designations." Sometime in April or May, after the Planning Commission work session (April 12) and hearing (April 26) on the draft CDD Work Plan, but before the Planning Commission deliberations (May 10), the County initiated this Work Plan item. Accordingly, the Planning Commission did not deliberate on this draft item as it did with all other draft Work Plan items. What was the purpose or value of seeking public input and a Planning Commission recommendation on this item when it was initiated before the draft Work Plan was approved? CDD staff has stated that this item is intended to address the desires of one individual landowner in the Deschutes Junction area. Staff also disclosed to the Planning Commission that this legislative amendment has been coordinated with that individual landowner's attorney. That landowner has twice received approval from the County to re -designate his property, and those approvals were twice remanded or reversed by the Land Use Board of Appeals because those approvals did not comply with state law. There are currently hundreds of acres of land zoned for industrial use, including large lot industrial land, inside the urban growth boundaries and unincorporated communities of Deschutes County where such intensive development belongs. LandWatch does not believe it is good policy for the County to initiate a County -wide legislative process to achieve the goals of one individual landowner. LandWatch believes it is worse policy to seek public input on a draft Work Plan, and ask the Planning Commission to provide a recommendation, but to initiate one individual item while that draft Work Plan is pending. This opaque process does not follow either statewide planning Goal 1 (Citizen Involvement) or Goal 2 (Land Use Planning). Growth Management Coordination & Affordable Housing Strategy LandWatch is pleased to see that these two Work Plan items have been combined into one. Deschutes County is in need of affordable housing, and the proper location for new affordable housing is within urban growth boundaries. LandWatch supports any County efforts to coordinate with cities to develop and implement growth management plans to plan for population growth. In particular, we support any potential urban reserve areas planning process in coordination with the City of Bend to provide long-term certainty about future potential urban growth boundary expansions. 3 Wildfire Mitigation We support the proposed Work Plan item to consider implementing amendments to Deschutes County code and policy regarding wildfire mitigation. The County should incorporate higher standards for wildfire risk found in model code from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), including NFPA 1141 and 1144, and the International Code Council (ICC), including the ICC Fire Prevention and Control Plan and International Fire Code. These model codes would require most new development to achieve fire risk mitigation standards (including access, building separation, fire protection, water supply, defensible space zones, use of non-combustible construction materials, and complete hazard mitigation assessments and wildfire mitigation and action plans) prior to approval. The County's wildfire risk will likely remain high as our climate becomes more arid and variable. Development in areas of high wildfire risk creates unnecessary risk to residents, firefighters, and first responders, and also results in the use of public money to protect private property in the likely event of wildfire. Deschutes County should prioritize implementing code and policy changes to prevent risks to public safety, minimize private property damage, and prevent public firefighting expenditures. Thank you for your consideration of these comments on the Community Development Department Work Plan for FY 2018-19. Sincerely, n Rory Isbell Staff Attorney Central Oregon LandWatch SW So 4 ). ;12 In?: 1541 k 4i 2935 www.centraioregonlandwatch.org Sherri Pinner From: Nick Lelack Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 8:41 AM To: Sherri Pinner Subject: Fwd: Community Development Department (CDD) Work Plan FY 2018-19 Attachments: COLW_CDDWorkPlan_BOCC_6.13.18.pdf; ATT00001.htm Nick Lelack, AICP Deschutes County Community Development Director 541-639-5585 Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Rory Isbell <rory a,colw.org> Date: June 13, 2018 at 8:11:25 AM PDT To: board a,deschutes.org Cc: Nick Lelack <Nick.Lelack(a,deschutes.org> Subject: Community Development Department (CDD) Work Plan FY 2018-19 Dear Chair DeBone, Commissioner Henderson, and Commissioner Baney, Please find attached comments from Central Oregon LandWatch on the Community Development Department (CDD) Work Plan FY 2018-19. Regards, Rory Isbell Rory Isbell Staff Attorney Central Oregon LandWatch 50 SW Bond St., Ste. #4 Bend, Oregon 97702 541-647-2930 x804 10U1 VWCU. I'; RCAL 'AL'. June 13, 2018 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, OR 97703 Re: CDD Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19 Dear Chair and Commissioners, ':e itr l ?r -_,on A. ,'U JI?ie LSU ">.