Loading...
2020-93-Minutes for Meeting February 03,2020 Recorded 3/4/2020�vTES c0 L .4G 2� BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon (541) 3 88- 65 70 1:00 PM Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2020-93 Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk Commissioners' Journal 03/04/2020 3:45:55 PM co II' I I II I II��I I�' III (' I I II III 71pr 2020-93 FOR RECORDING STAMP ONLY MONDAY February 3, 2020 ALLEN CONFERENCE ROOM Present were Commissioners Patti Adair Anthony DeBone, and Phil Henderson. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; David Doyle, County Counsel; and Sharon Keith, Board Executive Assistant. Several citizens, staff, and one identified representative of the media were in attendance. CALL TO ORDER: Chair Adair called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. ACTION ITEMS 1. Enterprise Zone Extended Abatement Agreement for in Manufacturing (13D MFG) Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No. 2020-134 Jon Stark, Redmond Economic Development presented the agreement for consideration with 13D MFG explaining the services provided by the company and their proposed plan as described in the document. DEBONE: Move approval of Document No. 2020-134 HENDERSON: Second BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 3, 2020 PAGE 1 OF 6 VOTE: DEBONE: HENDERSON: ADAI R: Yes Yes Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 2. Enterprise Zone Extended Abatement Agreement for BasX Solutions, Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No. 2020-135 Mr. Stark presented this agreement with BasX explaining the services provided by the company and their proposed plan as described in the document. HENDERSON: Move approval of Document No. 2020-135 DEBONE: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Yes DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 3. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-129, Denial of Nehmzow Marijuana Production Facility at 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend Community Development Department Planner Isabella Liu and Assistant Legal Counsel Adam Smith presented the document for review prior to the document being presented in a final format. Commissioner Henderson stated he has several comments on the document and decision. Commissioner Adair stated page 10 of 16 asking for clarification of a date on the newsletter mentioned in the record. The decision document is on the agenda for February 5 and the deadline is February 6. Commissioner Henderson recommended language revisions in various locations within the document. Conversation held on the definition of youth activity centers and factors considered. Discussion held on property distance and clarity needed for distance from youth activity centers from proposed facilities. Activities or uses would create foreseeability factors of occurring youth activities. BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 3, 2020 PAGE 2 OF 6 Assistant Legal Counsel Adam Smith will present a newly revised document based on today's direction. 4. Nonprime Resource Lands Consideration of Re -Opening Record Community Development Department Planner Zechariah Heck presented and reported on a procedure challenge has been raised regarding notice to the Department of Lands Conservation Development. Coordination has been made with DLCD regarding the testimony specific to the challenge. Mr. Heck stated if the record is reopened the response from DLCD could be included. Letters were also submitted by County Forester Ed Keith and Environmental Health Supervisor Todd Cleveland. Notice was sent to the property owners and open house meetings were held with the Planning Commission. Assistant Legal Counsel Adam Smith suggested the possibility of an evening meeting for public testimony. The Board recommends an invitation to the property owner explaining the situation. Staff will prepare the Order to reopen the record for the Board's consideration on Wednesday, February S. DEBONE: Move approval to reopen record both oral and written and notify the property owners HENDERSON: Second VOTE: DEBONE: Yes HENDERSON: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 5. Preparation for Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendments Public Hearing Community Development Department Planner Tanya Saltzman presented preparations for the Board for the public hearing that is scheduled for Wednesday, February 12 to consider text amendments to allow employee BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 3, 2020 PAGE 3 OF 6 housing as an outright permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district. If adopted by emergency, the application for site plan review could begin. 6. joint Planning Commission Work Session / Draft Agenda Community Development Department Director Nick Lelack and Planning Manager Peter Gutowsky presented a draft agenda for the joint meeting on February 13 with the Planning Commission. Mr. Lelack reported on upcoming term expirations on the Planning Commission. Mr. Lelack also reported on Senate Bill 1536 which if passed would require the County to increase staffing levels. A hearing is scheduled in Salem on Wednesday. 7. Discussion and Consideration of Update to Grant Policy, GA 20 Deputy County Administrator presented a draft policy for consideration. Mr. Kropp reported that several departments have requested to change the policy so they are not required to come before the board with requests to apply for certain grants and to also clarify the grant process. Commissioner DeBone spoke on the grant process and importance of reporting grant applications and receipts and noted the importance of reporting the grants to Finance as recommended by the Deschutes County Audit Committee. Commissioner Adair doesn't want the process to change because the Commissioners are interested in knowing about our departments applying for grants. Commissioner DeBone commented on a better vision and also wants to continue with the current process. Commissioner Henderson expressed the positive message for the Commissioners of knowing of grant applications and want the process to BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 3, 2020 PAGE 4 OF 6 remain as is. No changes will be made to the process. Slight changes will be made to update the policy to remove the grant writer position since it no longer exists and to add a grant application form. RECESS: At the time of 3:32 p.m., the Board took a recess and the meeting was reconvened at 3:40 p.m. EXECUTIVE SESSION: At the time of 3:40 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (d) Labor Negotiations. The Board came out of Executive Session at 4:10 p.m. At the time of 4:10 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (d) Labor Negotiations. The Board came out of Executive Session at 4:22 p.m. At the time of 4:22 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (e) Property Negotiations. The Board came out of Executive Session at 4: p.m. At the time of 5:17 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session under ORS192.660 (2) (a) Consideration of Employment. The Board came out of Executive Session at 5:44 p.m. DEBONE: Move to direct staff to proceed as discussed. HENDERSON: Second VOTE: DEBONE: Yes HENDERSON: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 3, 2020 PAGE 5 OF 6 OTHER ITEMS: • Veterans Village proposal update: County Administrator Anderson spoke with Erik Tobiason, and City of Bend staff John Skidmore and Shelly Smith regarding the Veterans Village and the city is open to the idea. The city council has made homelessness an issue but this development doesn't appear to be high on the priority list. CDD staff are working with the City on the general concern of homelessness. Mr. Anderson will debrief with Nick Lelack and Peter Gutowsky after their next meeting. Commissioner Henderson feels the Board should call the City Councilors. Commissioner Henderson may try to tour the Clackamas Veterans Village this week. Commissioner Adair has a Homeless Leadership Coalition meeting on Friday. Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:55 p.m, C- A DATED this _ Day of 20 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. rk PATTI A AI , CHAIR ATTEST: rrt —'- BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 3, 2020 PAGE 6 OF 6 E s coG o Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703 (541) 388-6570 - www.deschutes.org BOCC MEETING AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1:00 PM, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2020 Allen Conference Room - Deschutes Services Building, 2ND Floor - 1300 NW Wall Street - Bend This meeting is open to the public, and allows the Board to gather information and give direction to staff. Public comment is not normally accepted. Written minutes are taken for the record 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. Item start times are estimated and subject to change without notice. CALL TO ORDER ACTION ITEMS 1. 1:00 PM Enterprise Zone Extended Abatement Agreement for in Manufacturing (13D MFG), Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No. 2020- 134 - Whitney Hale, Communications Director 2. 1:10 PM Enterprise Zone Extended Abatement Agreement for BasX Solutions, Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No. 2020-135 - Whitney Hale, Communications Director 3. 1:20 PM Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-129, Denial of Nehmzow Marijuana Production Facility at 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend - Isabella Liu, Associate Planner 4. 1:50 PM Nonprime Resource Lands - Consideration of Re -Opening Record - Zechariah Heck, Associate Planner Board of Commissioners BOCC Meeting Agenda Monday, February 3, 2020 Page 1 of 2 5. 2:00 PM Preparation for Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendments Public Hearing - Tanya Saltzman, Associate Planner 6. 2:30 PM joint Planning Commission Work Session / Draft Agenda - Nick Lelack, Community Development Director 7. 3:00 PM Discussion and Consideration of Update to Grant Policy, GA-20 - Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator COMMISSIONER'S UPDATES EXECUTIVE SESSION 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. Exel l -;ve Sessiol I ul Aer ORS 192.66v /2' fe1 peal Drnrlcrty nlaantiatinnc anti ORS i i N Y . b.,.,u... . 192.660 (2) (d) Labor Negotiations 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. ADJOURN Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible, please call (541) 617-4747. FUTURE MEETINGS: Additional meeting dates available at www.deschutes.org/meetin,gcalendar Meeting dates and times are subject to change. If you have questions, please call (541) 388-6572. Board of Commissioners BOCC Meeting Agenda Monday, February 3, 2020 Page 2 of 2 I E S C0G 2 n�'`� -ADeschutes 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 BOCC Monday Meeting of February 3, 2020 DATE: January 29, 2020 FROM: Isabella Liu, Community Development, TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-129, Denial of Nehmzow Marijuana Production Facility at 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: On January 22, 2020, the Board of County Commissioners (Board) deliberated on the matter of an appeal of an administrative approval of marijuana production (file nos. 247-19-000844- RC, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-18-000915-AD) and instructed staff to draft a denial of the marijuana prnuJuirtinn rom ioctpw— The draft Mlerigirin iC noW presented to the Board for consideration of signature on Document No. 2020-129. ATTENDANCE: Izze Liu, Associate Planner MEMORANDUM DATE: January 28, 2020 TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Izze Liu, Associate Planner RE: Final decision denying a marijuana production proposal. File No. 247-19-000944-RC (related to file nos. 247-19-000431-A, 247-18-000915-AD). BACKGROUND INFORMATION APPLICANT/OWNER: APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY: APPELLANT: APPELLANT'S ATTORNEY: Tommy Nehmzow Michael Hughes, Hughes Law Keith & Kristin Adams Elizabeth Dickson, Dickson Hatfield LLP LOCATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend; and is further identified on County Assessor Tax Map 18-13-30 as tax lot 500. 1. PURPOSE The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners ("Board") will consider for signature a written decision denying a request for a marijuana production facility at the subject property. On January 22, 2020, the Board deliberated on this matter and voted two to one (Chair Adair and Commissioner Henderson in favor; Vice Chair DeBone opposed) to overturn the Administrative Determination that approved the land use permit application to establish a marijuana production facility on the subject property. Based on discussions and findings at the deliberation meeting, a draft decision has been prepared for review by the Board. 111. CONCLUSION & NEXT STEPS The County filed the Notice of Withdrawal to LUBA on November 8th, therefore, the Board has until February 6, 2020 to mail a new decision. 111111. RECORD ATTACHMENT 1. 2020-01-28 - BOCC Decision 247-19-000844-RC (related to file nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A) REVIEWED LEGAL COUNSEL DECISION OF THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FILE NUMBERS: 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC APPLICANT/OWNER: Tommy Nehmzow APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY: Michael Hughes, Hughes Law APPELLANT: Keith and Kristin Adams APPELLANT'S ATTORNEY: Elizabeth Dickson, Dickson Hatfield, LLP STAFF REVIEWER: Izze Liu, Associate Planner LOCATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend; and is further identified on County Assessor Map 18-13-30, Tax Lot 500 ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION ISSUED: May 13, 2019 APPEAL FILED: May 28, 2019 HEARING DATES: June 26, 2019 and July 24, 2019 RECORD CLOSED: August 14, 2019 DECISION DATED: October 2, 2019 LUBA NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED: October 21, 2019 NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL FILED WITH LUBA BY DESCHUTES COUNTY: November 8, 2019 Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 1 of 16 HEARING ON RECONSIDERATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE DETERMINATION: December 11, 2019 RECORD CLOSED: January 10, 2020 I. SUMMARY OF DECISION: In this decision, the Board of County Commissioners ('Board" or "BOCC") reconsidered its Findings and Decision dated October 2, 2019, and incorporates the previous decision. The Board exercised its discretion to hear the reconsideration of the appeal de novo. The record, in its entirety, was presented to the Board as attachments prior to and at the January 22, 2020 deliberation. The Board conducted a reconsideration public hearing on December 11, 2019. Staff met with the Board during a work session on January 15, 2019, in preparation for deliberations that occurred on January 22, 2020. In the deliberations, the Board voted two to one (Chair Adair and Commissioner Henderson in favor of denial; Commissioner DeBone opposed denial) to deny the land use application to establish a recreational marijuana production facility on the subject property. In deliberations, the Board found that facilities and activities taking place on the adjoining Sundance Meadows Ranch (the "Ranch" or "SMR") constitute a "youth activity center" as the Board interprets itc meaning of the term ",youth activity center" used in the Deschutes County Code. The Board made this determination by consolidating ten separate factors identified in prior deliberations as indicators of the presence of a "youth activity center" by the Board, and the reasonable foreseeability of the existence of those factors on a neighboring property by an applicant. The decision from those prior deliberations have been included in the record. The Board found that the proposed use does not satisfy the separation distance requirements of the code because of the proximity to a youth activity center on an adjacent parcel, where the subject property line is less than 1,320 feet' from the property line of Sundance Meadows Ranch; or alternatively, less than 1,000 feet2 between the proposed facility and the property line of Sundance Meadows Ranch, neither of which would satisfy the applicable criterion. 11. APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: Title 18 of the Deschutes County Code (DCC), County Zoning Chapter 18.16, Exclusive Farm Use Zones Chapter 18.116, Supplementary Provisions Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance ' The code, amended under Ordinance No. 2018-012, requires a 1,320-foot separation distance requirement from a youth activity center. Z The code, adopted under Ordinance 2016-015, requires a 1,000-foot separation distance requirement from a youth activity center. Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 2 of 16 Oregon's Statewide Land Use Planning Goals Goal 1, Citizen Involvement Goal 2, Land Use Planning Goal 3, Agricultural Lands Oregon Revised Statutes ORS 197.625, Acknowledgement of Comprehensive Plan or Land Use Regulation Changes; Application Prior to Acknowledgement ORS47513, Cannabis Regulation ORS 215.203, Zoning Ordinances Establishing Exclusive Farm Use Zones ORS 215.243, Agricultural Land Use Policy III. BASIC FINDINGS: The Board adopts and incorporates by reference the code interpretations, findings of fact, and conclusions of law set forth in the May 13, 2019 Administrative Decision in Section II (Basic Findings), including subsections titled Location, Lot of Record, Zoning, Proposal, Site Description, Land Use History, Public Agency Comments, Public Comments and Review Period with the addition of the following, noting that where there is conflict, these findings control: PROCEDURAL HISTORY: The Administrative Decision approved the proposal and was issued on May 13, 2019. An appeal was timely filed by the appellant, Adams, during the 12-day appeal period on May 28, 2019. The Board used their discretion to serve as the hearings body for the appellant's appeal to be heard de novo pursuant to Board Order 2019-014, dated May 21, 2019. A public hearing was held on June 26, 2019 wherein Applicant requested a continuance of the matter. The public hearing was rescheduled and held on July 24, 2019. The Board heard testimony and established an open record period that closed on August 14, 2019. The Board conducted deliberations at their regular business meetings on August 28, 2019, The Board voted two to one to overturn the Administrative Decision and to deny the application on appeal by its Decision dated October 2, 2019. Applicant filed its Notice of Appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) on October 21, 2019. Respondent, Deschutes County, filed its Notice of Withdrawal of its Decision on November 8, 2019. The matter was again reset for hearing on the County's withdrawal and reconsideration of the matter on December 11, 2019 (resulting in new file no. 247-19-000844-RC). The public hearing was held on December 11, 2019. The Board heard testimony and allowed an open record that closed on January 10, 2020. Rebuttal argument was submitted by appellants Adams on January 3, 2020. Applicant submitted his final argument on January 10, 2020, and the record was then closed. The Board conducted a deliberation discussion of this matter on reconsideration on January 15, 2020 and held deliberations on January 22, 2020. Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 3 of 16 APPLICABLE LAW: On October 24, 2018, the Board adopted amendments to DCC 18.116.3303 (hereinafter referred to as the "New Code" compared to the un-amended "Old Code"), however, these amendments had not yet been acknowledged by the state. The amendments were adopted in substantial compliance with ORS 197.610 and 197.615. The subject application was submitted on December 3, 2018, and deemed complete on February 22, 2019. Therefore, the adopted amendments were applicable to this application pursuant to ORS 197.625(4) and 215.427(3)(a). The Board recognizes that the New Code was repealed on September 3, 2019 by Ordinance 2019- 012, effective December 2, 2019. That ordinance also reinstated the Old Code. The instant application was denied on appeal by this Board on October 2, 2019, applying the New Code. On reconsideration, commencing on November 8, 2019, it is still properly judged for compliance with the New Code. However, during the reconsideration hearing, the applicant raised the applicability of the New Code. Neither the applicant nor the appellants provided relevant statute, rule, or case law, therefore, this Board will make alternate findings under both the New Code and the Old Code. Pertinent sections of the Old and New Code are as follows with changes in the New Code underlined: Code Version Effective Dates Relevant Differences Ord. 2016-015 July 1, 2016 - Ch. 18.116.330(B)(7)(a)(iv) "Old Code" November 22, 2018; (B) Marijuana production and marijuana December 2, 2019 - processing. Marijuana production and present I I Idt ijuaiia pr OCessiiig shall be subject LU the (made re -effective by following standards and criteria: Ord. No. 2019-012 (7) Separation Distances. Minimum separation upon repeal of "New distances shall apply as follows: Code.") (a) The use shall be located a minimum of 1,000 feet from: (iv) A youth activity center. Ch. 18.116.330(B)(7)(b) (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. Ord. 2018-012 November 23, 2018 - Ch. 18.116.330(B)(6)(a)(iv) "New Code" December 1, 2019 (B) Marijuana production and marijuana processing. Marijuana production and 3 Ordinance No. 2018-012 Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 4 of 16 (Repealed September marijuana processing shall be subject to the 3, 2019 by Ord. No. following standards and criteria: 2019-012) (6) Separation Distances. Minimum separation distances shall apply as follows: (a) The applicant property line shall be located a minimum of 1,320 feet from: (iv) A youth activity center. Ch. 18.116.330(B)(6)(b) (b) For purposes of DCC 18.116.330(B)(6),all distances shall be measured from the lot line of the affected properties listed in DCC 18.116.330(BMa) to the closest point of the of applicant's property line of land occupied by the marijuana producer or marijuana processor. IV. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS: Title 18 - DESCHUTES COUNTY CODE, COUNTY ZONING The Board adopts and incorporates by reference the code interpretations, findings of fact, and conclusions of law set forth in the May 13, 2019, Administrative Determination in Section III iFiindi gs)J pt f-r rho findir'Qc relatin to the DCC Section identified below: \r n lull ig.�/, en�eNi i v- a i` -b-' .g The Board shall apply Ord. 2018-012 (New Code) in the finding below, followed by alternative analysis in accordance with Ord. 2016-015 (Old Code) in light of the analysis provided above under Applicable Law. To the extent there are conflicts between the findings made previously and the findings below, the findings and conclusions below shall control. Chapter 18.116. SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS Section 18 116 330 Marijuana Production. Processing, and Retailing. B. Marijuana production and marijuana processing. Marijuana production and marijuana processing shall be subject to the following standards and criteria: 6. Separation Distances. Minimum separation distances shall apply as follows: a. The applicant property line shall be located a minimum of 1,320 feet from: iv. A youth activity center, FINDING: The Board finds that for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety it is necessary to buffer marijuana production from gathering places for children. These Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 5 of 16 include schools, parks, and youth activity centers. This policy is reflected in both the 2016 and 2018 versions of DCC 18.116.330, separating youth activity centers from marijuana production and processing in both code versions. The New Code widens the spacing distance required, both in feet (1,000 feet vs. 1,320 feet) and in method of measurement. Applicant has argued that the legislative history suggests an interpretation whereby all buffered uses should be licensed as a means of qualifying them for protection. Specifically, the Applicant cited the minutes of the Marijuana Advisory Committee where licensed youth activity centers were considered. Although the previous Board of County Commissioners disagreed that only a "licensed youth activity center" should qualify for protection, that Board did not ultimately include the requirement that a "youth activity center" must be "licensed" when ultimately codifying the Old Code. Instead, the broader phrase "youth activity center" was adopted. This Board finds that dropping the term "licensed" was intentional to thereby ensure that that term "youth activity centers" was not intended to be apply narrowly to only licensed facilities. Deschutes County intentionally separated youths from marijuana production and processing, particularly concentrations of youths engaging in organized activities. The County did so, acknowledging the fact that the Legislature elected to allow marijuana production as an outright permitted use in exclusive farm use ("EFU") zones. The County took this action in express reliance on the Legislature's allowance that local governments may place reasonable time, place and manner restrictions on marijuana production. This Board finds that the unusual zoning patterns mixing EFU- zoned properties with exception lands throughout the County creates a greater likelihood for conflicting uses, such as development featuring youth activities near EFU land suitable for marijuana Prod irtinn Thic "checkerboard" zoning pattern is the result of development on agricultural lands prior to such legislatively mandated restrictions in the 1970's. Such development patterns formed long before current resource land restrictions, which would likely prohibit such development now. Nevertheless, such a pattern exists in Deschutes County and is not likely to change in the foreseeable future. The Board of County Commissioners intentionally restricted the "place" where marijuana could be grown in the EFU zone with the intent of protecting the Count -Vs youths engaging in activities. The Board of County Commissioners recently considered public policy regarding marijuana production and processing as part of its promised evaluation of the County's Old Code. It opened the discussion up to the public, and reviewed many public comments and also heard public testimony in a public hearing on July 3, 2019. The Board concluded that protection of youths by separating youth activity centers was significantly more important than they had previously thought, based on the additional information, data, and testimony provided. Independent scientific studies were submitted to this Board regarding this case and are noted in the Record. These studies evidenced a scientific consensus that marijuana permanently damages the brains of youths, when consumed. Marijuana as a crop is particularly risky, where it is grown in a mostly consumable state, requiring only simply drying to be consumed. This fact distinguishes it from all other crops grown in Deschutes County. This Board considered such risk to public peace, health and safety when enacting both the Old Code and the New Code, and applies that legislative intent in this case. Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 6 of 16 This Board notes that the term youth activity center has been applied previously in related county land use decisions, and by reviewing those precedents, this Board has compiled a list of ten factors that it consistently has found persuasive when previously called to interpret the otherwise undefined term. It should be note that the Board's intention in setting forth the aforementioned ten factors is simply to consolidate and clarify our previous interpretations. The Board intends that these ten factors are to be applied as a checklist of considerations, but not all such consideration are required elements for a use to rise to the level of a "youth activity center". A use may satisfy only some of the factors, and still qualify as a "youth activity center." Youth Activity Center Factors Present Possible Not Present a. Separate building or area for use x b. Youth recreation activity accommodated regularly x c. Adult supervision provided x d. Specific toys, games, or equipment available for activity x e. Permitted or licensed activities x f. Organized group activities x g. School related activities x h. Usage (frequency / regularity / intensity / number of participants) exceeds usual EFU use by 50% or more x i. Use observable from neighboring properties x Youth activities marketed to the public (e.g., website, social media, published or pubiicizecl) x I I I I The Board finds that all such use factors should be considered in these contexts: a. History b. Foreseeability The contextual considerations, "History" and "Foreseeability", are added as the result of a recent Land Use Board of Appeals decision, Waveseer of Oregon, LLC v. Deschutes County and Krutzikowsky and McCready, LUBA No. 2019-036, issued October 17, 2019 ("Waveseer"), which reviewed this Board's application of the youth activity center separation distance in that case. LUBA provided guidance on how such factors should be applied to the facts of a specific case, noting that it is unreasonable to impose a regulation if an applicant cannot foresee the regulation's possible relevance to a particular application. This Board finds that based on LUBA's guidance, the foreseeability of each of the aforementioned ten factors as well as the foreseeability that the County will interpret a nearby property as a "youth activity center" are important to consider on a case -by - case basis. This Board finds that a reasonable investor interested in buying a tract of land for marijuana production or processing will perform the customary "due diligence" on par with any other commercial property acquisition to verify that the intended use is reasonably likely to be permitted on the considered tract. Depending on the facts and circumstances, such due diligent may include consultation with planning staff to verify use history of both the subject tract and tracts within the Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 7 of 16 separation area specified. As noted in ORS 93.040, a buyer is legally advised to check both subject tract land uses and uses allowed on neighboring properties, and assumes legal responsibility for doing so in that statute's mandatory language included in all Oregon deeds. This application requests approval to construct a marijuana production facility on property adjoining Sundance Meadows Ranch ("Ranch" or "SMR"). Applicant's property surrounds the Ranch swimming pool and court area on three sides as well. There is no separation buffer between the properties. This Board evaluates each of the ten aforementioned factors enumerated above to determine whether the adjoining Ranch qualifies as a "youth activity center": Factor 1 • Separate building or area for use SMR includes many separate buildings and areas for particular youth activities. The following list is contained in a Deschutes County 2017 Declaratory Ruling for verification of nonconforming use for Sundance Meadows recreational community (File Number 247-17-000754-DR) submitted to this Record. These facilities have been verified in the Record by recent photographs, affidavits, and testimony. a. Recreation/meeting hall b. Swimming pool c. Horse stables and riding facilities d. Small fishing lake In Uiniati ira anif (A hniacl f. Frisbee/Disc golf (18 holes) g. Remote control car track h. Tennis court i. Horseshoe pit j. Archery range k. Playground These facilities have been improved or constructed on site since at least 2017, the date of the Declaratory Ruling. SMR owners testified that the improvements have been there for a long time, some for decades. It was foreseeable for the applicant to be aware of the facilities, since they are advertised on the Ranch's website and the pool and tennis court are readily visible from the applicant's property, approximately 1 50feet between the Applicant's structure and his property line, with the pool and tennis court on the other side of the fence. Applicant's attorney submitted a screenshot of the Sundance Meadows website as part of Applicant's December 20, 2019 submittal into the Record. The website is titled "Things to do at the ranch and Youth Center." In addition to the list above, Applicant's submittal includes pickleball, basketball, and ATV riding of interest to youths. The fact that Applicant introduced both the aforementioned 2017 Declaratory Ruling and Sundance Meadows website into the record for this matter is notable because it demonstrates that these documents were reasonably discoverable, thereby demonstrating the foreseeability of this factor. Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 8 of 16 This Board finds that the property adjoining Applicant's subject property contains several separate buildings and areas for youth activity use, that the buildings and areas have been on the property for at least three years, and it was foreseeable for Applicant to see, hear, or discover in public records the existence of the youth activities on the adjoining Ranch. Factor 2• Youth recreation activity accommodated regularly The Board finds that the Ranch's youth recreation activities are offered all year long. Evidence provided demonstrates that most activities are more popular in the spring, summer, and fall because of the mobility problems associated with snow and ice, and also the discomfort of outdoor activities in winter weather. Appellant Adams submitted over 250 permission forms filled out by youths in 2018 alone for horseback riding, as well as photographs evidencing youths engaged in many different types of activities on the Ranch and oral testimony by Ranch personnel attesting to the many youth activities and the frequency of their use. The Board finds that the youth recreation activities offered on the Ranch are used often by many youths based on the evidence provided. The history of this use was also demonstrated to the Board. Evidence included events enjoyed by Ranch participants in 2016, affidavits and testimony recollecting such activities for decades, and the findings of the Deschutes County Declaratory Ruling affirming the nonconforming uses focusing on youth activities back to the 1970's. This Board finds that the youth recreation activities offered by the Sundance Meadows Ranch have a long history. These youth recreation activities occur mostly outdoors, are publicized on the Ranch's website as evidenced by Applicant's website screenshot submittal dated December 20, 2019, and were reviewed in detail in the inecrhi,tes County Declaratory Ruling #247-17-000754-DR. This Board finds that the youth recreation activities offered bythe Ranch are reasonably discoverable by an applicant engaged in reasonable due diligence, and so are reasonably foreseeable. This factor is found to exist on the Ranch, a second indicator that it is a Youth Activity Center in the Board's view. Factor 3: Adult supervision provided The Board finds this is an appropriate factor for determination of the existence of a Youth Activity Center because adult supervision suggest a level of formality when compared to a group of youths paying together on a regular basis. As such, the Board interprets a youth activity center to involve adult organization, supervision, and/or facilitation. In this case, the Board heard and read evidence of adult organization, supervision, and/or facilitation of all youth activities on the Ranch. All facilities were constructed and equipped by adults. Youth use of the pool expressly requires adult supervision, and is posted. Youth horseback rides require permission slips, over 250 of which were submitted for 2018 for Board review. Fishing, miniature golf, frisbee/disc golf, use of the remote - control car track, tennis, basketball, horseshoes, and archery involve checking equipment out at the recreation center or the lodge but do not require direct adult supervision, presumably because of the limited safety risks of these activities. This Board finds that adult supervision is required to be active and in close proximity for the more hazardous activities, and is left up to parents for less hazardous youth activities. This level of adult organization, supervision, and/or facilitation satisfies this factor in determining whether the activities at the Ranch are together a Youth Activity Center, in the Board's interpretation. Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 9 of 16 The history of this factor's presence at the Ranch is evidenced to the Board by oral testimony, affidavits, submittals, photographs, and the findings of File No. 247-17-000754-DR in Deschutes County's 2017 analysis of and investigation into the nature of nonconforming uses at the Ranch. This Board finds that these adult supervised uses have existed at the Ranch for at least three years, and likely for decades. The Ranch's adult -organized, supervised, and facilitated activities for youths have not been shielded from public view or knowledge. This Board finds it is reasonably foreseeable that a person interested in establishing a marijuana production facility in Deschutes County would review the Ranch's 40+ year land use history including the nonconforming use approval noted above, review the Ranch's website and Facebook presence, observe the pool from the property boundary with the noted camper trailer beside it for adult supervision all summer, and conclude that youth activities occur at the website's "Youth Center" which would reasonably be found to impact the DCC setback provisions. Factor 4• Specific toys games or equipment availability for activity This Board includes this factor as an indicator of a Youth Activity Center to preclude a general use area from being claimed as a Youth Activity Center. This Board finds that the Ranch provides a wide range of improvements constructed specifically for youth activities, with the toys, game accessories, or equipment needed for youths to enjoy such activities. These include the maintained and filled pool, tennis court, basketball court, stable and corral, horse trails, fishing lake (stocked with fish), miniature golf course, frisbee and disc golf course, remote control car track, horseshoe pit, archery range and playground. The Board finds that the Ranch also provides equipment for these youth arti�iitiac at the lorige or recreation renter; and there is a storage facility at the pool for court game equipment as well. Evidence provided by oral testimony and affidavits, written submittals, and photographs have satisfied this Board that these improvements and equipment are provided by the Ranch as part of its "Youth Center." Historically, these facilities have existed for some time. For example, land use records show that the pool was last improved in 2006, according to Deschutes County Property Information Account #112393 submitted by Appellant Adams into the Record at the December 11, 2019 public hearing. The game court area is scheduled for repaving, indicating a history of use of a decade or more. This Board finds that these specific facilities have existed at the Ranch for many years, establishing a history that indicates to this Board that these accessorized uses have a long history at the Ranch. The provision of these accessories to the various youth activity improvements are portrayed on the Ranch's website, Facebook page, and the monthly newsletter as well. A May 2019 edition of the newsletter in the Record includes a reminder to youths of the equipment available and its necessary care as the summer season started. This Board finds that the presence of these accessories, as publicized and available for public review, serve as notice of the Youth Activity Center at the Ranch. It is reasonably foreseeable that an interested party, such as a prospective purchaser of adjoining property, would see such evidence and reason that such accessories, in addition to the site improvements geared toward youth activities, indicate an active and current program catering to youth at the Ranch. Factor 5: Permitted or licensed activities Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 10 of 16 This Board includes this as a factor indicating the presence of a youth activity center on a particular site because it can assist in defining the nature and extent of the uses present. In this case, this Board finds that the County's approval of Application #247-17-000754-DR, mailed January 18, 2018, serves as an indicator of youth activities permitted on the site, where the County made an express Declaratory Ruling for a verification of a nonconforming use, the Sundance Meadows recreational community. This 24-page decision thoroughly verifies the valid nonconforming use on the three tax lots together comprising approximately 580 acres, with an additional 300+ acre area owned by the Ranch separated by BLM property nearby. This decision was noticed to nearby property owners, including the predecessor to the applicant. It was not appealed, so is final. It includes detailed descriptions of the youth activity facilities and calls the Ranch a "recreational community" based on these improvements. This Board notes the history of permits granted to the Ranch, starting with CU-76-5, which approved the proposed use in 1976 as a recreational complex. The approval for the first swimming pool cover was issued in 1976 as well. The "recreation complex center" approved in 1979 further establishes the long history of permits granted for recreational use as well. Based on this evidence, as well as oral testimony, affidavits, and written and photographic evidence in the record, this Board finds that the history of permitted land use for recreation is extensive. The history of this recreational community also speaks to its foreseeability of its discovery by a potential property buyer looking to find suitable EFU land for marijuana production in Deschutes County. This Board finds that such a long and detailed land use permit history of use for recreational activities makes it reasonably foreseeable for a potential purchaser to suspect recreational or "ynuith artiVi yr' i ica naxt rinnr, Factor 6: Organized Group Activities This Board includes organized group activities as a factor indicating the presence of a Youth Activity Center, because the Board interprets a youth activity center to involve manyyouths, notjust a small number as might collect to play together in a rural area where family homes may have many acres between them. For this same reason, the Board interprets that the group must be organized, not just youths seeking each other out for common activity on an ad hoc basis. Evidence provided to the Board indicates that the Ranch encourages youths to come together as a group for specific activities, such as swimming at scheduled times or horseback riding as a group. This Board finds that the Ranch demonstrates that it holds organized group activities for youths, and so satisfies this factor of a Youth Activity Center. The history of such organized group activities stretches back decades, as indicated by the pool permits noted in the Record, for example. Oral testimony, affidavits, written submittals and photographs prove these organized group activities have occurred at the Ranch for at least a decade, likely more. This Board finds that it is foreseeable that a person shopping for suitable marijuana production land in the County would readily find evidence of organized group activities at the Ranch, and note that such activities target youths at this recreational community, and reasonably conclude there is Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 11 of 16 significant risk of such adjoining property being characterized as a youth activity center requiring buffering from marijuana production. Factor 7: School related activities School related activities are a factor the Board recognizes as an indicator of a Youth Activity Center. School related activities are organized activities where youths congregate for their education. For this reason, this Board finds that the presence of school -related activities is a good indicator of the presence of a Youth Activity Center as well. The Ranch does not host school related activities such as 4H or FFA. Its relationship with Ranch guests or owners and their families is more closely associated with unstructured or "free" time. However, the Ranch has submitted evidence into the Record of hosting special education class visits to the Ranch on a regular basis by the busload. The Ranch also leases a corral and stable to the Equine Outreach Horse Rescue Program. Equine Outreach is a highly valued and well respected animal rescue organization that relocated to the Ranch two years ago. Its charity status requires it to rely on volunteers. The Oregon National Guard Youth Challenge Program, an alternative high school for at -risk youths, assists with the care of the horses. Ten to fifteen youths at a time are bussed to the Ranch on a weekly basis to groom horses, clean stalls, and learn about feeding and health care of horses recovering from abuse or neglect. Evidence in the Record from Equine Outreach documents that this reciprocal relationship is beneficial to both the youths and the horses. The visits to the Ranch are a key component of the Youth Challenge Program's curriculum. Equine Outreach expressed concern over the continuation of the Youth Challenge's participation at Equine Outreach, if the marijuana production facility were to be allowed so close to the Ranch, rnncit"lorin thin imnnrtanra of a innnrtin¢ at -risk vnuths in their varying stages of recovery. g �..- . .r.....�..-- - o I - This Board finds that the Oregon National Guard Youth Challenge Program's involvement in the Ranch constitutes a farm use with school related activities, and finds this satisfies another factor of Youth Activity Center existence at the Ranch. The history of this connection is not a long one, but does precede Applicant's acquisition of the subject property. The foreseeability of the Youth Challenge Program's involvement is likely not significant, where both Equine Outreach and the Youth Challenge Program don't publicize their good work to the public. If this were the only factor of "Youth Activity Center" found to be present by this Board at the Ranch, it likely would not be interpreted as such. However, it is considered as one of many factors examined by this Board when interpreting the existence of such an important use needing separation. Factor 8: Usage (frequency/regularit)/intensity/number of participants) exceeds usual EFU This Board finds that the usage at the Ranch greatly exceeds the usual EFU use customarily associated with activities in the zone. Unlike an individual family's ranch or farm, this use is clearly nonconforming and has been verified as such by Decision #247-17-000754-DR as noted above and included in the Record. The frequency of use by hundreds of members and the youths within those families greatly exceeds the number of youths customarily found on a ranch or farm in Deschutes County. Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 12 of 16 For example, the Affidavit sworn by Delores "Dee" Schultz, President of the Board of Directors of Sundance Meadows Ranch, states that the Ranch hosts approximately four fishing derbies a year. During the most recent derby on June 15, 2019, approximately 40 children participated in the event. Activities that are scheduled on a regular basis include horseback riding lessons, guided rides, and lessons on equine care. Ms. Schultz states that these activities are very popular at the Ranch. Over 350 rides were scheduled in 2018 and the sign up list is typically full on holiday weekends. This is evidenced by the horseback riding permission slips exceeding 250 for 2018 alone. The regularity of such uses is also evidenced by the slips, noting that they occur every day of the week. This Board reviewed affidavits of the pool supervisor, the security director and the president of Sundance Meadows Ranch, all affirming daily youth use of the pool area and schedule swim time for a significant number of children on a regular basis during the summer. The Affidavit sworn by Ron Hauser, Head of Security at Sundance Meadows Ranch, states that the pool is used by six to eighteen kids at any given time. The Board received testimony in the form of photographs as well, showing many children swimming in the pool. The Ranch website, published map and newsletter also describe the pool area as a facility attractive to youth and frequently used by them. Intensity of use is demonstrated by the mapped location of the youth activities throughout the Ranch submitted into the record, ranging from the pool and court area to the miles of horseback trails taking advantage of trails on both the Ranch property and through the BLM property to adjoining Ranch land. The slips also document participant numbers much higher than any that would ordinarily be seen on a family ranch or farm. This Board finds that the usage documented in this case is many multiples higher than customarily usage on EFU property, much higher than the 55001- * A 1-hroehnlri in the fartnr Jv 7U I IoleU as a threshold es old . The history of this concentrated use has been documented to predate Applicant's acquisition of the property in the Record. Evidence in the form of oral testimony, affidavits, written submittals and photographs documents that this concentration of use is not new. It clearly dates back to at least 2016 and likely has occurred on the Ranch for decades. This concentrated use is also a good indicator that a determination of "Youth Activity Center" is a substantial risk for a prospective marijuana producer. The Ranch's website placed in the Record by Attorney Hughes for the Applicant documented the Ranch's "Youth Activities." The county's on-line public land use records documents land uses back to 1976, including many facility permits for improvements not associated with customary EFU usage. The proximity of the Ranch's pool and court area to the Applicant's proposed marijuana grow facility serves as actual notice that this recreational community's use is frequent, regular, unusually intense for EFU property, and used by many youths. This Board finds that this factor is met. Factor 9: Use observable from neighboring properties This Board finds that the factor of observability from neighboring properties is satisfied. Photos placed in the Record from the fence between the Ranch's court area and pool show a straight line of vision from Applicant's proposed grow site. Other youth recreational uses on site set further back from the adjoining property line are observable by other means such as the Ranch's website, Facebook, and Google Earth. The history of this observability predates Applicant's acquisition of the Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 13 of 16 property. The likelihood that the Applicant would reasonably foresee the that the property next to his is used as a pool and court game area is very high, and would cause a reasonable property investor shopping for a marijuana production site in Deschutes County to inquire further as to its use as a Youth Activity Center, as called out for setback in the Deschutes County Code. Factor 10• Youth activities marketed to the public (e.g., website social media, published or publicized This Board recognizes that marketing may serve as a highly informative and widely disseminated means of making people aware of what's going on in a community. Though it is not a reliable definition of finding a Youth Activity Center exists on a particular parcel of property in the County, it can be a good indicator of what activities occur, who participates, and where it's located. In this case, the Board finds that the Ranch's website, Facebook presence and newsletter all convey a consistent message: The Ranch is a recreational community that focuses on youth activities. While the newsletter may not be readily available to members of the outside community, the Ranch's website and Facebook page are easily located and reviewed for youth -oriented content. The Record does not contain social media history for the Ranch's presence. The Board does find that it is reasonably foreseeable that an interested party could find these electronic sources with speed and ease. As previously noted, Applicant's attorney even included a screen shot of the Ranch's website in his December 20, 2019 submittal in the Record before this Board, demonstrating the foreseeability of that website. This Board finds that the youth activities marketed to the public indicate that a Youth Activity Center is present at the Ranch. Ten FactorAnaly,is ronclusion: Sunclanre NneadMAX Ranch k internreted bvthis Board to qualify as a Youth Activity Center for purposes of DCC 18.116.330(B)(6)(a)(iv). The Board interprets these facilities and activities located collectively at the Ranch to constitute a youth activity center and finds that the subject property does not meet the separation distance requirements of DCC 18.116.330(B)(6)(a)(iv) because the subject property is adjacent to the Ranch property, with no separation distance between the two properties. Applicant argues that only licensed, not -for -profit, and exclusively -for -youth facilities should qualify as youth activity centers. As previously discussed, Applicant relied on minutes of the Marijuana Advisory Committee convened prior to the passage of the 2016 code. The Board has considered Applicant's reasoning, but has not placed such a qualifier on its interpretation of the term as the Board uses the term, and is not persuaded by Applicant's arguments to change its interpretation at this time. Commissioner Henderson noted that the Marijuana Advisory Committee discussed licensed youth activity centers but the word "licensed" was omitted from the Deschutes County Code, therefore a license is not required. ALTERNATIVE FINDING: Ordinance No. 2018-012 changed subsection B(6) previously numbered as subsection B(7) by increasing the separation distance from 1,000 feet to 1,320 feet. The Board finds that the facilities and activities at the Ranch constitute a YAC and that applying the previous subjection (13)(7) to this application would not change the outcome because the Applicant's proposed marijuana production facilities is less than 1,000 feet from the Ranch property line. It is, Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 14 of 16 in fact, 150 feet from the Ranch property line. Under either the old subsection B(7) or the new subsection B(6), the separation criterion is not satisfied. b. For purposes of DCC 18.116.330(8)(6), all distances shall be measured from the lot line of the affected properties listed in DCC 18.116.330(8)(6)(a) to the closest point of the applicant's property line of land occupied by the marijuana producer or marijuana processor. FINDING: The Board finds that the distance between the applicant's property line and the Ranch property line is 0 feet, because the properties adjoin. This distance does not meet the required setback noted in the above finding, where the Board finds that there is a Youth Activity Center on the Ranch. ALTERNATIVE FINDING: Ordinance No. 2018-12 changed subsection (13)(6) previously numbered as subsection (13)(7) by modifying the method of distance measurement to "the closest point of the buildings and land area occupied by the marijuana producer or marijuana processor." This method in the Old Code allows the marijuana use area to be closer to the protected use, even if minimum setbacks from the marijuana property line are used, because the measurement is taken from the marijuana area itself rather than the property line of the marijuana use property. In this case, the Board finds that the version of code applied is not determinative to the outcome. The Old Code measurement method would still yield the same result as the New Code: The proposed marijuana production facility on the Nehmzow property is only 150 feet from the common property, line with the Ranch. Under either the old subsection (B)(7) or the new subsection (13)(6), the criterion is not met. DECISION: Based on the findings of fact and conclusions of law set out above, the Board votes 2:1 to reverse the Administrative Decision, affirm its Findings and Decision, and deny the land use permit application to establish a recreational marijuana production facility on the subject property. DATED this _ day of , 2020. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR DESCHUTES COUNTY Patti Adair, Chair Anthony DeBone, Vice Chair Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 15 of 16 Philip G . Henderson, Commissioner THIS DECISION BECOMES FINAL WHEN MAILED. PARTIES MAY APPEAL THIS DECISION TO THE LAND USE BOARD OF APPEALS WITHIN 21 DAYS OF THE DATE ON WHICH THIS DECISION IS FINAL. Board of County Commissioners Decision, Document No. 2020-129 File Nos. 247-18-000915-AD, 247-19-000431-A, and 247-19-000844-RC Page 16 of 16 L�01 E S C0G 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 BOCC Monday Meeting of February 3, 2020 DATE: January 29, 2020 FROM: Zechariah Heck, Community Development, 541-385-1704 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Nonprime Resource Lands - Consideration of Re -Opening Record BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Board continued a public hearing concerning the Nonprime Resource Lands amendment on January 15, 2020 and, at the conclusion of the meeting, kept the written record open until Wednesday, January 22 at 5:00 p.m. Staff is asking the Board to consider re -opening the written record due to a procedural challenge raised during the initial open record period. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: fine. ATTENDANCE: Zechariah Heck, Associate Planner; Peter Gutowsky, Planning Manager. L M[V� IVK V T UCY1 zL r'IVRr-HAt 9. MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Peter Gutowsky, AICP, Planning Manager Zechariah Heck, Associate Planner DATE: January 29, 2020 SUBJECT: Nonprime Resource Lands Amendment / Order 2020-006 / Reopening Written Record CONSIDERATION OF ORDER 2020-006 Staff is asking the Board of County Commissioners (Board) to consider adopting Order 2020-006 to reopen the written record for 10-days (Attachment 1). This action will not delay the Board's deliberation and consideration of 1st reading of the Nonprime Resource Lands amendment which is scheduled for March 4. BACKGROUND The Board continued a public hearing concerning the Nonprime Resource Lands amendment on January 15, 2020 and, at the conclusion of the meeting, kept the written record open until Wednesday, January 22 at 5:00 p.m. At 4:56 p.m. on January 22, Scott Hilgenberg, Rural Lands Legislative Attorney with 1,000 Friends of Oregon, submitted written comments. In one of his arguments, Mr. Hilgenberg raised a procedural challenge relating to ORS 197.610, subsection 6. The County's proposal has changed substantially from its original proposal, including the modification of proposed plan provisions that address actions involving the Department of Land Conservation and Development. There is a concern that the County has not followed all aspects of ORS 197.610, including subsection (6). 1000 Friends of Oregon requests that the County issue findings demonstrating the county's ongoing compliance with that statute. Upon receiving the letter, staff immediately coordinated with Gordon Howard, DLCD Community Services Division Manager, who cited case law and offered his opinion in two emails regarding Mr. Hilgenberg's challenge. Continuing the written record will allow staff to introduce Mr. Howard's emails (and any additional written testimony) into the record. Staff will notify all parties with standing, who may submit additional testimony relevant to the County's procedure. Attachments 1. Order 2020-006 2. 1,000 Friends of Oregon letter RE IEWED 06 M, LEGAL COUNSEL For Recording Stamp Only BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON An Order Re -Opening the Record to Allow the Board of County Commissioners to Consider New * ORDER NO. 2020-006 Evidence Relevant to File No. 247-19-000265-PA WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners (`Board") held public hearings regarding Nonprime Resource Lands amendments, File No. 247-19-000265-PA, on November 18, 2019, and, January 15, 2020; and WHEREAS, the Board allowed the written record to remain open until 5:00 PM on January 22, 2020; and WHEREAS, testimony was submitted on January 22, 2020, that challenged the County's procedure specific to Oregon Revised Statutes ("ORS") 197.610, subsection 6; and WHEREAS, for a legislative decision, Chapter 22.12 of the Deschutes County Code ("DCC") does not include a provision addressing the procedures to be followed when the Board re -opens the written record of a legislative item; and WHEREAS, for a quasi-judicial decision, DCC 22.24.160 provides the procedures for re -opening the record, and it is reasonable to apply those same procedures to a legislative matter; WHEREAS, the Board wishes to make it clear that additional testimony may be presented with new evidence regarding only the issue raised concerning ORS 197.610, subsection 6; now therefore, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, HEREBY ORDERS as follows: Section 1. The Board hereby reopens the record of the Nonprime Resource Lands amendments, File No. 247-19-000265-PA, to consider new testimony and evidence related only to the County's procedure specific to ORS 197.610(6). PAGE 1 OF 2 - ORDER No. 2020-006 Section 2. Staff shall provide notice to parties as set forth in DCC 22.24.160(B)(2). Section 3. The Board shall not accept new testimony and evidence on any other issues unless allowed by DCC. Section 4. The written record shall close on February 13, 2020 at 5:00 PM PST. Dated this _ of February, 2020 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON ATTEST: Recording Secretary PATTI ADAIR, Chair ANTHONY DEBONE, Vice Chair PHILLIP G. HENDERSON, Commissioner PAGE 2 OF 2 - ORDER No. 2020-006 January 22, 2020 SENT VIA EMAIL Deschutes County Board of Commissioners Deschutes Services Building 1300 NW Wall Street, 2nd Floor Bend, OR 97703 Re: Comments in Support of Denial of the Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments that are Inconsistent with State -Mandated Resource Protection To the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners: Please accept these comments to be included in the record regarding proposed Ordinance No. 2019-007 on behalf of 1000 Friends of Oregon. 1000 Friends of Oregon urges the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners to deny the proposed plan amendments for all the reasons noted in prior testimony, and as provided below. These final comments are in response to recent county testimony. A. It is settled law that soil classification is a stand-alone consideration when determining whether land is "Agricultural Land," and lands that are categorized as such cannot be removed from that category based on external factors. County staff asserted at the January 15, 2020 hearing that external factors need to be considered when determining whether land constitutes resource land notwithstanding NRCS soil classification, and that this "aggressive interpretation" offers "a matter of first impression." Although the County's preferred interpretation is indeed aggressive (and illegal, as outlined in our prior testimony), it is notably not a matter of first impression. Binding case law explains that if land qualifies as "Agricultural Land" under OAR 660-033-0020(1)(a)(A) due to soil classification, that land "cannot be classified as something other than agricultural land based on existing land use patterns or any of the other factors listed in the Goal 3 definition of agricultural land." Friends of Yamhill County v. Yamhill County, 47 Or LUBA 508, 525-526 (2004). See also OAR 660-033-0030(1). Any other interpretation is not founded in the law. B. County testimony demonstrates that lands subject to the plan amendments may support commercial timber utilization. In the December 18, 2019 testimony of Ed Keith, County Forester, he explained that the lands subject to the plan amendments are available for commercial timber utilization. In addition, Mr. Keith excepts from his analysis Section 36, and therefore imples that Section 36 supports even greater commercial timber utilization than as discussed in the section titled "Analysis." Further, 133 SW 2nd Avenue, Suite 201 9 Portland, OR 97204 • (503) 497-1000 • www.friends.org Mr. Keith's analysis addresses only "the average lot size," and therefore does not provide an adequate factual basis or constitute substantial evidence regarding whether the plan amendment's application to every subject parcel is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 4. C. County testimony demonstrates that the proposed plan amendments would allow for residential development in areas where there are not sufficient wastewater treatments services. The January 3, 2020 testimony of Todd Cleveland, County Environmental Health Inspector explains that alternative septic technology may be required to provide adequate septic service to a number of properties subject to the plan amendments. Alternative treatment technology is very expensive, with some systems costing around $45,000. The County should not motivate development in areas where conventional septic systems cannot support the amount of residential uses allowed by the zoning. Mr. Cleveland's testimony notes that Meadow Crest Acres is located in an area of groundwater concern and based on detailed hydrological analysis needs nitrogen reducing onsite wastewater technologies to best protect water resources for future beneficial uses. Mr. Cleveland's testimony neither demonstrates that all properties within Meadow Crest Acres subject to the plan amendments will be served by existing onsite wastewater systems, nor indicates what the cost of necessary advanced wastewater systems would be, and how that would affect affordability. The County's approach could motivate residential development in areas subject to the plan amendments that results in exceeding an area's carrying capacity for wastewater and nitrogen. This could create a risk of a public health hazard. Such an approach could force later -in -time developers to be required to install expensive technology to manage their wastewater, where prior developments are able to unfairly utilize cheaper conventional systems that led to the breach of capacity of the area's wastewater management capabilities. Mr. Cleveland also notes that some parcels subject to the plan amendments may not be able to obtain approval for any type of system. It is poor planning to rezone lands to allow for housing outright where the County's Environmental Health Inspector determines that some of the lots cannot have adequate waste disposal. 1000 Friends of Oregon is aware that there is a site evaluation performed prior to issuance for septic permits, but where the County has already analyzed the septic capabilities of the subject properties, and determined that some of them cannot support septic, those properties should be excluded from rezoning to allow for housing outright. Also, Mr. Cleveland's testimony explains that previously subdivided lots have already been issued approved site evaluations prior to final plat issuance, and in some cases, records are quite old and limited. Outdated evaluations for septic allowances should be reviewed and updated based on current conditions. Mr. Cleveland's conclusion that onsite wastewater treatment systems are not a significant limitation to residential uses within the areas subject to the plan amendments is not supported by his own testimony because he admits that the records are outdated and of limited use, and acknowledges that some parcels do not have the capacity to 2 of 3 gain approval for any type of wastewater system. The county should reconsider zoning areas for housing that lack the ability to properly manage wastewater. D. Procedural Errors The County's proposal has changed substantially from its original proposal, including the modification of proposed plan provisions that address actions involving the Department of Land Conservation and Development. There is a concern that the County has not followed all aspects of ORS 197.610, including subsection (6). 1000 Friends of Oregon requests that the County issue findings demonstrating the county's ongoing compliance with that statute. E. Conclusion The proposed amendments fail to apply state requirements governing agricultural land in violation of Statewide Planning Goal 3. The proposed amendments fail to apply the definition of Agricultural Land, provided at OAR 660-033-0020(1). Without a showing that the redesignations envisioned by the proposed amendments for the subject properties will comply with the definition of agricultural land, the proposed amendments are inconsistent with Goal 3. The proposed amendments violate Statewide Planning Goal 4. The county errs in its determination that parceiization and ownership status determine whether land is forestland under Goal 4. See OAR 660-006-0010(2). Mr. Keith's testimony fails to adequately address all properties subject to the plan amendments, and their potential productivity. Without ensuring compliance now with Goal 3 and Goal 4 for the many redesignations of agricultural and forest land that would ensue upon adoption, the proposed amendments fail to meet the standard at ORS 197.175(2)(a) that all post -acknowledgement plan amendments comply with the goals. For all the reasons provided above and submitted in prior testimony, we strongly urge the county to deny the proposed amendments. We request notice of any further action to be provided to Scott@@iends.org. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important issue. Scott Hilgenberg Rural Lands Legislative Attorney 1000 Friends of Oregon 3 of 3 vT E S C0G � 2 o 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 BOCC Monday Meeting of February 3, 2020 DATE: January 29, 2020 FROM: Tanya Saltzman, Community Development, TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Preparation for Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendments Public Hearing The Board of County Commissioners (Board) will conduct a work session on February 3, 2020 in preparation for a public hearing on February 12, 2020 to consider text amendments to Chapter 18.108.110, Sunriver Business Park District (SUBP), File No. 247-19-000700-TA. The applicant, Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership, proposes amendments that would allow employee housing as an outright permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district. MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Tanya Saltzman, Associate Planner DATE: January 29, 2020 SUBJECT: Work Session: Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Text Amendments The Board of County Commissioners (Board) will conduct a work session on February 3, 2020 in preparation for a public hearing on February 12, 2020 to consider text amendments to Chapter 18.108.110, Sunriver Business Park District (SUBP), File No. 247-19-000700-TA. The applicant, Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership, proposes amendments that would allow employee housing as an outright permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district. The entire record, including public comments, is provided to the Board through this memorandum as well as via hard copy. PROPOSAL The proposed text amendments add employee housing structures to the outright permitted uses in the Sunriver Business Park (SUBP) zone. The amendments provide definitions for "employee" and "employee housing structure," and specify parking requirements. II. BACKGROUND The purpose of the proposed amendments is to allow employee housing for those who work in the neighboring resorts, including Sunriver Resort, Caldera Springs, and Crosswater, as well as Mt. Bachelor. According to the applicant's burden of proof, the communities noted above employ upwards of 1,000 peak summer employees, and half of that in the off-season; lack of housing for employees has consistently been identified as a problem, both for the employees themselves as well as for their employers who are trying to attract and retain a workforce. The applicant states that the greater Sunriver community is largely built out with respect to potential development of employee housing, but six lots within the SUBP district are undeveloped, including a 3.25-acre parcel owned by the applicant. Based on this need for employee housing, the available land within the zoning district, and the wide range of uses already permitted in the Sunriver Business Park district, the applicant has submitted a burden of proof stating that the text amendment is in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals, applicable Oregon Administrative Rules, applicable policies of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and the county's Transportation System Plan. As noted above, the applicant owns a 3.25-acre vacant lot within the Sunriver Business Park. While that specific property is not the subject of this application, the proposed text amendments would allow for the construction of employee housing on that lot and others in the Business Park zoning district subject to Deschutes County Code (DCC) Chapter 124, Site Plan Review.' If the text amendments are approved, the applicant intends to construct employee housing on that lot to serve at least 200 employees. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS The Deschutes County Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 14, 2019, which was continued to December 12, 2019. The following individuals or organizations provided oral or written testimony in addition to the applicant: • Roger Lee, Economic Development for Central Oregon (EDCO) • Marc Cameron, Sunriver Brewing Company • David Welton • Ann Gawith, Executive Director, La Pine Chamber of Commerce • Krista Miller, General Manager, Caldera Springs • John Holland, President, Sunriver Area Chamber of Commerce • V�Wdle lC_ llle, 'Executive Director, Habitat La Pine S uiriver • John Schuldt • Eric Post • Mark Halvorsen The majority of testimony was in favor of the proposed amendments, with a few caveats. Three individuals expressed concern about traffic/intersections, policing/enforcement, and parking, but expressed support for the concept in general. A neighboring property owner with concerns about maintenance and upkeep felt that it might be premature to open up the employee housing option to all potential property owners. Additional public comments were received from the following individuals after the close of the public hearing in response to the Planning Commission's vote: • Daniel Frasie • Ariel Mendez • David Welton ' https://weblink.deschutes.org/public/0/doc/89195/Pagel.aspx Page 2 of 4 IV. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION At the first public hearing, commissioners expressed concern about parking, enforcement, and compatibility; this discussion was continued to the second hearing. Items of discussion included: Parking: Commissioners expressed concern that parking requirements were too low. While the applicant stated that based on their experience, very few of their workers —many of whom come from outside of the region or country —have come to Sunriver with cars, commissioners questioned what would occur in the winter when bicycling or walking would be less feasible, and when there was potential for non -employees to utilize the housing. Members of the Planning Commission also expressed concern about spillover parking and the enforcement of parking. Enforcement: Enforcement is general was noted as a concern for commissioners, in terms of employee eligibility —which, in the original application, varied depending on the season —as well as general conditions of any proposed development. Compatibility: Commissioners expressed concern about introducing a new use into the business park. They noted that while the zoning district accommodates a variety of uses, from light industrial to commercial, introducing residential uses could potentially create compatibility concerns, particularly if there were any issues with enforcement. Ultimately, the Planning Commission's vote to recommend approval of the amendments as written failed 2-5. Members of the Commission voiced their support for the general concept of employee i_ Business Park but .did � t the amendments for tho ro cons housing in the Sunriver 6US11ICJS Park zone, e, LJUI UIU not support the alillei iui i ici i�� ivi a is i ca.w� �� cited above. V. MODIFICATIONS TO AMENDMENTS After the Planning Commission vote, the applicant consulted with staff in order to determine how best to address the items of concern voiced by the Planning Commission; in addition, staff sought to make sure that the code language was clear and feasible to administer. Staff met with the applicant and applicant's legal counsel to revise the amendments in a manner that would achieve these goals. The revisions to the proposed text amendments (Attachment 1) are summarized as follows: • Narrowed definition of "employee" to a person who earns a living by working in the hospitality, food and beverage, outdoor recreation or tourism industry (i) in or within two miles of the Sunriver Unincorporated Community boundary, or (ii) at Mt. Bachelor Ski and Summer Resort. The previous definition included those within 20 air miles of the housing unit and required monthly employment verification. • Consolidated "employee housing unit" and "employee housing structure" definitions for clarity. • Eliminated seasonal definitions and with it, eliminated option of non -employees utilizing the housing during the times outside of Resort Season. Only employees (as defined) and their families are eligible throughout the year. Page 3 of 4 • Changed parking requirements to one vehicular parking space per three beds (formerly one space per six beds); added subsection stating that for employee housing structures constructed in phases, parking requirements may be reduced to no fewer than one space per six beds if the applicant demonstrates during site plan review process that a lesser parking ratio will continue to provide adequate parking as required by DCC 18.116.030(D)(9). VI. ADOPTION BY EMERGENCY As noted above, upon adoption the applicant intends to submit an application to construct employee housing on a lot they own in the district. Owing to the seasonal nature of tourism employment and the need for potential employees to secure housing prior to the beginning of the resort's high season, the applicant respectfully requests consideration of adoption by emergency. This would allow for a planning, permitting, and construction timeline that could potentially begin housing employees for the 2021 summer resort season. VII. NEXT STEPS The Board will hold the public hearing for the text amendments on February 12, 2020. The agenda packet for the hearing will contain a draft ordinance and revised findings. Attachments i. Revise a iT extAirieiiunients Full Record 2. 