- ...al On behalf of the Central Oregon Association of REALTORS° (COAR) — representing nearly 1,800 REALTORS° in Deschutes County — thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Community Development Department (CDD) Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19. We are writing to express support for the following key planning initiatives outlined in the work plan: 1. Agricultural lands re-evaluation and potential re -designation - Currently demand is greatly outstripping supply in both the area's residential and commercial/industrial markets. Considering the need that exists for affordable housing and low inventory at various price points, it is prudent to re-evaluate agricultural lands that are not viable for farming to identify the best use for these properties and determine if they represent opportunities for development or other uses. 2. Affordable housing - In the midst of an affordable housing crisis, a well-defined housing strategy for the county is essential. We would welcome the opportunity to be involved in the development of such a strategy, and we are happy to serve as a resource and offer any expertise, input or data that might be helpful. We also strongly support CDD's recommendation to participate in state-wide committees focused on advancing policies to allow rural accessory dwelling units (ADUs). ADUs can provide much-needed affordable housing options in the county by introducing a new housing typology capable of coming online quickly with relatively few barriers to entry for property owners. We also encourage the County in its role as a partner to support and encourage cities, such as Bend, to expeditiously establish urban reserves. As you know, urban reserves allow communities to proactively plan for continued growth and future UGB expansions. Thank you for your service to Deschutes County, as well as your consideration of the local real estate community's input. Cent -g;u r=,;s+;;: <3€ :, r I %,. i ;k: 5,11 .',8.-'.6 27 OAR TO: 0311 vi erk`,; PEAL STATf Ce•11--;11 3120 Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact us at 541-382-6027 or info@coar.com. Sincerely, Bill Bellamy 2018 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 1)1 mks' -,1.-12 B(=r):.1 01'4.137,70"J Sherri Pinner From: Nick Lelack Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 8:41 AM To: Sherri Pinner Subject: Fwd: CDD Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19: Letter from COAR Attachments: image001.png; ATT00001.htm; Letter from COAR to Deschutes County BOCC_ 6.13.18.pdf; ATT00002.htm Nick Lelack, AICP Deschutes County Community Development Director 541-639-5585 Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: "Tyler Neese" <tvler@coar.com> Date: June 13, 2018 at 8:33:13 AM PDT To: <board cr deschutes.org> Cc: "'Nick Lelack"' <Nick.Lelack@deschutes.org> Subject: CDD Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018-19: Letter from COAR Dear Chair and Commissioners, Please find attached written comments regarding the County's CDD Work Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2018- 19 submitted on behalf of the Central Oregon Association of REALTORS®. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Thank you, Tyler Tyler Neese Government Affairs Director Central Oregon Association of REALTORS° 2112 NE 4th Street Bend, OR 97701 541-382-6027 Fax: 541-383-3020 tyler@coar.com www.coar.com 1 June 12, 2018 Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St. 2nd Floor Bend, OR 97703 Re: Grading Ordinance Dear Board of County Commissioners, The proposed 2018-2019 Community Development Department ("CDD") Work Plan is ambitious and will likely lead to many carry-over task like previous years. COBA has previously asked the Board to consider adding work on urban reserves for the City of Bend in its Work Plan. It is our understanding that CDD is also preparing for a Comprehensive Plan update in 2020 to coincide with the census, and so we believe any items included in future Work Plans should be geared towards accomplishing that goal or, at least, positioning that process for success. Like last year's plan, the Work Plan contemplates work to review and adopt a grading ordinance. We oppose this item in the Work Plan and ask that the Board not include it at this time. We understand that Planning Commission has commented on a potential grading ordinance. Deschutes County currently allows excavation and grading through its "on-site construction" exemption from the definition of "surface mining." This allows permitted uses in zones to be established, and to review the impacts of those uses under the relevant land use procedure. Adopting a grading ordinance would create additional regulatory hurdles to development and introduce a new land use decision into all development projects - increasing staff time, costs of development, and additional opportunity for appeal. As 1 am sure you are aware, staff is already working at full+ capacity. A grading ordinance would have the direct effect of increasing the cost and reducing the supply of attainable housing in our county. Development in Deschutes County is difficult enough. Please do not increase the cost and regulatory burden to development in Deschutes County, We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Work Plan and the work that the CDD does on behalf of all citizens within Deschutes County. Sinceret K-na Gustafson VP of Government and Legal Counsel cc: Nick Lelack 1051 NI 4"' Street, I Bend, OI I 9T/01 phone: 541 -389-1058 fax: 541-1891545 web° www,coba,orp, Sherri Pinner From: Nick Lelack Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 10:50 AM To: Sherri Pinner Subject: Fwd: Agricultural lands re-evaluation comment Nick Lelack, AICP Deschutes County Community Development Director 541-639-5585 Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: maggie monroe <mustangmargie813ngmail.com> Date: June 13, 2018 at 10:39:00 AM PDT To: maggie monroe <mustangmargie813(gmail.com>, nick.lelack(deschutes.org, boardndeschutes.org Subject: Agricultural lands re-evaluation comment I have a comment to submit regarding agricultural lands re-evaluation and potential redesignation. Most of us have chosen the Bend area because of the beauty of its landscape, its open spaces, the rural atmosphere, its wildlife. Open spaces created by agricultural land provide beautiful views, peace, wildlife corridors, wildlife habitat, cropland, jobs for central Oregon. Redesignating agricultural land puts our way of life in jeopardy and that of wildlife. It will destroy the very reason most of us chose to live here. Development of these lands will destroy the beauty and feel of the area. It will become a city/county like any other, packed with houses, blacktop, electric poles, light pollution, noise, car fumes, businesses and so on. The voice of the coyote, the singing of the spring frogs and toads, the melody of the songbird, the shrill call of the bird of prey, the silent movements of the deer will be gone. The way of life we moved here for will be gone. To develop is a decision that will last forever, no going back, once the land is gone its gone. The native plants destroyed, the wildlife evicted or perished, the sights and sounds of open space gone. The way of life in the Bend area will become like every other city or county that has been divided and subdivided and perhaps divided again. The flavor of this mountain town that so many tourists, vacationers and locals cherish and are attracted to will be gone. The smell of the juniper, the smell of the sage, the smell of the pine gone, the smell of fresh cut hay gone. Agricultural lands are very important not only to our economy but for the jobs they provide, the open space they provide for migrating deer and elk, the food and shelter they provide for wildlife, the microclimates created, the water sources for wildlife, the brush thickets and trees for nests and shelter. It is of utmost importance to preserve and protect the dwindling open space of agricultural land, for the wildlife that depend upon it for survival but also for our own peace and spirit. A place where nature and humans can co -exist providing for each others needs. It's our responsibility to protect all the life that lives here. Thank you, Margie Kline Deschutes County resident 1 Sherri Pinner From: Nick Lelack Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 10:50 AM To: Sherri Pinner Subject: Fwd: Community Development Department Work Plan Nick Lelack, AICP Deschutes County Community Development Director 541-639-5585 Sent from my iI'hone Begin forwarded message: From: Jo <iokeen10@ mail.com> Date: June 13, 2018 at 10:47:05 AM PDT To: nick.lelackndeschutcs.or€, board(iWeschutes.orz Subject: Community Development Department Work Plan Our agricultural lands are a great resource, they provide us with our food. I love the fact that I can buy so much food that is locally grown now as compared to ten years ago. This trend needs to continue. It is healthy for us and the entire planet. It is a sustainable way to produce food. Please DO NOT reclassify our agricultural lands as non -resource lands. That would make no sense at all. "Thank you, Joanne Keen Bend, Oregon Sent from my iPad BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony , Subject: f1'•' 11 1 11c Date: Name -S )1 ') -6{ ea/I/1V I , - Address r)()I OL/itC, e.T-1-1011"IVIIS -b.erv--\61 Phone #s "/ E-mail address A )v tfie.. o Lpiyi In Favor Neutral/Undecided x Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. Opposed No SUBMIT COMPLETED REQUEST TO RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE MEETING BEGINS Subject: Name Address BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REOUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony .t,k) cJL ( ti 3 )J 67 r> Phone #s E-mail address e; /e-vj 1t?l/. In Favor Neutral/Undecided Li Date: / Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. Opposed No SUBMIT COMPLETED REQUEST TO RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE MEETING BEGINS Subject: Name Address Phone #s BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony (-DD t1\34. gory ,s,lye,// gowd .c -f SLi S-utJ 19vZ E-mail address In Favor Date: 611211/1 Neutral/Undecided Opposed Submitting written documents as part of testimony? u Yes If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. No SUBMIT COMPLETED REQUEST TO RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE MEETING BEGINS Subject: Name Address Phone #s BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REOUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony ()*--c 4 () 2.> In Favor 0 Neutral/Undecided kYld Opposed Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes " No If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. SUBMIT COMPLETED REQUEST TO RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE MEETING BEGINS BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony: Please complete and submit to Recording Secretary. Subject: G r .��Yvl 0 w-\rcA Date: G- t3 - I a Name d v.fein Address S^'4/ b 4.S kk C.,o - Phone #s CLi t - 3 &-c') , s- t -1v O E-mail address Q K -.J e LAvi4.4v,__ . Nd-- )4 In Favor Neutral/Undecided Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. Opposed No „'4 ••-1 Subject: Name Address Phone #s E-mail address In Favor BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING REQUEST TO SPEAK Citizen Input or Testimony w�� i Neutral/Undecided Date: Submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record. Opposed No SUBMIT COMPLETED REQUEST TO RECORDING SECRETARY BEFORE MEETING BEGINS