2019-12-18 Public Comment - Welton 3. 2019-12-18 Public Comment - Mendez 4. 2019-12-16 Public Comment - Frasie 5. 2019-12-12 PC Hearing Continuation Memo 6. 2019-12-12 PC Hearing Continuation - Applicant Correspondence 7. 2019-12-12 PC Hearing Continuation Minutes 8. 2019-11-14 PC Hearing Packet 9. 2019-11-14 PC Hearing Staff Presentation 10. 2019-11-14 PC Hearing Sign -In Sheet 11. 2019-11-14 PC Hearing - Additional Public Comments 12. 2019-11-14 PC Hearing Minutes 13. 2019-11-02 Bulletin NOPH Affidavit 14. 2019-10-10 PC Work Session Packet 15. 2019-10-10 PC Work Session Staff Presentation 16. 2019-10-03 DLCD PAPA Screen Shot 17. 2019-10-03 DLCDL Confirmation Email 18. 2019-09-24 Proposed Amendments and Applicant Findings Page 4 of 4 EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 18.108.110. Business Park - BP District. A. Uses Permitted Outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright: 1. Residential uses existing as of March 31, 1997. 2. Administrative, educational and other related facilities in conjunction with a use permitted outright. 3. Library. 4. Recreational path. 5. Post office. 6. Church in building or buildings not exceeding 5,000 square feet of floor area. 7. Child care facilities, nurseries, and/or preschools. 8. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: Retail/rental store, office and service establishment, including but not limited to the following: a. Automobile, motorcycle, boat, recreational vehicle, trailer or truck sales, rental, repair or maintenance business, including tire stores and parts stores. b. Agricultural equipment and supplies. r, rar with: d. Contractor's office, including but not limited to, building, electrical, plumbing, heating and air conditioning, painter, etc.. e. Construction equipment sales, rental and/or service. f. Exterminator services. g. Golf cart sales and service. h. Lumber yard, home improvement or building materials store. i. Housekeeping and janitorial service. j. Dry cleaner and/or self-service laundry facility. k. Marine/boat sales and service. I. Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge including entertainment. p. Marijuana processing cannabinoid concentrates and cannabinoid products, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. q. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items or products at the same location. 100901619;1} EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 9. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Scientific research or experimental development of materials, methods or products, including engineering and laboratory research. b. Light manufacturing, assembly, fabricating or packaging of products from previously prepared materials, including but not limited to cloth, paper, leather, precious or semi- precious metals or stones, etc. c. Manufacture of food products, pharmaceuticals and the like, but not including the production of fish or meat products, or the rendering of fats and oils. d. Warehouse and distribution uses in a building or buildings each less than 10,000 square feet of floor area. 10. Employee housing structures. B. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following conditional uses may be permitted subject to DCC 18.128 and a conditional use permit: 1. Public buildings and public utility structures and yards, including railroad yards. 2. A dwelling unit for a caretaker or watchman working on a developed property. 3. Law enforcement detention facility. 4. Parking lot. 5. Radio and television broadcast facilities. 6. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Bowling alley. b. Theater. c. Veterinary clinic and/or kennel. d. Marijuana processing including cannabinoid extracts, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. e. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. 7. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Warehouses and distribution uses in a building or buildings exceeding 10,000 square feet of floor area. b. Distillery and beer/ale brewing facility, including wholesale sales thereof. 100901619;11 EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT c. Self/mini storage. d. Trucking company dispatch/terminal. e. Solid waste/garbage operator, not including solid waste disposal or other forms of solid waste storage or transfer station. C. Use Limits. The following limitations and standards shall apply to uses listed in DCC 18.108.110(A) or (B): 1. A use expected to generate more than 30 truck -trailer or other heavy equipment trips per day to and from the subject property shall not be permitted to locate on a lot adjacent to or across the street from a lot in a residential district. 2. Storage, loading and parking areas shall be screened from residential zones. 3. No use requiring air contaminant discharge permits shall be approved by the Planning Director or Hearings Body prior to review by the applicable state or federal permit reviewing authority, nor shall such uses be permitted adjacent to or across the street from a residential lot. D. Special Requirements for Large Scale Uses. Any of the uses listed in DCC 18.108.110(A)(6) or (B)(6) may be allowed in a building or buildings each exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space if the Planning Director or Hearings Body finds: 1. That the intended customers for the proposed use will come from the community and surrounding rural area, or the use will meet the needs of the people passing through the area. For the purposes of DCC 18.108.110, the surrounding rural area shall be that area identified as all property within five miles of the boundary of the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community; 2. The use will primarily employ a work force from the community and surrounding rural area; and 3. That it is not practical to locate the use in a building or buildings under 8,000 square feet of floor space. E. Height Regulations. No building or structure shall be hereafter erected, enlarged or structurally altered to exceed 45 feet in height. F. Lot Requirements. The following lot requirements shall be observed: 1. Lot Area. No requirements. 2. Lot Width. No requirements. 3. Lot Depth. Each lot shall have a minimum depth of 100 feet. 4. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet. f00901619;1) EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 5. Side Yard. No side yard required, except when adjoining a lot in an RS or RM District and then the required side yard shall be 50 feet. No side yards are required on the side of a building adjoining a railroad right of way. 6. Rear Yard. No rear yard required, except when adjoining a lot in an RS or RM District and then the rear yard shall be 50 feet. No rear yard is required on the side of a building adjoining a railroad right of way. 7. Lot Coverage. The maximum lot coverage by buildings and structures shall be 50 percent of the total lot area. G. Special Requirements for Employee Housing 1. The following definitions shall apply to DCC 18.108.110(A)(9)(e): "Employee" shall mean a person eighteen (18) years of age or older who earns a living by working in the hospitality food and beverage outdoor recreation or tourism industry (i) in or within two (2) miles of the Sunriver Unincorporated Community Boundary, or (ii) at Mt. Bachelor Ski and Summer Resort. "Employee Housing Structure" shall mean a dormitory or multi -family dwelling whose primary purpose is to serve the housing needs of Employees, and the occupancy of which is restricted to Employees together with such person's spouse and minor children, if any. For the purposes of this section "dormitory" is defined as a residence hall providing rooms for individuals or for groups usually without private baths. 2. Parking Requirements. Employee Housing Structures must provide as a minimum one vehicular parking space for every 3 beds provided and bicycle parking for at least one space for every two beds provided. a. For Employee Housing Structures constructed in one or more phases, the parking requirements may be reduced to no fewer than one space for every six beds if the applicant demonstrates at the time of site plan approval that a lesser parking ratio will continue to provide adequate parking as required by DCC 18.116.030(D)(9). f00901619;1) Tanya Saltzman Subject: RE: Workforce housing in Sunriver -----Original Message ----- From: David Welton <davidnwelton@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 8:51 PM To: Board <board@deschutes.org> Subject: Workforce housing in Sunriver [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Hello, I wish to add my voice in favor of approving the project in Sunriver for some badly needed workforce housing. I think today's editorial in the paper sums up many of the relevant facts: https://www.bendbulletin.com/opinion/editorial-county-should-approve-sunriver-code-change- req uest/article_1b224650-2101-11ea-bfe9-9f726101fefc. htm I Specifically, nr,.... 6..- �., 7n9 4 for ovomr�lc 1 �S2 summer amnlnvaac hart 17 rarc amnna them. That'S PVPrt fewer Cars than the Few using cars. in aviu, o example, 128 su...., a ......�.,lnw-......nrl 19 _..._ _..._..o _hem- hnt - ----- ---- - -. text amendment would require — one car for every 10 employees, as opposed to the requested 1 for every six." Furthermore, I believe we need to take a more market -driven approach to parking requirements. Rather than having the local government attempt to guess exactly how many parking spots should be provided, let the market figure it out. Thankyou David N. Welton Tanya Saltzman Subject: RE: Please allow workforce housing with reduced parking requirements -----Original Message ----- From: Ariel Mendez <atmendez@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 9:51 PM To: Board <board@deschutes.org> Subject: Please allow workforce housing with reduced parking requirements [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Dear Commissioners Henderson, Adair, and DeBone, I would like to lend my voice in support of approving the proposed Sunriver workforce housing with reduced parking requirements. I'm sure you've considered how costly parking requirements are, and they are especially wasteful when they are not necessary. One other aspect to consider is the added benefit of fewer people driving to Sunriver, either from within Sunriver or nearby areas. For every person that is able to walk to work in Sunriver instead of drive there from out of town, we save a trip on Hwy 97 and local roads. This reduces congestion, promotes safety, and also provides savings to taxpayers in the loan UI reduced load maintenance soots. As a member of Bend's Citywide Transportation Advisory Committee and a longtime safe streets advocate, I'd be happy to chat further if it would be helpful. Yours, Ariel Mendez Bend, OR 650-776-1871 Tanya Saltzman From: Tanya Saltzman Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 3:14 PM To: 'Daniel Frasie' Subject: RE: disappointed. Hi Daniel, Yes, as noted in my email I am the county case planner for the employee housing text amendment. You can send an email to the Planning Commission (who just voted on the amendments) at Plan ningCommisslon@deschutes.Org If you'd like to email the Board of County Commissioners, which has not yet heard this proposal but will in late January, they can be reached at board@deschutes.org Hope this helps. Let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, Tanya Tanya Saltzman, AICP Associate Planner 117 NW Lafayette Aver Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel: (541) 388-6528 1 www.deschutes.org/cd Let us know how we're doing: Customer Feedback survey From: Daniel Frasie <daniel.frasie@gmaii.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2019 2:36 PM To: Tanya Saltzman <Tanya.Saltzman@deschutes.org> Subject: Re: disappointed. [EXTERNAL EMAIL] do you work for the county? and if so what is the email address for the board of commissioners? I tried looking them up on the county website and could not find a general email.. I think just a phone number that no one answered.. or maybe not even that. the county website is not user friendly. On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 3:15 PM Tanya Saltzman <Tanya.Saltzman (&deschutes.org> wrote: Daniel, Thanks for reaching out with your concerns about the Sunriver employee housing text amendments. As the case planner, I'd like to clarify a couple of things. The most significant is that although the Planning Commission denied the motion to recommend approval to the Board of County Commissioners, this doesn't mean the end of the process. The Planning Commission, whose members are appointed, provides recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC), but it'll ultimately be up to the BOCC to formally approve or deny the amendments. In this case, the Planning Commission had concerns about parking and other issues and thus did not feel they could recommend the amendments as written. Given that, we're looking to hold a hearing with the BOCC at the end of January, likely the 29`". We welcome any written comments (you can send them to me) or oral comments provided at the hearing, and I encourage you to do so as the Board truly values public input on these matters. After the hearing, the Board will deliberate and then make a decision to approve or deny the amendments. Second, I want to clarify that these are text amendments to the zoning code to allow employee housing in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district in general —although the applicant is Sunriver Resort, this is not a specific development proposal for one project/lot/building. If the text amendments are adopted by the Board in January/February, then it will be up to Sunriver Resort (or any other property owner in that district who wants to build employee housing) to submit an application specifically for their lot. During that process, things like fire department access and circulation will be examined during the site plan review process. Finally, I believe the other developments you mentioned are in the City of Bend's jurisdiction and not the County's but your point is understood regardless. I hope this is helpful. I understand your disappointment in the Planning Commission's vote but rest assured, the process continues. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out. Best, Tanya Tanya Saltzman, AICP Associate Planner x, 117 NW Lafayette Ave I Bend, Oregon 97703 Tel: (541) 388-6528 1 www.deschutes,Qfg/cd 1108 Let us know how we're doing: Customer Feedback Survev From: Daniel Frasie <daniel.frasie@gmall.com> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2019 2:32 PM To: CDD Planning <planning@deschutes.org> Subject: disappointed. [EXTERNAL EMAIL] I am beyond disappointed in you guys for denying the proposed housing that Sunriver would like to do for future employees. Especially if you guys allowed the apartments on Ne Bellevue dr. to happen.. plus the other ones on Dalton.. plus worthy brewing.. Just for example those streets are not meant to handle all the parked cars.. if there is an emergency Good luck trying to get an ambulance/fire truck through there especially if a delivery truck happens to be driving through their as well.. if you guys are the ones who approved those developments but denying Sunriver's plan for employee housing.. then you guys should be fired!.. Stupid decision absolutely even if you guys didn't approve those other places that I mentioned still I think you not approving the project in Sunriver is still highly stupid. If I have a chance I will be encouraging others to vote you guys out come next election. sincerely -Daniel. MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Planning Commission FROM: Tanya Saltzman, Associate Planner DATE: December 5, 2019 SUBJECT: Public Hearing Continuation: Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Text Amendments The Planning Commission will conduct a continued public hearing on December 12, 2019 to consider text amendments to Chapter 18.108, Sunriver Business Park District (SUBP), File No. 247-19-000700- TA. The applicant, Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership, proposes amendments that would allow employee housing as an outright permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district. The Planning Commission held a work session on the amendments on October 10, 2019.' A public hearing was held on November 14, 2019, at which time the Planning C OMIMissivii elected to conti sue the public hearing to December 12. The applicant -initiated text amendments, findings, and the entirety of the record were provided to the Planning Commission at the initial public hearing.2 I. BACKGROUND The purpose of the proposed amendments is to allow employee housing for those who work in the neighboring resorts, including Sunriver Resort, Caldera Springs, and Crosswater as well as the larger Sunriver community and Mt. Bachelor. The proposed text amendments add employee housing structures to the outright permitted uses in the Sunriver Business Park (SUBP) zone. As noted previously, the applicant owns a 3.25-acre vacant lot within the Sunriver Business Park. While that property is not the subject of this application, the proposed text amendments would allow for the construction of employee housing on that lot and others in the Business Park zoning district subject to Deschutes County Code (DCC) Chapter 124, Site Plan Review.3 If the text amendments are https://deschutescountyor.iqm2.com/Citizens/DetaiI LegiFile aspx?Frame=&MeetinglD=2458&MediaPosition=&ID=2907& CssClass= 2 https•//deschutescountyoriqm2 com/Citizens/Detail Meeting.aspx?ID=2459 3 https://weblink.deschutes.org/public/0/doc/89195/Pagel.aspx approved, the applicant intends to construct employee housing on that lot to serve at least 200 employees. 111. ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION Several areas of concern were noted by members of the Planning Commission at the November 14 public hearing, discussed below. In light of that discussion, staff offers potential points for consideration. Parking: Some commissioners asked the applicant to reconsider the amount of parking required. While the applicant stated that based on their experiences, many resort industry workers come from locations outside of the region or country and thus would not have cars, commissioners questioned what would occur in the winter when bicycling or walking would be less feasible, and noted that still, more residents might have cars than the applicants have anticipated. • What is the factual basis for one parking space for six beds? • In the event onsite parking demand exceeds supply, where will spillover parking go? • How will Sunriver ensure parking is enforced? Enforcement: Some commissioners expressed concern about enforcement in general —namely: • Who would enforce employee eligibility as well as general conditions of any proposed development? • Related to concerns about enfor cement of employee ell ILAiity, vvhat iS the basis for the eligibility requirements? Lot size: Should there be minimum lot/parcel size requirements for employee housing in the Sunriver Business Park? Current uses in the zone: Commissioners inquired whether there currently is'a way in which the Business Park zoning district could allow employee housing without the need for a text amendment and ensuing areas of concern as expressed above. By staffs understanding, there is no outright permitted use or conditional use that could accommodate employee housing. Permitted and conditional uses in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district are as follows: 18.108.110. Business Park - BP District. A. Uses Permitted Outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright: 1. Residential uses existing as of March 31, 1997. 2. Administrative, educational and other related facilities in conjunction with a use permitted outright. 3. Library. 4. Recreational path. 5. Post office. 6. Church in building or buildings not exceeding 5,000 square feet of floor area. Page 2 of 4 7. Child care facilities, nurseries, and/or preschools. 8. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: Retail/rental store, office and service establishment, including but not limited to the following: a. Automobile, motorcycle, boat, recreational vehicle, trailer or truck sales, rental, repair or maintenance business, including tire stores and parts stores. b. Agricultural equipment and supplies. c. Car wash. d. Contractor's office, including but not limited to, building, electrical, plumbing, heating and air conditioning, painter, etc.. e. Construction equipment sales, rental and/or service. f. Exterminator services. g. Golf cart sales and service. h. Lumber yard, home improvement or building materials store. i. Housekeeping and janitorial service. j. Dry cleaner and/or self-service laundry facility. k. Marine/boat sales and service. I. Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge including entertainment. p. Marijuana processing cannabinoid concentrates and cannabinoid products, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. q. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items or products at the same location. 9. A building or ounaings each riot exceeding w,VVv square ICCI VI IIVoI spate IIVUsiiig any combination of: a. Scientific research or experimental development of materials, methods or products, including engineering and laboratory research. b. Light manufacturing, assembly, fabricating or packaging of products from previously prepared materials, including but not limited to cloth, paper, leather, precious or semi-precious metals or stones, etc. c. Manufacture of food products, pharmaceuticals and the like, but not including the production of fish or meat products, or the rendering of fats and oils. d. Warehouse and distribution uses in a building or buildings each less than 10,000 square feet of floor area. B. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following conditional uses may be permitted subject to DCC 18.128 and a conditional use permit: 1. Public buildings and public utility structures and yards, including railroad yards. 2. A dwelling unit for a caretaker or watchman working on a developed property. 3. Law enforcement detention facility. 4. Parking lot. 5. Radio and television broadcast facilities. 6. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Bowling alley. Page 3 of 4 b. Theater. c. Veterinary clinic and/or kennel. d. Marijuana processing including cannabinoid extracts, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. e. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. 7. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Warehouses and distribution uses in a building or buildings exceeding 10,000 square feet of floor area. b. Distillery and beer/ale brewing facility, including wholesale sales thereof. c. Self/mini storage. d. Trucking company dispatch/terminal. e. Solid waste/garbage operator, not including solid waste disposal or other forms of solid waste storage or transfer station. III. PUBLIC INPUT No additional public input has been received since the first public hearing on November 14, 2019. IV. NEXT STEPS At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Commission can: • Continue the hearing to a date certain; • I.IOSe the hearing and leave the written i record u open to a uaic c e r pann, vi • Close the hearing and commence deliberations or schedule deliberations to a later date. Page 4 of 4 Tanya Saltzman From: Steven Hultberg <shultberg@radlerwhite.com> Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2019 3:54 PM To: Tanya Saltzman Subject: RE: Sunriver Business Park [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Tanya, think I got my math wrong. There were 128 employees with 12 cars, not 10. Still results in the same ratio 1 spot per 10 beds. Regards, Steve Steven P. Hultberg PO Box 2007 Bend, Oregon 97709 P 541.585.3697 C 541.420.1024 E shultberaCslradlerwhite.com From: Steven Hultberg Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 5:11 PM To: Tanya Saltzman <Tanya.Saltzman@deschutes.org> Cc: Steve Runner (srunner@sunriver-resort.com) <srunner@sunriver-resort.com>; Fettig, John (PDXDS) <joh n.fettig@sunriver-realty.com> Subject: Sunriver Business Park Tanya, Thanks for taking the time to speak with me this afternoon regarding the business park. I have had an opportunity to review the staff memorandum and wanted to provide a bit more background and responses to the issues presented in the staff memo. Parking: As we mentioned at the first hearing, the parking ratio was based on the Resort's experience with employees and how many of them actually have automobiles. In the summer of 2019, the resort provided housing for 128 employees in 128 beds. Out of those 128 employees, there were only 10 vehicles. This results in the need for one parking space per 10 employees. The housing proposed is most similar to a dormitory, with private rooms and shared kitchens/living space. The county's own parking standard for dormitories is 1 space for each 6 student beds. With past experience showing a need for 1 space for every 10 employees, and the county's standards at 1 space for 6 students, the proposed parking standards at 1 spot for each 6 beds is consistent with both past practices and the county's own parking standards. Enforcement: Like any other use in the county, the resort will need site plan approval for employee housing. Site plan approval will limit the use of the property to employee housing. Any violation of that condition may be enforced by the county in the same manner as any other use violation. Lot Size: We do not see a need to limit lot size. All lots within the business park are platted, with most being developed. We believe that other standards such as lot coverage and parking requirements will effectively limit the ability to provide employee housing on small lots. Conditional Use: Unfortunately, we did not see any other path available to provide employee housing. Had a conditional use or other permit been available, we would have pursued another avenue. Moreover, we thought it was important to provide additional code text regarding employee housing into the code. Regards, Steve RADLERWHrm PARKs ALEXANDER Steven P. Hultberg PO Box 2007 Bend, Oregon 97709 P 541.585.3697 C 541.420,1024 E shultberg(a)radlerwhite.com � Ci COMMUN�TY DEVELOPMENT Minutes DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DESCHUTES SERVICES CENTER 1300 NW WALL STREET, BEND, OREGON, 97703 DECEMBER 12, 2019 - 5:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chair Dale Crawford. Board members present: Vice Chair Maggie Kirby, Hugh Palcic, Les Hudson, Jim Beeger, Steve Swisher and Jessica Kieras. Staff present: Nick Lelack - Community Development Director, Peter Gutowsky - Planning Manager, Zechariah Heck - Associate Planner, Tanya Saltzman - Associate Planner, and Ashley Williams - Administrative Assistant. II. Public Comments There were no public comments. III. Sunriver Business Park / Employee Housing Text Amendments / Continuation of Public Hearing Tanya Saltzman, Associate Planner provided an email from the applicant regarding issues addressed in the staff memo. She said that at the prior hearing there were some lingering concerns therefore the hearing was continued. The email addresses those concerns which were: parking, enforcement, lot size, and conditional use. Steve Hultberg, Applicant Attorney, offered to answer questions from the Commission. He said that the parking was based on the requirement for a dormitory which is a 6 bed to 1 car ratio. He said that the employee hiring trends are consistent, but he did not have information regarding return hires. During the shoulder season the rooms would be rented on a month to month basis. His view was that those likely wouldn't fill during the shoulder season because they are not stable housing. He said that the traffic was reviewed during the peak season. Commissioner Hudson noted that this use was not compatible with the Business Park, and wondered if the applicants would be interested in pursuing this as a conditional use. Mr. Hultberg said that it was their intention to have this use permitted outright. Director Lelack added that the Board of County Commissioners is pushing for there to be a CET bus stop in Sunriver. Commissioner Palcic said that stop would be available next year. He added that 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes.org @ www.deschutes.org/cd he would like to see compatibility between this development and the existing condominiums that are in the Business Park. Commissioner Beeger moved to close oral and written records and move to deliberations. Swisher seconded. All members were in favor. Deliberations: Commissioner Beeger said that he would like to see the lot size requirements better defined. He felt that this would benefit the applicants and suggested that the lot size be no smaller than 3 acres, but no bigger than 5 acres. He said that he would like to see the rental opportunities opened up to employees of publicly owned land (i.e. BLM and Forest Service). Lastly, regarding Renter Criteria, he would like to see strengthening of employment requirements. More specifically, removal of the "being employed within the last 12 months" requirement and that no non -qualifying employee could live there more than 90 days. His final comment was that there should be one parking space for every 3 beds, rather than every 6 beds. Commissioner Hudson expressed concerns with approving the amendment because of the lack of definitions within the language. Commissioner Hudson moved that we accept it as written although there is significant lack of definition. Commissioner Beeger seconded. Commissioner Swisher agreed with the language in the motion and agrees with the lack of clarity in the proposed amendment. Chair Crawford wasn't sure if the amendment should be forwarded to the Board with noted concerns, or denied until the applicant could consider the comments made by Commissioner Beeger and possibly resolve them. Commissioner Palcic said that it may be worthwhile to consider this route as a Conditional Use rather than a use permitted outright. There were additional comments from Commissioners expressing support in principal for the project, but a desire for a more thorough application. There were concerns expressed that the code as it relates to dormitories has not been tested and therefore may fail. The final concerns expressed were with the lack of supporting details as noted in the motion. Chair Crawford called for a vote. The vote was as follows: Chair Crawford and Commissioner Swisher were in favor. All other members were opposed. The motion failed. IV. Nonprime Resource Lands / Work Session / Revisit Draft Eligibility Criteria Zechariah Heck, Associate Planner, provided an update on the NPR lands. He went over the Board of County Commissioners process to date on proposal one and shared the public hearing was continued to January 15, 2020. Proposal one limits nonprime resource land December 12, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 redesignations to six areas residentially developed and platted/conveyed prior to land use legislation taking effect in the County. Zechariah said there was testimony received at the hearing from both Central Oregon LandWatch (COLW) and 1000 Friends of Oregon; both are opposed to the County's proposal. Zechariah mentioned the purpose for the agenda topic tonight is to check -in with the Commission on proposal one, which could establish general eligibility criteria for applicant - initiated comprehensive plan/zone change applications. Staff will return for another follow up to the Commission on January 9, 2020. Zechariah said the Commission has time to review and evaluate the proposed criteria and consider what additional standards the Commission would like to see. He closed by asking commissioners for any data or map requests for the Commission to make an informed recommendation. Commissioner Swisher said that he was in favor of primarily considering the lands near Urban Growth Boundaries and Unincorporated Communities. He said that he would like to see the areas affected by the proposal, including buildable lands. Commissioner Hudson suggested that the best way to propose this argument would be to show how the resource lands are being used currently, and show that they are not - and cannot be - productive. By describing distances from irrigation districts, steep slope inclines, the lack of foresting ability and lack of soil quality to support the ability to farm strong+—prifir mane knwn ot nl rri drnot him present as arguments that +hestouh 11- e resourceful. Commissioner Swisher agreed with these concepts. Commissioner Beeger expressed concerns with using the term "mapping errors" he thinks the word "errors" is not very defendable. Mr. -Heck said that staff is revising these findings to remove the word errors based on state definitions and the Big Look Bill. Zechariah said the term error may be confusing, and thus is being avoided. There was discussion about former Planning Commissioner Powell and his apparent opinion the discussed areas were not errors. Commissioner Palcic recommended addressing specific arguments presented in the letter from 2015 from DLCD for findings. He said this would allow staff to defend against arguments already made. Director Lelack said the Board of County Commissioners feels strongly about moving forward with this process. He said it will. be helpful if the Commission had ideas about what types of data are needed to make decision. He said it is the perception of the County these areas have always been mapping errors since the original designation. He said there is disagreement from the County and constituents that the Big Look Bill could correct these and the definitions of that bill. December 12, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 Mr. Gutowsky said testimony received at the hearing from 1000 Friends of Oregon provided staff with valuable insights about criteria that should be addressed. He said this testimony thoroughly considered the Douglas County Land Use Board of Appeals decision and other relevant factors like housing inventory within cities. He continued by stating the County is working with cities within Deschutes County to gain letters of support about the project. He closed by saying staff will not go forward with the next proposal until we see what happens with this proposal. He said there is a high likelihood of creating case law based on the proposal. Commissioner Hudson said the types of data he would like to see to aid his decision would be soil quality, physical land characteristics (slopes), and lack of irrigation availability. Commissioner Kieras said she wants to see lands adjacent to UGBs. Commissioner Beeger and Mr. Gutowsky discussed greenhouses and the evolution of farming practices. There was discussion about how that argument could be used and be valid. It was decided to invite the Department's GIS specialists, Tim Berg and Ines Curland, to the next meeting to show the Commissioner various layers and outcomes presented digitally. Commissioner Swisher closed with comments regarding a buildable land inventory. Mr. Gutowsky said such a task could be completed during the Comprehensive Plan update. V. Planning Commission & Staff Comments n ns Salt-..... hared information about It thy, Techr-i-1 A—ict,n,o i;rnnf that tho IVIJ. .�dIlLllldll shared some 1111 VI IIIQ II ViI QVVUI IIIC 1GLI 11 IIl.UI /1JJIJtuI lll.. LIuI II ll JUL ll— County applied for earlier this year. She said that the grant was partially awarded. The funds received will go towards building wildfire standards and an update to wildlife inventories. The Housing Strategies and the Terrebonne wastewater plans were not funded. Mr. Gutowsky said that the piped canal amendment for the Flood Plain discussions held earlier this year was approved by emergency this week. The Board also adopted the Model Flood Plain under a 90 day adoption, the second reading will be in January. He said that first reading of the RLUIPA ordinance was read in November. He said that the Board of County Commissioners has added some language that can impose conditions to this amendment. However COLW provided standing during Planning Commission Hearings and the Planning Commission voted against it. It is likely this amendment will be appealed to LUBA once adopted. Director Lelack said that there are two open positions currently in the Planning Department. One, for a Senior Planner, is being filled. However, Nicole's Long Range Planner position will not be filled. The funds budgeted for this position will likely be used for consultants to aid in specific Long Range Projects over the next 18 months. He said that the big topic for the 2020 short legislative session is hemp production, he intends to update the Commission throughout that process in the coming year. He said that the Court of Appeals has agreed to hear the Thornburgh case and is not on an imposed timeline to December 12, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5 do so. He closed by saying that the Board will deliberate on the Lower Bridge application in December. Commissioner Palcic provided an update on the Wickiup Junction project which is considering multi -modal transportation options. Vice Chair Kirby and Commissioner Kieras congratulated staff on the awarding of the Technical Assistance Grant. Commissioner Hudson said that he went to the Land Law Review Conference where there were interesting sessions about a number of items including land takings, statewide transportation, climate change, and other topics. He said that he will make available the slide sets from the Conference for anyone who is interested. Chair Crawford said he went to the Terrebonne Refinement meeting and is unsure of where that project is at. VI. Adjourn Next Planning Commission meeting will be on January 9, 2020. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:39. Respectfully submitted, Ashley Williams /%UrniI list dUve /Assistant All materials including (but not limited to) video, presentations, written material and submittals are subject to the County Retention Policy; All items are posted and available for public viewing on the Deschutes County Meeting Portal. For further detail on this and other meetings please follow link below. https://deschutescountyor.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx December 12, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 4.1 Deschutes County Planning Commission I ES CO 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, OR 97708 vjAl SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ITEM (ID # 2975) Meeting: 11/14/19 05:30 PM Department: Community Development Category: Public Hearing Prepared By: Tanya Saltzman Initiator: Tanya Saltzman Sponsors: DOC ID: 2975 Public Hearing: Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendments The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on November 14, 2019 to consider text amendments to Chapter 18.108, Sunriver Business Park District (SUBP), File No. 247-19-000700- TA. The applicant, Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership, proposes amendments that would allow employee housing as an outright permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district. Updated: 11/7/2019 7:57 AM by Tanya Saltzman Page 1 Packet Pg. 3 4.1.a S C-0 MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Planning Commission FROM: Tanya Saltzman, Associate Planner DATE: November 7, 2019 SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Text Amendment The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on November 14, 2019 to consider text amendments to Chapter 18.108, Sunriver Business Park District (SUBP), File No. 247-19-000700-TA. The applicant, Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership, proposes amendments that would allow employee housing as an outright permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district. The Planning Commission held a work session on the topic on October 10, 2019.' Since then, the applicant has submitted one minor change to the proposed text amendments, which is described below. The proposed revised amendments and findings are included as Attachment A. I. BACKGROUND The purpose of the proposed amendments is to allow employee housing for those who work in the neighboring resorts, including Sunriver Resort, Caldera Springs, and Crosswater as well as the larger Sunriver community and Mt. Bachelor. According to the applicant's burden of proof, these communities employ upwards of 1,000 peak summer employees, and half of that in the off-season; lack of housing for employees has consistently been identified as a problem, both for the employees themselves as well as for their employers who are trying to attract and retain a workforce. The applicant states that the greater Sunriver community is largely built out with respect to potential development of employee housing, but six lots within the SUBP district are undeveloped, including a 3.25-acre parcel owned by the applicant. https://deschutescountvor.igm2.com/Citizens/"­`Detail LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingiD=2458&Media Position=&ID=2907&Cs s0ass= Packet Pg. 4 4.1.a Based on this need for employee housing, the available land within the zoning district, and the wide range of uses permitted in the Sunriver Business Park district, the applicant has submitted a burden of proof stating that the text amendment is in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals, applicable Oregon Administrative Rules, applicable policies of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and the county's Transportation System Plan. The proposed text amendments add employee housing structures to the outright permitted uses in the Sunriver Business Park (SUBP) zone. The amendments provide definitions for "employee," "employee housing unit," "employee housing structure," and "resort seasons," and provide requirements for duration/timing of employment required to qualify for such housing. As noted above, the applicant owns a 3.25-acre vacant lot within the Sunriver Business Park. While that property is not the subject of this application, the proposed text amendments would allow for the construction of employee housing on that lot and others in the Business Park zoning district subject to Deschutes County Code (DCC) Chapter 124, Site Plan Review.Z If the text amendments are approved, the applicant intends to construct employee housing on that lot to serve at least 200 employees. After the October 10 work session, the applicant submitted a minor alteration to the proposed text amendments, changing part of the definition of "resort season" to the period between Thanksgiving and the first Sunday following January 1 of any year. This part of "resort season" was previously defined as the period from Thanksgiving to April. 11. TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS Senior Transportation Planner Peter Russell reviewed the application and findings concerning Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 12 and the Transportation Planning Rule, and requested clarification from the applicant's transportation consultant, Transight Consulting, on the methodology for trip generation numbers. That clarification has been provided (Attachment B); the applicant demonstrated that trip impacts for employee housing will be less than those for other allowed uses in the zoning district. As such, the application is in compliance with Goal 12 and the Transportation Planning Rule. Ill. PUBLIC INPUT As of the submission date of this memorandum (November 7, 2019), written comments have been received from four individuals, all in support of the amendments (Attachment C): • Roger j. Lee, CEO, Economic Development for Central Oregon (EDCO) • Marc Cameron, owner, Sunriver Brewing Company 2 https://weblink.deschutes.org/public/0/doc/89195/Pagel.aspx Packet Pg. 5 4.1.a David Welton Ann Gawith, Executive Director, La Pine Chamber of Commerce IV. NEXT STEPS At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Commission can: • Continue the hearing to a date certain; • Close the hearing and leave the written record open to a date certain; or • Close the hearing and commence deliberations. Attachments A. Proposed Amendments (Revised) and Applicant Findings B. Email from Senior Transportation Planner and Consultant Memo C. Public Comments D. Sunriver Business Park zoning map Packet Pg. 61 4.1.b INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED 1. Complete the application form and provide appropriate original signatures. To ensure timely processing of your application, all materials must be submitted on single -sided, 8.5" x 11" paper. DO not use binders, tabs/dividers, staples or tape. 2. This apmlication shall include one full-sized plan set (to scale) and one plan set reduced to no larger than 11"x 17". Include a plot plan that shows all property lines and existing and proposed structures, parking, landscaping, lighting, etc. 3. Include a copy of the current deed showing the property owners. 4. Attach correct fee. All applicable standards and criteria must be addressed in writing prior to acceptance of the application. Detailed descriptions, maps and other relevant information must be attached to the application. TYPE OF APPLICATION (check one): Administrative Determination (AD)_ Partition (MP) Conditional Use (CU) _ Subdivision (TP) _ Declaratory Ruling (DR) , Temporary Use (TU) — Applicant's Name (print): Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership Mailing Address: PO Box 3609 Applicant's Email Address: srunner@suiiriyer-resortcom Property Owner/s Name (if different)*: FEE: $6 129 00 Site Plan (SP) _ Variance (V) _ Setback Exception (SE) Other Text Amendment Phone: ( 541 ) 593-7832 City/State/Zip: Sunriver, OR 97707 Phone: ( ) Mailing Address: Same as above.. City/State/Zip: 1, Request: Text amendment to allow employee housing as permitted use in Sunriver UUC--Business Park zone. 2. Property Description: Township 20 S Range 11 E Section 5 Tax Lot N/A 3. Property Zone(s): Sunriver UUC--BP Zone Property Size (acres or sq. ft.): N/A 4. Lot of Record? (State reason), N/A for text amendment. All lots included in Business Park plat. 5. Property Address: Various located on Venture Lane and Enterprise Drive, Sunriver, Oregon. (ove r) 'I I / NW L.itayette Avenue, hand, 0M.', x1 9770:i 1 P 0. Box 6005, BCnd, OR R7708-6005 `N (S41) 388-0575 @ cdd(,?desCIILJL(11 O00; @ WWWd0SChL11esoig/<d Rev 18 _ Packet Pg. 7 6. Present Use of Property: Properties within the business park are developed for a wide variety of commercial uses. 7. Existing Structures: Multiple commercial structures are located within the BP zone in the business park. 8. Property will be served by: Sewer Yes 9. Domestic Water Source: Sunriver water, Lt_e Onsite Disposal System To the best of my knowledge, the proposal complies with all previous conditions of approval and all other applicable local, state, and federal laws. By signing this application, I acknowledge that Deschutes County planning staff may make a site visit(s) to the address(es) listed on this application in order to evaluate the property(ies) with the Deschutes County Code criteria applicable to the land use request(s) submitted. Please describe any special circumstances regarding a potential site visit: Applicant's Signature: Date:9l12/2019 Property Owner's Signature (if different)*: Date: Agent's Name (if applicable): Steven Hultberg Phone:( 541) 585-3697 Mailing Address: P.o. Box 2007 City/State/Zip: Bend, Oregon 97709 Agent's Email Address: shultberg@radlerwhite.com *If this application is not signed by the property owner, a letter authorizing signature by the applicant must be attached. By signing this application, the applicant understands and agrees that Deschutes County may require a deposit for hearings officers' fees prior to the application being deemed complete. If the application is heard by a hearings officer, the applicant will be responsible for the actual costs of the hearings officer. 11 7 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Or 90n 97/0:3 1 P Cl Box 600's, Bend, OR 97708-6005 I, (541) 388-65/5 @ cdd@deschuies org @ www deschures org/cd Packet Pg. 81 4.1.b TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION NARRATIVE SUNRIVER BUSINESS PARK EMPLOYEE HOUSING Applicant: Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership PO Box 3609 Sunriver, Oregon 97707 Attn: Mr. Steven Runner Property Address: 17601 Center Drive Sunriver, Oregon 97707 Applicant's Attorney: Radler White Parks & Alexander LLP PO Box 2007 Bend, Oregon 97709 Attn: Mr. Steven Hultberg Project Description The applicant proposes to amend Deschutes County Code ("DCC") 18.108.110 to allow employee housing in the Business Park District within the Sunriver Unincorporated Community Zone. The proposed amended text is attached as Exhibit A. The Sunriver area is home to several resorts, including Sunriver Resort, Caldera Springs and Crosswater. These resort communities, as well as the larger Sunriver community, employ upwards of 1,000 peak summer seasonal employees, with about one-half of that number employed in the off-season. Many of these employees come to the Sunriver area for seasonal employment and depart in the shoulder season. Based on significant employee feedback, there is a critical need in the Sunriver area for affordable employee housing. The applicant proposes to amend DCC 18.108.110 to permit employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park. Although not the subject of the present application, the applicant owns a 3.25 acre vacant lot within the Business Park, upon which the applicant proposes to construct employee housing units to serve upwards of 200 employees. The draft text amendment includes provisions restricting use of units to employees engaged in the tourism, recreation or hospitality industries. The amendments are intended to serve Sunriver area employees during the summer months, as well as Mt. Bachelor employees during the winter months. During the high season, employee units would be restricted solely to eligible employees. During the off-season, units would be first made available to eligible employees, and then on a first come basis after employee needs have been met. Site Description The Sunriver Business Park is located south and east of SW Century Drive. The Caldera Springs destination resort is to the south, and the Burlington Northern mainline is to the east. Forest Service lands are to the east of the BNSF mainline. Although not within the Business Park District, the Powder Village Condominium complex is on the southern boundary of the Business Park. Most of the Sunriver Business Park is occupied by a mix of commercial, light industrial and residential uses. Six lots within the Sunriver Business Park are undeveloped, including the 3.25-acre parcel owned by the applicant. To be clear, the proposed text amendment would apply throughout the entire Business Park District. PAGE 1 (00901.495;1) Packet Pg. 9 4.1.b Review Criteria Deschutes County lacks specific approval criteria in DCC Titles 18 and 22 for reviewing text amendments to DCC Title 18. That said, under county precedence and state law, legislative and quasi-judicial text amendments generally must be consistent with DCC Title 22, Chapter 22.12, Legislative Procedures, the Statewide Planning Goals, applicable Oregon Administrative Rules, applicable policies of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and the county's Transportation System Plan. This application narrative addressed each of the applicable standards. Proposed Findings Title 22 of the Deschutes County Code, Development Procedures Ordinance 22 12 030 Initiation of Legislative Changes. A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of required fees as well as by the Board of Commissioners or the Planning Commission. FINDING: As a property owner in Deschutes County, the applicant may initiate a legislative change to the DCC. As defined by the DCC "Legislative changes" "generally involve broad public policy decisions that apply to other than an individual property owner. These include, without limitation, amendments to the text of the comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, or the subdivision or partition ordinance and changes in zoning maps not directed at a small number of property owners." Because the proposed text amendment is an amendment to the text of the county's zoning ordinance, it qualifies as a "legislative change." Under the county's Development Procedures Ordinance, DCC Title 22, the county may elect to process this legislative change through a quasi-judicial procedure. Statewide Planning Goals Goal 1, Citizen Involvement FINDING: The text amendment will include hearings before both the Deschutes County Planning Commission and the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. All meetings will be publicly noticed, and the public may participate both orally and in person. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 1. Goal 2, Land Use Planning FINDING: ORS 197.610 allows local governments to initiate post acknowledgement plan amendments or changes to land use regulations, provided that certain notice standards are met. in very general terms, Goal 2 requires local governments to demonstrate that legislative text changes are consistent with the jurisdiction's acknowledged comprehensive plan and related acknowledged plans (e.g., transportation system plan). The applicant anticipates that the county will provide the required notices for the proposed amendments. The findings below demonstrate that the proposed text amendment is consistent with applicable goals and policies of the county's acknowledged planning documents. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 2. Goal 3, Agricultural Lands FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park. No agricultural lands are affected by the proposed text amendment. Goal 3 does not apply to this application. PAGE 2 (00901495;1) Packet Pg. 10 4.1.b Goal 4, Forest Lands FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park, No Goal 4 forestlands are affected by the proposed text amendment. Although Goal 4 forestland is adjacent to the Sunriver Business Park, the underlying property itself is within the Sunriver Unincorporated Community and not subject to Goal 4 standards. Goal 4 does not apply to this application. Goal 5, Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park. No Goal 5 resources are located within the Sunriver Business Park District. Goal 5 does not apply to this application. Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resource Quality FINDING: No development or land use changes are being proposed that impact air, water, or land resource qualities. Other areas of the County's code deal with protecting air, water, and land remain in full force and effect. To the extent that Goal 6 applies to this application, the provision of employee housing within close proximity to employment areas will necessarily reduce reliance on the automobile for work -related transportation needs. To the extent that Goal 6 is implicated by this application, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 6. Goal 7, Natural Hazards FINDING: The County's Comprehensive Plan identifies the dominant natural hazards as wildfire, winter storms, and flooding. The proposed text amendment merely adds employee housing as a permitted use in the underlying zone. The underlying property will remain subject to the county's existing wildfire plans, floodplain standards and other ordinance standards applicable to natural hazards. To the extent that Goal 7 is implicated by this application, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 7. Goal 8, Recreational Needs FINDING: Employee housing allowed by the proposed text amendment is intended to partially address the employee housing needs of the surrounding resorts and resort communities. Although not directly on point, by providing employment and employee housing to resort and recreational employees, the county's recreational needs are benefitted by the text amendment. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 8. Goal 9, Economic Development FINDING: The Sunriver Business Park in not within a recognized urban growth boundary. Consequently, OAR 660-009 does not apply to the present application. In general terms, Goal 9 is intended to ensure an adequate supply of land for business and employment growth. In the greater Sunriver community, tourism, including recreational activities, food and beverage service and related service industries, are the primary economic activities. Given the critical shortage of affordable employee housing, the tourism industry is finding it challenging to find and retain employees. In order to support the tourism industry, convenient and affordable housing solutions must be found. The adoption of the present text amendment will partially alleviate the housing pressures in the Sunriver area. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 9. Goal 10, Housing PAGE 3 (00901495;1) Packet Pg. 11 4.1.b FINDING: This goal pertains to urban or urbanizable lands. Consequently, Goal 10 does not apply to the present application. That said, the proposed text amendment will provide the opportunity to provide affordable employee housing in an area of high demand. To the extent that Goal 10 applies to this application, the applicant had demonstrated compliance with Goal 10. Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services FINDING: Goal 11 generally pertains more to water and sewer services. The Sunriver Business Park is served by Sunriver Water and Sunriver Environmental. Consequently, water and sewer services are available to the underlying business park. Given the wide range of uses already permitted in the Business Park, there is no indication that a limited amount of employee housing will have any greater effect on sewer and water services than would existing uses already permitted either outright or conditionally in the Sunriver Business Park District. The applicant had demonstrated compliance with Goal 12. Goal 13, Energy Conservation FINDING: This text amendment does not affect the County's regulation of solar setbacks, siting of small- scale windmills, land use or density, etc. The primary purpose of this text amendment is to provide employee housing in close proximity to the employment centers in and around the greater Sunriver community. Housing in close proximity to employment centers will necessarily reduce reliance on the automobile and reduce commute times, both of which will reduce the use of fuel. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 13. Goal 14, Urbanization eurMIR14- -me C... -+y 1—rmm�linrl ;;,ith coal 14 thrmigrh the adoption of the Sunriver Unincorporated FINLANU: 111 �.�uruv Community Zone under OAR 660-022-0030. As required by this administrative rule, changes in plan designations must comply with the post acknowledgement provisions of ORS 197.610 through 197.625. Findings below demonstrate compliance with the applicable provisions of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22 The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 14. Goals 15 through 19 FINDING: Goals 15 through 19 do not apply to this application. Oregon Administrative Rules; OAR Chapter 660, Division 22 The Sunriver Business Park is located within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community ("UUC"), as defined by OAR 660-022-010(8). The county's designation of the Sunriver area as a UUC in 1997, together with the adoption of the county's unincorporated community zoning standards (DCC 18,108), demonstrated compliance with the Division 22 rules. Upon adoption and acknowledgement of DCC 18,108, the county's obligations under Division 22 are limited to complying with the Division 22 planning and zoning standards under OAR 660-022-0030. These standards expressly permit the county to amend the applicable UUC zoning standards under ORS 197.610 through 197.625. The UCC rules also permit the county to authorize residential uses consistent with the UUC regulations. The following provisions apply to the present text amendment: OAR 660-022-0030(2) County plans and land use regulations may authorize any residential use and density in unincorporated communities, subject to the requirements of this division. PAGE {00901495;1} Packet Pg. 12 FINDING: Employee housing is arguably a "residential use." Consequently, the county may allow employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park provided it meets other requirements of Division 22. OAR 660-022-0030(6) County plans and land use regulations shall ensure that new or expanded uses authorized within unincorporated communities do not adversely affect agricultural or forestry uses. FINDING: Employee housing would be classified as a "new or expanded use" within the Sunriver Business Park District. The Sunriver Business Park is located west of the BNSF mainline and further west from US Forest Service land to the east. Forestry uses on nearby Goal 4 lands are limited to recreational uses. No forestry operations are currently active in the area, nor are any planned for the immediate future. The addition of employee housing on with the Sunriver Business Park District will have no greater impact on adjacent or nearby forestry uses as would any of the existing permitted or conditional uses in the Sunriver Business Park District. The underlying zoning already permits a wide range of residential, commercial, office, retail, entertainment and light industrial uses. There is no evidence that employee housing will have any external impacts which would extend beyond the BNSF mainline onto US Forest Service lands. OAR 660-022-0030(7) County plans and land use regulations shall allow only those uses which are consistent with the identified function, capacity and level of service of transportation facilities serving the community, pursuant to OAR 660-012-0060(1)(a) through (c). FINDING: The findings immediately below under the "Transportation Planning Rule Compliance" section demonstrate consistency with this requirement. TranSnnrtation Planning Rule Compliance; OAR 660-012-0060 When electing to adopt a post -acknowledgement plan amendment ("PAPA"), local governments are required under OAR 660-012-0060 to determine whether the PAPA will "significantly affect" any planned or existing transportation facilities. In very general terms, the significant affect" determination requires a local government to analyze the "reasonable worst -case scenario" of transportation impacts under current zoning to the "reasonable worst -case scenario" of transportation impacts based on the new zone or new use allowed in a zone. in the present case, the county must determine whether the addition of employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park will result in additional transportation impacts over and above those currently anticipated based on existing uses. if employee housing will have additional trips associated with it over and above other existing uses, then the county must determine whether those additional trips will "significantly affect" a existing or planned transportation facility. Attached as Exhibit B is the applicant's transportation analysis, prepared by Transight Consulting (the "TIA"). The TIA examined all of the uses currently permitted in the Business Park zoning district and identified a reasonable development pattern assuming a variety of allowed uses. It should be noted that the TIA is conservative in that it could have identified the highest trip generating use and assumed that such use could be distributed throughout the zone. The TIA, however, assumed a "reasonable" worst case scenario and assumed a variety of development and a variety of trip generating uses within the zone. Based on this analysis, the TIA concludes that a reasonable development pattern could generate a total of 373.2 Peak PM trips, or 17 Peak PM trips per acre. The TIA then measured a reasonable development based on approximately 30 units of a combination of student housing and multi -family PAGES {00901495;1} Packet Pg. 13 4.1.b housing per acre within the Sunriver Business Park. These two uses were used because there is no ITE rate for employee housing, especially employee housing located within the resort community it is intended to serve. The results demonstrate that employee housing will generate between 8.4 and 13.2 Peak PM trips per acre. This results in fewer trips generated on a per acre basis than what is currently allowed within the Sunriver Business Park. In addition to this quantitative analysis, Sunriver Resort will utilize both an employee shuttle service during the peak summer season and provide bicycles to its employees, further reducing the trip generation potential. According to Sunriver Resort management and human resources, very few employees come to Central Oregon with vehicles and rely on bicycle and shuttle transportation to get to and from work. Moreover, services are available to employees within the Sunriver Business Park, and the Sunriver town center is approximately'/: mile from the Sunriver Business Park. Based on the TIA, together with the transportation demand measures provided by the Resort, the proposed text amendment will not "significantly affect" any transportation facility within the meaning set forth under OAR 660-012-0060. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies The applicant believes that the following goals and policies are the only goals and polices applicable to this application: Comprehensive Plan Designation/Purpose Business Park District. The Sunriver Business Park lies at the southern end of the community boundary and is physically separated from the remainder of the community by Spring River Road. This plan designation was originally created to accommodate light industrial development to support the employment needs of the community and surrounding area. Since the inception of zoning regulations for this area, development has been primarily commercial in nature rather than industrial. The Zoning ordinance was modified in 1997 to reflect the existing businesses and the trend for commercial development while still allowing for industrial uses to develop. FINDING: As the above description indicates, development within the business park has shifted from light industrial uses to more commercial uses. The 1997 amendments which recognized existing uses and the trend towards commercial development acknowledged this trend. The addition of employee housing will compliment the business park by providing additional customers to the retail and commercial uses, as well as by providing housing options in close proximity to employment centers. Unlike Black Butte Ranch, which has areas specifically designated for employee housing (see, e.g., Policy 4.8.10, Policy 4.8.14, and Policy 4.8.15) the Sunriver UUC has no such designation. Complicating matters is the fact that most of Sunriver is already built -out, meaning that there is little, if any, vacant land available for employee housing in the greater Sunriver community. Policy 4.5.1 Land use regulations shall conform to the requirements of OAR 660 Division 22 or any successor. FINDING: The findings above demonstrate compliance with OAR 660, Division 22. Policy 4.5.2 County comprehensive plan policies and land use regulations shall ensure that new uses authorized within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community do not adversely affect forest uses in the surrounding Forest Use Zones. FINDING: The findings above demonstrate compliance with this standard. PAGE 6 {00901495;1} Packet Pg. 14� Policy 4.5.10 Multiple -family residences and residential units in commercial buildings shall be permitted in the commercial area for the purpose of providing housing which is adjacent to places of employment. Single-family residences shall not be permitted in commercial areas. FINDING: Although not directly on point because the employee housing will not be maintained within " commercial buildings" the intent of this policy is to provide housing near places of employment. As described in this application, there is a critical shortage of affordable housing for nearby employees. The present text amendment will partially alleviate this critical shortage. Policy 4.5.16 A variety of commercial uses which support the needs of the community and surrounding rural area, and not uses solely intended to attract resort visitors, should be encouraged. FINDING: While not directly on point, the proposed text amendment will allow employee housing to meet the needs of employees who otherwise are forced to commute from La Pine and other areas outside the Sunriver area. These employees will be able to utilize commercial uses both within the Sunriver Business Park as well as the larger Sunriver community. Policy 4.5.17 Allow small-scale, low -impact commercial uses in conformance with the requirements of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22. Larger more intense commercial uses shall be permitted if they are intended to serve the community, the surrounding rural area and the travel needs of people passing through the area. FINDING: Again, while not directly on point, this policy directs the county to permit only small-scale uses intended to serve the community. Here, the employee housing is proposed to meet the direct needs of employees working in the immediate vicinity of the business park. .. _ _ - _ Small-scale, _ l _ low Impact Industrial stria) uses should be -!!owed in rnnfnrnlAnrA with the Policy4.5.Zts5man-scale, IUW-1(tlEldl.t niuu�u�ai ux>>,..,u..• ..�..••••••••,•, •••,••...•....._..-- ---- — requirements of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22. FINDING: Again, while not on point, this policy stresses the need to permit only small scale uses in the business park, Policy 4.5.29 New uses or expansion of existing uses within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community which require land use approval shall be approved only upon confirmation from the Sunriver Utility Company that water and sewer service for such uses can be provided. FINDING: A wide range of commercial uses are already permitted in the Sunriver Business Park and utilize water and sewer services from the sewer and water companies. As a requirement of any site plan review application for employee housing, the applicant will be required to obtain "will serve" letters. Conclusion The Sunriver area faces a critical shortage of affordable, employee housing. This shortage seriously affects the ability of area employers to attract and retain employees, especially seasonal employees. While the present text amendment cannot solve the critical shortage, by providing employee housing options at the Sunriver Business Park, the applicant will be able to at least address this shortage for a percentage of its seasonal employees and those otherwise employed in the immediate vicinity. PAGE 00901495;1j Packet Pg. 15 4.1.b EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 18.108.110. Business Park - BP District. A. Uses Permitted Outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright: 1. Residential uses existing as of March 31, 1997. 2. Administrative, educational and other related facilities in conjunction with a use permitted outright. 3. Library. 4. Recreational path. 5. Post office. 6. Church in building or buildings not exceeding 5,000 square feet of floor area. 7. Child care facilities, nurseries, and/or preschools. 8. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: Retail/rental store, office and service establishment, including but not limited to the following: a. Automobile, motorcycle, boat, recreational vehicle, trailer or truck sales, rental, repair or maintenance business, including tire stores and parts stores. b. Agricultural equipment and supplies. c. Car :Nash. d. Contractor's office, including but not limited to, building, electrical, plumbing, heating and air conditioning, painter, etc.. e. Construction equipment sales, rental and/or service. f. Exterminator services. g. Golf cart sales and service. h. Lumber yard, home improvement or building materials store. I. Housekeeping and janitorial service. j. Dry cleaner and/or self-service laundry facility. k. Marine/boat sales and service. I. Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge including entertainment. p. Marijuana processing cannabinoid concentrates and cannabinoid products, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. q. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items or products at the same location. f00901619;1) Packet Pg. 16 4.1.b EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 9. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Scientific research or experimental development of materials, methods or products, including engineering and laboratory research. b. Light manufacturing, assembly, fabricating or packaging of products from previously prepared materials, including but not limited to cloth, paper, leather, precious or semi- precious metals or stones, etc. c. Manufacture of food products, pharmaceuticals and the like, but not including the production of fish or meat products, or the rendering of fats and oils. d. Warehouse and distribution uses in a building or buildings each less than 10,000 square feet of floor area. B. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following conditional uses may be permitted subject to DCC 18.128 and a conditional use permit: 1. Public buildings and public utility structures and yards, including railroad yards. 2. A dwelling unit for a caretaker or watchman working on a developed property. 3. Law enforcement detention facility. A Parkins Int_ 5. Radio and television broadcast facilities. 6. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Bowling alley. b. Theater. c. Veterinary clinic and/or kennel. d. Marijuana processing including cannabinoid extracts, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. e. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. 7. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Warehouses and distribution uses in a building or buildings exceeding 10,000 square feet of floor area. b. Distillery and beer/ale brewing facility, including wholesale sales thereof. c. Self/mini storage. f 00901619;11 CPacket Pg. 17 4.1.b EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT d. Trucking company dispatch/terminal. e. Solid waste/garbage operator, not including solid waste disposal or other forms of solid waste storage or transfer station. C. Use Limits. The following limitations and standards shall apply to uses listed in DCC 18.108.110(A) or (B): 1. A use expected to generate more than 30 truck -trailer or other heavy equipment trips per day to and from the subject property shall not be permitted to locate on a lot adjacent to or across the street from a lot in a residential district. 2. Storage, loading and parking areas shall be screened from residential zones. 3. No use requiring air contaminant discharge permits shall be approved by the Planning Director or Hearings Body prior to review by the applicable state or federal permit reviewing authority, nor shall such uses be permitted adjacent to or across the street from a residential lot. D. Special Requirements for Large Scale Uses. Any of the uses listed in DCC 18.108.110(A)(6) or (B)(6) may be allowed in a building or buildings each exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space if the Planning Director or Hearings Body finds: 1. That the intended customers for the proposed use will come from the community and surrounding rural area, or the use will meet the needs of the people passing through the area. For the purposes of DCC 18.108.110, the surrounding rural area shall be that area identified as all property within five miles of the boundary of the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community; 2. The use will primarily employ a work force from the community and surrounding rural area; and 3. That it is not practical to locate the use. in a building or buildings under 8,000 square feet of floor space. E. Height Regulations. No building or structure shall be hereafter erected, enlarged or structurally altered to exceed 45 feet in height. F. Lot Requirements. The following lot requirements shall be observed: 1. Lot Area. No requirements. 2. Lot Width. No requirements. 3. Lot Depth. Each lot shall have a minimum depth of 100 feet. 4. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet. 5. Side Yard. No side yard required, except when adjoining a lot in an RS or RM District and then the required side yard shall be 50 feet. No side yards are required on the side of a building adjoining a -railroad right of way. f00901619;1) Packet Pg. 18 4.1.b EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 6. Rear Yard. No rear yard required, except when adjoining a lot in an RS or RM District and then the rear yard shall be 50 feet. No rear yard is required on the side of a building adjoining a railroad right of way. 7. Lot Coverage. The maximum lot coverage by buildings and structures shall be 50 percent of the total lot area. a (� f.t� 1� 4�1 rr nent`k For i v pjoyg', f tc Sik '!.. 'The iCf{I€1t€€i tl l �F�1it �I1 .;l'l�ti ir�.ily C D(_ ..�i }'. .. � �f } `.�. E 0 v E`C h a I I n-iC .SIT rt e t stf € r older \u1bo ear'ns his or her livin by t lit.(C f r .__ _,._._ ._ f _...... _.. workii`j*,_in Cite f osj k1c;33ty. C Ldo N recreation or t.ou` ill inci aif� lllli�fl�1 20 sii rail€ ` E7 U-1c, �: fC �E'k i'f3 t ti'iy�r I II?!; lo° an, r rC f'(z of at le> tl/ilC ly iive hours 4?'l s' F 4 Cll t' ti 1trV v _... sLarus sl­,all a_ernon.sti ..S tf C{'rou l, pj r tt14 C)f �ijlloy fienf; rn 4i.hIv.. ,,, t(E!t IipC�IC`t��l£> kl . 'all rn 3a C�11hri Ih, (( i.CSE,g unit cont g�__, Plfsl6 Nii4lsl?1s`f 1C=tC t.c fifi"tIt r,loyl c11l4i t .._ ..C__., tl Eel ..._ Srjch r) e rs(.,) S St -so ij 1 ryilt;f;}t clhied( !r I i 1iii L(,ll,1€ ye "t)u�i �€€, Struc (i'l,a11 :neatrneat i 3 d I1iiu aru ne n L r11ui ( f d((31i3w!!s e P�\ rziEt�.?.`_. i �.�_ t_I�_.iiE rtE+E;€t kl;fC,` �l �:Ei.Fi,i1CC.'S. r i"Resort r ' It .[i'Cll`kE �� ' tj } nu 3 y 1 i; �'.. art tw( in Me Ilioiial 1Mvand �itC to 11 o ai L i?Itln:�'.'.S I a, u.sInf, t t ru.c1: u res l.,)f i �e(J f_} n, dle r I rl,"ltlfr Sat'' t t I(f r �� r3� .t..... .tlzl)� Fe+('E:tiC .ICI{....ii..€.. f,l1. iirg., �# iri �(lF ��((}tC Lt? t� i?E1 -? _ t i LAJkJ i 1 t, II ( � l! ��)��)� i t !.,, ar< L 6}P �/V_l3€ fl.as, been an ES Y6Y_i t.1.�_._, E�I.7.f €`. ts' <_, i'� .i !i C rlih 1iH43st(t� tU� .ile i tVff , U C..°f fl S t iJ� c.. J (}si'"jkti f iPi�t1? !1, I! es�l�r �-lu ii1 E,Y 'T r -S� C---- I ,� r.F I t €"itti..� tirries 6 1 the �earotft ide Flesc)i t, e..0 1.`r a P_mpfl Jyee vJi€ilia X::t,j on, Y't)(tt'I to monifi basis (T�1 �Ir r„lij t iI �f' f� `..l.if-' n :f r C?!} vUl'iEi I l aI}e u. s rWe,Iv ut'1t1i,t 0 F}tit ; pc i ,t7,%vPYIIo Ci-Ii leino n sAt i :iE t11iou o h zif oI of 6_rn3IF1\Ji,I.E..)l t, h at tha, t ipe rson `h I b e a.n nrr,1O yt,.e dui i?it., Ells.` t{.r it. i.lr t�C'lvfOl Ctz inf-', *c oH. _(,.._.on (q "tl-if � with Such per �F �l }t use _ pp and rhino childIren l! ,ii`�.It, IIFj no t.he( persons, ii '.it�r)ir r` ( e liou rlty li f . I.. ii} is be ._ ._�_......_ i._ __._. _. .�. _._...._ . .. __— tl lc i (4 4i"3` t't (r:'i IE ds dl s€ I � ed. c1P}crVe l , 3 E U 11I,ec E i p1c)y€ e t,€(_:' I i plf? lee li u.si f 1.iht 11 ,,V be occ Jtir f i 11 a basis t ri ca i€! i d.Ufist`� [i s _ liiC3�r �f, 41#,_..mf3lc ! s iSx irtl 3ttr _fili s,4CiiLit ?3E._ { Iilt'E1�cz1 p rKI°lf,, f} c �`fS! { t < t fc OC t}` k5f 1V! t� u , licit Y')it SIC e 1"'arkintz For a[ leasitne Iftl every Me b�-.�d`_s. Cttf,E?(.. . f 00901619;1) Packet Pg. 19 4.1.b Exhibit B ey TRANSIGHT 00NSULTING,LLc Date: To: From: Project Reference No.: Project Name: September 4, 2019 Steve Hultberg Joe Bessman, PE 1329 Sunriver Resort Employee Housing .:.D PROE. d' 706 �1 PE OREGON � Cif ✓L'FQ 14 �y W. The purpose of this memorandum is to highlight the potential TPR compliance issues raised with approval of a text amendment for the Sunriver Business Park to add employee housing as an allowable use. This would provide a means of supporting Sunriver employees within the resort property, reducing longer - distance trips from the surrounding communities and supporting employees that are experiencing a regional housing shortage. PROPOSED TEXT MODIFICATION As proposed, the Sunriver Business Park zoning would be amended to include Employee housing structures as an outright allowable use within buildings limited to 20,000 square -feet of floor space. The text amendment would include definition of employee housing, which is summarized as follows: • Useofempioyee housing would be uNcn to persons i&year old or old .-r. w••-.•r.leino in the hn5nitallty. •-•••a ••• -••- ••--r - •• outdoor recreation, or tourism industry at least 25 hours per week • Place of employment is within 20 air miles (to allow this space to include Mt. Bachelor during the winter season) • Would allow spouse/minor children to reside on -site • Employee housing would be required to supply at least one parking stall for every six beds, and at least one bicycle parking space for every two beds. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE The requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule are contained within Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-12 (Transportation Planning). This Division, prepared by the Department of Land Conservation and Development, specifies the required elements for coordinated transportation and land use planning. Within this division are the requirements forthe preparation of transportation system plans, coordination with State and regional plans and policies, and measures to prevent urbanization or sprawl onto rural lands. Section -0060 (Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments) provides the specific transportation requirements for a zone change and plan amendment, ensuring that these changes remain consistent with the goals and requirements of the adopted Transportation System Plan. To test compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule the first step is to determine whether a significant effect occurs. The administrative rule defines a plan or land use regulation amendment as significantly affecting a transportation facility if it: • Changes the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; 1329REP j�Paacket Pg. 20 4.1.b Sunriver Business Pork Employee Housing Exhibit B • Changes the standards implementing a functional classification system; Results in types of travel that are inconsistent with the functional classification of a facility, or degrades the performance standards identified within the adopted Transportation System Plan. To test whether a significant effect occurs, a trip generation review was conducted of the allowed uses within the Sunriver Business Park zoning and what could occur with the text amendment. SUNRIVER BUSINESS PARK AREA The Sunriver Business Park zoning designation is only located on the lands shown in Figure 1, encompassing approximately 70 acres west of the BNSF railroad mainline and south of S Century Drive. The overall area is built -out across nearly 70 percent of the land area, leaving approximately 21 acres within eight separate tax lots that are fully or partially developable. Figure 1. Sunriver Business Park Zoning Boundary. Source: Deschutes County DIAL. Page 2 Packet Pg. 21 4.1.b Sunriver Business Pork Employee Housing Exhibit B Existing Outright Allowed Uses Deschutes County Code 18,108.110 outlines the allowable uses and density requirements within this zoning designation. The current zoning allows the following uses outright: • Library • Post Office • Church • Child care facilities, nurseries, preschools • A building or group of buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet with any combination of a retail, rental store, office, and service establishment, including but not limited to the following uses: o Car wash o Automotive sales, rental, and repair o Dry cleaning o Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge • A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: o Research space o Light manufacturing, production, or processing o Food product manufacturing o Warehousing and distribution uses with less than 10,000 square -feet of floor area. Tha Dpsr_hutes Countv Transportation System Plan is premised on weekday p.m, peak hour trips. This metric is used in the classification of roadway facilities and in the assessment of intersection and roadway improvement needs. Review of the trip generation potential of these uses is presented in Table 1. This table also identifies a reasonable maximum size of the use within this area, as 22 acres of developable land could not reasonably be built -out with automated car washes or post offices. With the remaining developable lands generally located on the east side of the business park farther from Century Drive these lands are more likely to be developed with lower intensity uses than the vehicle -oriented convenience commercial near the S Century Drive traffic signal. Page 3 Packet Pg. 22 4.1.b Sunriver Business Park Employee Housinti Exhibit B -. • • _____ ___ _i.TC T..:-. /^......rni: /•M 0-6- ITE Land Use and ITE Reasonable FAR and Land Use Code Maximum Acreage Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Rate 3.81 PM Trips/KSF Shopping Center 0.25 FAR 41.49 PM Trips/Acre Retail ITE 820 No Size Limit 27.38 Net New PM Trips/Acre General Office 0.25 FAR 1.15 PM Trips/KSF Office ITE 710 No Size limit �� 12.52 PM Trips/Acre �� Library 0.25 8.16 PM Trips/KSF Library ITE 590 2.5 Acres 88.86 PM Trips/Acre US Post Office 0.25 FAR 11.21 PM Trips/KSF Post Office ITE 732 2.5 Acres 122.07 PM Trips/Acre Day Care Center 0.25 FAR 11.12 PM Trips/KSF Child Care Center ITE 565 2.5 Acres 121.09 PM Trips/Acre High -Turnover 0.25 FAR 9.77 PM Trips/KSF Restaurant (Sit -Down) Restaurant 5.0 Acres 106.39 PM Trips/Acre ITE 932 60.64 Net New PM Trips/Acre Auto Parts Sales 0.25 FAR 4.91 PM Trips/KSF Auto Parts Sales ITE 843 2.5 Acres 53.47 PM Trips/Acre 14.20 PM Trips/KSF Automated Car Wash 0.1 FAR 61.85 PM Trips/Acre Car Wash ITE 948 1.0 Acre Est. 30.93 Net New PM Trips/Acre Research Research and Development Center 0.25 FAR No Size Limit 0.49 PM Trips/KSF 5.33 PM Trips/Acre ITE 760 Manufacturing 0.20 FAR 0.67 PM Trips/KSF Manufacturing ITE 140 No Size Limit 5.84 PM Trips/Acre From this table, the 22 acres could be developed with the following uses that would be considered a "reasonable development scenario" for trip generation purposes: • 5 Acres of commercial uses (139.9 PM Trips) • 2.5 Acres of restaurant space (151.6 PM Trips) • 14.5 Acres of Light Industrial/Manufacturing space (84.7 PM Trips) This overall scenario could generate 373.2 PM Trips, or 17.0 PM Trips per Acre. Proposed Employee Housing Table 1 also provides a comparison to a three-story multifamily residential product within this area. A typical urban three-story apartment structure can reasonably be built with a density of 20 to 25 units per acre. This is based on balancing the building footprint, parking area, setbacks, and landscape requirements. With the text amendment allowing lower parking requirements, higher site densities than this typical range could be achieved. For analysis purposes 30 units per acre was assumed, which results in approximately 13.2 driveway trips per acre. This trip rate assumes suburban trip generation Poge 4 ( �Packet Pg. 23 Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Exhibit B characteristics and does not account for the modal splits or user type that this housing is intended to accommodate. A better trip generation surrogate for this use with the limiting employee housing provisions would be classification of the housing with ITE's Land Use 225: Off -Campus Student Apartment. The modal split and age range within a college campus is likely much more similar to Sunriver Resort employees (particularly seasonal employees) than typical suburban apartments. The land use description is provided below: An off -campus student apartment is part of an apartment complex that serves college or university students. These properties are generally located nearby and within walking distance of a college campus. Most apartments include student -related amenities such as free high-speed Internet, study lounges, fitness centers, sports courts, and swimming pools. Apartments included in this land use can be furnished or unfurnished and range in size from studio apartments to apartments with four bedrooms. Units typically have washer and dryers in each unit, Most facilities also include security and 24-hour emergency maintenance. ..t ITe Ir 1. Pen nr�+.^n Qntae IdU1C G. Jurr llllaly V- ...1+v -- ITE Land Use and ITE Reasonable FAR and Land Use Code Maximum Acreage Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Rate Multifamily Housing 30 Units/Acre 0.44 PM Trips/Unit Employee (Mid -Rise) Trips/Acre 2 PM Tri 13.2 p Housing Off -Campus Student y 30 Units/Acre 0.28 PM Trips/Unit Apartment (ITE 225) 8A PM Trips/Acre � .. n.........+ could generate 4 /1 +., 1 2 7 trine Table 2 shows that the siting of employee housing within Sunriver Resort could genes ate 13.2 .rips per acre. If there were no use restrictions placed on the housing limiting the use to employees the higher range could be anticipated, and with effective management of users to limit the housing to the Sunriver employee the lower range could reasonably be obtained. This shows the potential to reduce the trip rate of employees by about 40 percent. Regardless of which land use classification is applied, the trip rate is lower than other allowed uses within the Sunriver Business Park based on a reasonable development scenario. Additional Trip Characteristics The trip rates shown in Table 1 and Table 2 provide an assessment of the "driveway" impacts without regard to trip length. Residential, retail, and employment trips vary in length, with retail trips generally shorter length (many of these would even be pass -by or diverted trips). Work trips are generally recurrent on a daily weekday basis and often impact the critical morning and evening peak periods. For example, trips to the Shell Station within the business park are typically short length trips that are already on S Century Drive or arriving from areas in Sunriver. Without this gas station travelers would have to drive farther for fuel. Conversely, a significant portion of new trips to a manufacturing facility would likely travel from Bend or La Pine, Employee housing serving Sunriver uses would be similar to a gas station; while there would be an impact of those trips on the system, the impact would be limited and could help avoid the longer -distance daily travel on the highway system. Page S Packet Pg. 24 4.9.b Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Exhibit B Effectively, this employee housing is serving as a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measure. This on -site supply of employee housing, coupled with provision of employee bicycles and shuttle service, will help to reduce current travel demands on US 97 to Sunriver Resort. As part of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program requirement placed on a new destination resort within the Powell Butte area a requirement is included within the ODOT agreement for the resort to consider employee housing, as this has been an identified need at other area destination resorts. While there are localized trip impacts with this type of use there is also a regional benefit on the more critical regional transportation routes. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report summarizes the impacts of the proposed text amendment to include Employee Housing within the Sunriver Business Park Zoning District (SUBP). Comparison of trip rates between the existing allowed uses and the addition of employee housing would not increase the trip generation potential of the area and so would not result in a significant effect for Transportation Planning Rule purposes. This analysis does not include an assessment of the adequacy of the current system or a specific development proposal; separate review would be required as part of a future land use application. Please let me know if you have any questions on these materials at (503) 997-4473 or via email at iotranhtconsultin.cnm. Page 6 Packet Pg_25 4.1.c Tanya Saltzman Subject: FW: Sunriver employee housing Attachments: 1329response.pdf From: Peter Russell <Peter.Russel I@deschutes.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 3:40 PM To: Tanya Saltzman <Tanya.Saltzman@deschutes.org> Cc: Peter Russell <Peter.Russel I@deschutes.org> Subject: FW: Sunriver employee housing Tanya, Here is the requested additional information regarding the traffic study. I find the study complies with the TPR and the proposed plan amendment complies with the Section 060 and has no significant effect. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. Peter Russell I Senior Transportation Planner 117 NW Lafayette Avenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 PO Box 6005 1 Bend, Oregon 97708 Tel: (541) 383-6718 1 www.deschutes.org/cd m qLMVAWcw + Disclaimer: Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22,20.005 and shall not be deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status of a person's property or conferring any rights, including any reliance rights, on any person, From: Joe Bessman <1oe@transightconsulting.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 2:24 PM To: Peter Russell <Peter.Russell @deschutes.org> Subject: RE: Sunriver employee housing [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Let me know if you have any questions on this Peter! Joe Bessman, PE Principal, Owner Transight Consulting, LLC Bend, Oregon office: (458) 202-5565 cell: (503) 997-4473 email: ioe0transightconsulting.com Packet Pg. 26 4.1.c web: https://transightconsuIting.net/ From: Peter Russell <Peter. Russell @deschutes.org> Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2019 2:17 PM To: Joe Bessman <Joe@transightconsulting.com> Cc: Peter Russell <Peter.Russell @deschutes.org> Subject: FW: Sunriver employee housing Joe, Please see below. As you'll recall we had talked and you were going to provide an addenda to your traffic study explaining the 1) method you used to convert the ITE rate of trips per bedroom unit to your trips per acre and 2) use of the ITE 225 category of student apartment whether you used the subsection for off -campus housing within '/:-mile of campus or beyond %-mile of campus. Thanks. Peter Russell I Senior Transportation Planner `h 117 NW Lafayette Avenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 PO Box 6005 1 Bend, Oregon 97708 Tel: (541) 383-6718 1 www.deschutes.org/cd Disclaimer: Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall not be deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status of a person's property or conferring any rights, including any reliance rights, on any person. Packet Pg. 27 4.1.c TRANSIGHT CONS ULTING,LLO �' ;rr-u�spartrnc�>n Eny r ec:°r+n�) and Plam ng ser"rCes Date: October 10, 2019 To: Peter Russell, Deschutes County From: Joe Bessman, PE Project Reference No.: 1329 706 P£ JOREC ONE �a 74 4�0 Said ` W. so, Project Name: Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing r' -- � IF .lei i-s: IM11,2v q The purpose of this memorandum is to provide a response to County comments related to the proposed text amendment for the Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing. Questions were raised surrounding the trip generation potential of the housing within the business park within the Proposed Employee Housing section of the September 4, 2019 memorandum. This memorandum provides additional details to describe the density that was assumed and corrects the "off -campus student apartment" trip rates to base these estimates on an estimated number of bedrooms. MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DENSITY The first question raised by County staff related to the density of the proposed employee housing as assumed within the traffic report: A tvniral urban three-story apartment structure can reasonably be built with a density of 20 to 25 units per acre. This is based on balancing the building footprint, parking area, setbacks, and landscape requirements. With the text amendment allowing lower parking requirements, higher site densities than this typical range could be achieved. For analysis purposes 30 units per acre was assumed... This paragraph describes typical multifamily development densities and an anticipated density with the lower required parking. As there are no specific development plans at this time this review is entirely speculative and is intended to provide an estimate of the density of a typical apartment site and the increased density if a lower parking ratio is allowed. For comparison, a recent hotel project in northeast Bend is constructing 106 units within a three-story structure on 5.10 acres (20.78 units per gross acre). The range assumed within the traffic study includes nearly a 45% higher site density. TRIP GENERATION CLASSIFICATIONS AND RATES The traffic report considered that the allowance of employee housing could have a range of impacts depending on mode split and vehicle ownership. If the employee housing is catering toward employees that are on -site and within walking or biking distance of work the trip rates could approximate those of students within an off -campus college apartment. If the units cater toward families with typical commute patterns and vehicle ownership the rates would be similar to studies of othertypical suburban multifamily sites as summarized within the ITE. In either case the trip impacts will be less than other allowed uses within the current zoning. 1329RESPONSE Packet Pg. 28 4.1.c Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing If the employee housing caters more towards younger on -site employees with a lower per -room occupancy (i.e., small family size) and exhibits high multimodal rates the lower range of trip generation could approximate trip rates of an Off -Campus Student Apartments (ITE 225). ITE's land use definition is as follows: An off -campus student apartment is part of an apartment complex that serves college or university students. These properties are generally located nearby and within walking distance of a college campus. Most apartments include student -related amenities such as free high-speed Internet, study lounges, fitness centers, sports courts, and swimming pools. Apartments included in this land use can be furnished or unfurnished and range in size from studio apartments to apartments with four bedrooms. Units typically have washer and dryers in each unit. Most facilities also include security and 24-hour emergency maintenance. The ITE manual further separates this land use into sites that are adjacent to campus and those that are over half a mile away. The manual also states that there were an average of 3.09 residents per occupied dwelling unit in the 17 surveyed sites. All data was collected in the 2010's and so reflects current travel characteristics. Data for off -campus apartments is provided in terms of Residents or Bedrooms rather than by total number of units. The number of bedrooms within this housing type will be higher than the number of units within a typical apartment building. Comparison of the trip rates based on the number of bedrooms versus residents was provided to identify average densities. Off -Campus Student Apartment (Adjacent): o 0.28 Trips/Resident V V.LJ It1f.1J/UCUIUVIII Off -Campus Student Apartment (>1/2 mile): 0 0.31 Trips/Resident 0 0.30 Trips/Bedroom The data shows that one person per bedroom is common within this type of housing product, and each typical housing "unit" provides 3.09 persons (presumably three -bedroom units). Assuming one person per bedroom based on information from the ITE manual, national data obtained online from the National Multifamily Housing Councils shows that typical apartments provide the following unit composition as summarized in Table 1. s https:Hwww nmhc org/research-insight/quick-facts-figures/Quick-facts-apartment-stock/ Page 2 Packet Pg. 29 4.1.c Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Tablp 1_ Anartment Unit Composition and Occuoancv Number of Bedrooms Percentage of Total Number of Bedrooms Avg. Number of Students per Unit Studio/1-Bedroom 42.4% 1 0.424 2-Bedroom 45.9% 2 0.918 3-Bedroom 11.7% 3 0.351 Total 1.693 With the average composition of apartments including a mix of one, two, and three -bedroom units Table 1 shows that on -average there are 1.693 persons per unit (or bedrooms per unit). If 30 apartment units are provided per acre this would support approximately 51 bedrooms, as summarized in Table 2. Table 2. Summary of ITE Trio Generation Rates Trip Metric Reasonable FAR and Maximum Weekday PM Peak Hour Land Use ITE Land Use and ITE Code Acreage Trip Rate Multifamily Housing Units 30 Units/Acre 0.44 PM Trips/Unit (Mid -Rise) 13.2 PM Trips/Acre Off -Campus Student 51 Bedrooms/ 0.28 PM Trips/Bedroom Employee Apartment Bedrooms Acre 14.3 PM Trips/Acre Housing (Adjacent to Campus) Off -Campus Student 51 Bedrooms/ 0.30 PM Trips/Bedroom Apartment ii I E 21-5) Dt!"uuilis Acre 15.3 PM Trips/Acre (Over %: Mile from Campus) Table 2 shows that with typical multifamily uses, or with some type of student housing the trip rates will vary between 13.2 and 15.3 weekday PM peak hour trips per acre. This range in trip rates is less than the 17.0 weekday PM peak hour trips per acre that could be generated in the business park today as summarized in the September 4, 2019 memorandum, and much less than the trip rate of some of the individual allowable uses. With the modal characteristics of Sunriver it is expected that either residential rate will be lower than those cited in Table 2, and particularly during the peak summer months. This analysis summarizes typical apartment densities based on persons per unit. The specific plans for the Sunriver property would house approximately 200 persons within a 3.25-acre site, with a different internal configuration than a typical apartment. This will include various types of multifamily housing products that would be best described based on Residents rather than Bedrooms. This product provides an overall density of 61.5 persons per acre. Applying the Off -Campus Student Apartment (Adjacent to Campus) trip rates results in the estimates shown in Table 3. Table 3. Summary of ITE Trio Generation Rates Reasonable FAR and Maximum Weekday PM Peak Hour Land Use ITE Land Use and ITE Code Trip Metric Acreage Trip Rate Employee Off -Campus Student 61.5 0.28 PM Trips/Resident Housing apartment Residents Persons/Acre 17.2 PM Trips/Acre (Adjacent to Campus) Page 3 Packet Pg. 30 4.1.c Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing As summarized within the September 4, 2019 memorandum, there are multiple allowable uses within the Sunriver Business Park zoning district that range in intensity. Retail uses would generate approximately 41.5 weekday PM peak hour trips per acre, restaurants generate approximately 121 trips per acre, and lower intensity uses such as manufacturing or office would only generate 5 to 13 PM peak hour trips per acre. The allowance of the Employee Housing, at 17.2 weekday p.m. peak hour trips per acre is less intense than several of these allowable uses, and equivalent to the "reasonable development scenario" that was outlined comprised of 35% commercial and 65% industrial uses. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report summarizes the impacts of the proposed text amendment to include Employee Housing within the Sunriver Business Park Zoning District (SUBP). Comparison of trip rates between the existing allowed uses and the addition of employee housing would not increase the trip generation potential of the area and so would not result in a significant effect for Transportation Planning Rule purposes. This analysis does not include an assessment of the adequacy of the current system or a specific development proposal; separate review would be required as part of a future land use application. Please let me know if you have any questions on these materials at (503) 997-4473 or via email at loe@transightconsulting.com. Page 4 Packet Pg. 31 4.1.d MOVE START EDCOGROW October 23, 2019 Deschutes County Planning Commission & Staff 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, OR 97702 RE: Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendment Request, File No. 19-000700-TA Planning Commissioners: I am writing to share my perspective regarding a requested text amendment change to the allowed uses within the Sunriver Business Park. Specifically, Sunriver Resort is asking for text amendments to Deschutes County's land use rules that would allow construction of workforce housing within the business park on property that the Resort has owned for many years. Current uses within the Sunriver Business Park are already very broad, it is home to a library, school, gas station, brewery, auto/tire repair, professional offices, restaurants, a laundromat and exercise gyms, and a day care center among other things. Given this longstanding history of disparate uses within the park, EDCO does not see any issues with also allowing multi -family housing to be constructed. EDCO applauds the Resort for its commitment to investing in workforce housing for its employees, who otherwise have few options in the immediate area. Low unemployment rates across the country have for years forced resorts to find employees from overseas through the J-1 visa program, particularly for the busy summer season. With few choices for public transportation to more affordable areas outside Sunriver- (where the current home price is $519,000, the highest in the region) both temporary and permanent resort workers are forced to make long commutes. The proposed employee housing project will provide significant relief both for these workers as well as the resort, which as one of the region's largest employers, can struggle finding people to work at Oregon's largest destination resort. At the end of the day, doesn't a quality visit to Sunriver start with quality service from people who can live happily near where they work? For these reasons, I support the proposed text change. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, 1/ Roger J. Lee CEO Economic Development for Centro) Oregon v �v.cdce�inf�s.con Packet Pg. 32 4.1.d Tanya Saltzman From: Marc Cameron <marc@sunriverbrewingcompany.com> Sent: Friday, October 25, 201912:18 PM To: Tanya Saltzman Subject: Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendment application, File No. 19-000700-TA [EXTERNAL EMAIL] I'm writing to voice my support for the subject Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendment application. I am a business owner in Sunriver and I'm active at several levels in the community. I own the Sunriver Brewing Company production facility in the Business Park at Sunriver and the brewpub restaurant in the Village at Sunriver. I also have businesses in Bend and Eugene. All included my businesses employ between 180 - 220 people depending on the season, the majority of whom work in Sunriver and Deschutes County. I'm also a homeowner in Sunriver. For several years there has been a severe shortage of affordable housing for employees working in the service industry, particularly in the 6 months when tourism is at it's highest. The Sunriver Resort is by far the largest employer in Sunriver but there are several of us who also depend on permanent and seasonal service employees to operate our businesses. Please approve the subject application and hopefully expand it to include the entire Business Park area. To do so will only bring a more sustainable business environment to the community. Regards, Marc Cameron PO Box 3340 Sunriver, Oregon 97707 www.sunriverbrewin.qcompany.com Packet Pg. 33 4.1.d Tanya Saltzman From: David Welton <davidnwelton@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, October 25, 2019 8:58 AM To: Tanya Saltzman Subject: Comment on 247-19-000700-TA - Sunriver workforce housing [EXTERNAL EMAIL] 0 As a resident of Deschutes County, and someone who occasional frequents Sunriver, I know how skyrocketing housing prices are making life difficult for the people who are needed to work there. Long commutes, unstable housing situations, worrying that you're one breakdown away from losing a job at a time when you can ill afford it. It should absolutely be legal - and indeed encouraged - to allow housing to be built within walking distance of jobs at the resort. It's better for the workers and it's better for the environment in that it is an efficient use of our precious land, and cuts down on fossil fuel usage. I fully support this zoning change, and would hope it's the first of many to legalize a diversity of housing options. Thankyou David N. Welton Packet Pg. 34 4.1.d ® °NOT Trailhead Chamber of Commerce & Visitor Center October 28, 2019 PO Bog 616,1AThe OR97739 541-530111 Faz 541-530410 dkto@apko% * wwwhpineol Deschutes County Planning Commission & Staff 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, OR 97702 BOARD OF RE: Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendment Request, File No. 19-000700-TA DIRECTORS 2019 ***** Planning Commissioners: Reg Lesueur We are writing in support of the requested text amendment change to the allowed uses within the President Sunriver Business Park. Specifically, Sunriver Resort is asking for text amendments to Deschutes Robin Mirrasoul County's land use rules that would allow construction of workforce housing within the business park Vice - President on property that the Resort has owned for many years. Tiffany Zeiler Treasurer Current uses within the Sunriver Business Park are already very broad, it is home to a library, school, Mary Thorson gas station, brewery, auto/tire repair, professional offices, restaurants, a laundromat and exercise Secretary gyms, and a day care center among other things. This longstanding history of disparate uses within the nark would fit the plan to allow multi -family housing to be constructed; as well as have an appropriate Gina Turner infrastructure of resident friendly businesses already in place. Jeremy Johnson Aaron Schfield The Sunriver Resort's commitment to investing in workforce housing for its employees, who otherwise have few options in the immediate area, is very progressive and pro -active thinking. Low unemploy- ment rates across the country have for years forced resorts to find employees from overseas, particu- Executive Director larly for the busy summer season, and Sunriver Resort is no exception. With very few choices for Ann Gawith public transportation to more affordable areas such as La Pine, both temporary and permanent resort Executive Assistant workers are forced to make long commutes. Teri Myers The proposed employee housing project will provide significant relief both for these workers as well as the resort, which as one of the region's largest employers, can struggle finding people to work at Ore- gon's largest destination resort. A quality visit to Sunriver starts with quality service from people who can live happily near where they work. For these reasons, the La Pine Chamber Board of Directors supports the text change. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Ann Gawil/h,,Executive Director N m E 0 U .n a U c d E ea a c 0 t 0 Packet Pg. 35 4.1.e Sunriver Business Park Zoning LO as N G. N .E- C O N a. m m 0 c d E s m Q r c d E s v m Packet Pg. 36 1 I Q' V) 4-J 4-J c 4-J V) 4-J 0 C- (3) 0 0 4-J u ro (3) (3) u E 4-j E o > 0 t2(3) U (3) C: Ul 0 0 Ln V) E E 4--J V) gig m :A' dW, I o, I m r"- _0 CL u 4--J cz Ln 4 -J 4-J U m - Q-4- 0) E E 4- a• 0 0 4-J 4- u 4- (Z C: u Ln m OL 0 00 w (1) u u E E 0 u 4— E E 0 u >1 0 4- 0 0 u C: u (A V) (3) E u (U s- co C: < S.-C. 0 ® u b-0 > E C: (U bjD > V) C) > 4-J D C: 0 C: o (U E u u m :�t 0 > (o u X LU _r_ 4--J V) -L 0 C: -I-- 0 > y ��4 4-J 4-J 4-J u u (1) 0 (1) 4-J .c a ft� m 4-J IZ E _0 E> 4--J 0 0 U 4--J w (3) C: 4-J m 4-J Vi 4-J 0 4-J C: 4-J -0 4-J 4-J V) 0 Ln 0 0 u 0 u - u (3) u _0 & 0 0 uj r� .woI r \� I v l�! W tv q W JS30 a. M i Q L J � v t � � S � S T Tanya Saltzman From: Miller, Krista (PDXDS) <krista.miller@destination hotels.com> Sent: Friday, November 08, 2019 2:47 PM To: Tanya Saltzman Subject: Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendment Request, File No. 19-000700-TA [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Dear Ms. Saltzman, am writing on behalf of the Caldera Springs Owners Association (CSOA) for the community of Caldera Springs located adjacent to and immediately to the south of the Sunriver Business Park. The community of Caldera Springs currently supports the employment of an estimated 100 persons in hospitality related fields (maintenance of facilities and grounds, food service, housekeeping, rental management, recreation services, etc.) during the peak tourism season each year. As this community continues to grow and expand in the future, this employment base will increase proportionally. CSOA is well aware of the difficulty of drawing sufficient numbers of employable persons from the surrounding area to fill the many jobs available each year that service the resort/hospitality aspects of Caldera Springs. We are aware of the necessity of hiring student interns from outside the area, off season staff from resorts outside the area, foreign students, and foreign workers to provide staffing for the hospitality services needed within the Caldera Springs community. We are also very aware of the absence of affordable housing in Deschutes County, especially for employees who may be employed seasonally in the area only during the high demand times that at most lasts only six months out of the year. r'cnA n hehalf of the community of Caldera Cnrinac Uinnnrtc the tPvt nmanrlmant which will makes PmnlovPP housing I.J Vf1, oil Uc11011 -1 111c 1..Vmmul��lY V� �..0 �ul..0 .+ r....b.r, ..r-,INv. tr .�. ... .. ... . . an allowed land use within the Sunriver Business Park. This will open the door to allowing the construction of affordable employee housing in close proximity of the resort properties in the south Deschutes County. We note that other resorts such as Crater Lake and Bandon Dunes, to name just two out of many others, have dedicated employee housing facilities located near those resorts for the very purpose being considered in this text amendment. In full disclosure, the community of Caldera Springs (and the future expansion of this community) is a development of Caldera Springs Real Estate, LLC, which is a fully owned entity of Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership (SRLP) who is the applicant for the Text Amendment. Although there is an ownership connection between the two entities, this does not negate nor alter the housing needs of the hospitality employees associated with the Caldera Springs community, either now or in the future when the Caldera Springs development is handed over from the developer to the Caldera Springs community and becomes completely independent of SRLP. Sincerely, KRISTA MILLER GENERAL MANAGER I CALDERA SPRINGS 17750 Caldera Springs Drive, Sunriver, OR 97707 0:541.593.3772 C:541.948.9093 r! VILLAGE PROPERTIES November 11, 2013 Tanya Saltzman Associate Planner Deschutes County Planning Department 117 N. Lafayette Ave. Bend, OR 97703 RE: File 247-19-000700-TA Sunriver Resort Unlimited Partnership Rezoning of the Sunriver Business Park Dear Tanya, I am writing in support of the applicant for a text amendment to allow housing in the Sunriver Business Park on their lot, but I would also like to see it expanded to include that housing be permitted within the Sunriver Business Park. I am a business owner, I own property in the Sunriver Business Park — 56835 Vcnture Lane — and I am the past president of the Sunriver Business Park Association. In Deschutes County we are all aware that housing for employees is a challenge at best, so anything that can be done to provide some alternatives would be welcomed. Thank you. Sincerely, ark 1 alvorsen Owner and Principal Broker P ff.1025. 541.593.1653 1,800.SUNRIVER PO Box 3310 - 56835 Venture ln, Ste 109, Sunriver, OR 97707 Sunriver .1,14.xea Chamber of Commerce SERVING THE NORTHWEST'S YEAR-ROUND PLAYGROUND Nov. 12, 2019 Deschutes County Planning Commission & Staff 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, OR 97702 Subject: Sunriver Resort Employee Housing text amendment for employee housing beds on private land in the Sunriver Business Park; File No. 19-000700-TA Planning Commissioners: I wear several hats concerning this text amendment request by Sunriver Resort: President of the Sunriver Area Chamber Board of Directors, member of the Sunriver Business Park Owners Committee, rlacianntarl rnntart for Deschutes County Road Denartment for traffic modifications to the Business Park, and 16-year resident of Sunriver (SROA). Regarding the Applicant's request to approve this proposal, all of these interests are in alignment for the text amendment's approval. Assuming the first part of the request for the zone change will apply to all lots, and since currently there is no alternative for our area, it appears that we have not found anyone that has brought objection. The second part likely will be the design/permit section per County requirements, which again should not likely be objectionable by park owners or area residents. The final approval and phase built project should hopefully influence the owners of the remaining unimproved lots to build those out as well. In addition, the need for moving forward with the text amendment is verified by input letters and the information provided by the Applicant. I also concur both with the need and with the location. Numerous other positive scenarios are in the works for the Business Park going forward. Hopefully, our requests for considering other business property overlay zoning will gather momentum. I am happy to weigh in further going forward. At the same time, I realize that this is at least a two-step proposal/request that should receive expedited approval. Respectfully Submitted, John Holland, President Sunriver Area Chamber of Commerce Tanya Saltzman From: Dwane Krumme<dwane@habitatlapinesunriver.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2019 7:50 PM To: Tanya Saltzman Subject: Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendment application, File No. 19-000700-TA [EXTERNAL EMAIL] This message is to express my support of the Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendment application. As a provider of affordable housing in this area, we are acutely aware of shortage of affordable housing available to employees working in the service industry. The problem is a matter of concern throughout the year, but the seasonal high levels of tourism for half a year or more place significant stress on employers and employees trying to find needed housing accommodations. From our perspective, availability of more affordable housing is a growing need in the service industry, and approval of this application will be an important step in responding to this need. With offices in the Sunriver Business Park, and as a Sunriver homeowner, I can understand the need for remedies to alleviate the affordable housing shortage adversely affecting permanent and seasonal service employees in this significant business segment. Employees in the service industry are an integral component of service industry capacity, and the service industry is an essential contributor to commerce here. Approval of the Sunriver Housing Text Amendment application will provide lasting benefits to employers, employees, and to sustaining robust business activity. Our organization very much supports approval of this application. Thank you. Dwane Krumme Executive Director Habitat La Pine Sunriver Serving Southern Deschutes County since 1993 PO Box 3364 56835 Venture Lane Suite 101-102 Sunriver, OR 97707 Phone. (541) 593-5005 Fax.• (541) 593-5011 dwane@habitatlapinesunri ver. org www. habitatlapines nnriver. org ANT Minutes DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DESCHUTES SERVICES CENTER 1300 NW WALL STREET, BEND, OREGON, 97703 NOVEMBER 14, 2019 - 5:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Vice Chair Maggie Kirby. Board members present: Hugh Palcic, Les Hudson, Jim Beeger, Steve Swisher and Jessica Kieras. Staff present: Peter Gutowsky - Planning Manager, Nicole Mardell - Associate Planner, Zechariah Heck - Associate Planner (arrived at 6 pm), Tanya Saltzman - Associate Planner, and Ashley Williams - Administrative Assistant. II. Approval of September 12 26 and October 10 Minutes Commissioner Palcic moved to approve the September 12th minutes. Commissioner Beeizer seconded. Ashley Williams noted minor changes to the minutes brought forth by Vice Chair Kirby and Commissioner Beeger. Vice Chair Kirby and Commissioners Swisher and Kieras abstained due to absence. Chair Crawford was absent. All other Commissioners were in favor. Commissioner Beeger moved to approve the September 26th minutes. Commissioner Swisher seconded. Ashley Williams noted minor changes to the minutes brought forth by Commissioner Beeger. Chair Crawford was absent. All present members were in favor. Commissioner Palcic moved to approve the October 10th minutes. Commissioner Beeger seconded. Ashley Williams noted minor changes to the minutes brought forth by Commissioner Swisher. 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 Q (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes.org @ www.deschutes.org/cd Chair Crawford was absent. Vice Chair Kirby and Commissioner Hudson abstained due to absence. All other members were in favor. 111. Public Comments There were no public comments. IV. Sunriver Business Park / Employee Housing Text Amendments / Public Hearine Tanya Saltzman, Associate Planner and Vice Chair Kirby opened the Public Hearing with their respective transcripts. There were no conflicts announced and no challenges from the audience. Ms. Saltzman provided a presentation regarding the amendment. She described the Sunriver Business Park, definitions, and amendment specifications. She reminded the Commission that this application is for a text amendment for the entire zone and does not pertain to a specific site. She said that since the Work Session in October questions presented by the Senior Transportation Planner have been addressed and that 8 letters of support for the amendment have been received. She closed her presentation by saying that there was only a change made to the resort season language, which makes the resort season shorter. Commissioner Beeger asked why the resort language was shortened. Ms. Saltzman said that this was to better accommodate renting of the units during the off seasons. There was discussion about when parking requirements are reviewed, the building size regulations, where else in the County employee housing is allowed and who is responsible for monitoring the housing. Parking requirements are reviewed during the Site Plan review, by this amendment employee housing would only be allowed in this zone, and the housing will be self -regulated or regulated by Code Enforcement (if a complaint is received). Steven Hultberg, Applicant Attorney, said that Sunriver is facing a crucial need for employee housing. He said that the reasons for limiting the resort season and expanding the shoulder season are to allow the housing be utilized by non -employees during the shoulder season. He reminded the Commission that the applicant is bound by their land use permit to provide housing in a manner consistent with that permit. To violate such requirements would violate the Land Use Permit. Steven Runner, Vice President of Development - Sunriver Resort, said that Sunriver Resort is the largest employer in South County. During the summer season their standard employment number doubles. He said that often times those employment gaps are filled with workers from foreign countries. Those employees require short term housing that is provided by Sunriver Resort. Currently the process for achieving that housing is cumbersome. Mr. Hultberg concluded these statements by noting that employee housing in a resort is not a unique situation, however, it is not addressed in Deschutes County Code currently. November 14, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 5 Commissioner Kieras asked for clarification about if the employee housing was part of the compensation for employees. Mr. Runner said that it was, but that the housing is still subsidized by the employer. Commissioner Beeger expressed concerns with the parking requirements, noting that there were not enough spaces. The applicants said this requirement is based on knowledgeability about the resort. Most seasonal employees do not have a car and use the shuttle service. Other concerns expressed were monitoring of the premises, termination of housing notices during the shoulder season, and opening of the facilities to non -employees. John Schuldt, adjacent property owner, expressed concerns that employee housing would spread out in the Business Park and may not be maintained properly. He is open to this development, but thinks it is premature to open it up to all parties. He also expressed concerns with the number of parking spaces required. Eric Post, adjacent property owner, expressed concerns with the intersection at the entrance of the Business Park. He would like to see a review of this intersection with any new development. He said that he is concerned with policing, but believes that would be true of any housing development. He is supportive of this proposal. Mark Halvorsen, 53835 Venture Lane, said that he has concerns with the intersection as well, but is supportive of the proposal. Ms. Saltzman said that the options moving forward are to close both records, leave the ,e,rirron rcrnrrl nnan anri rinca tha oral rPrnrrl nr rnntimie the hP_aring to a date certain. After discussion with staff about the Commission's remaining questions it was decided the best method for moving forward was to continue the hearing. Commissioner Hudson moved to continue the hearing to December 12cn Commissioner Beeger seconded. All members present were in favor. Staff requested that all questions be submitted by December 2nd for adequate packet preparation. V. Flood Plain Amendments - Split Zone Amendment / Deliberation Nicole Mardell, Associate Planner, said that this is a follow up on the postponed deliberations for the Split Zone Flood Plain Amendments. She said that the County reached out to certain stakeholders to come up with a narrowed scope amendment. Those stakeholders included the County, Private Property Owners (Attorney) and Central Oregon LandWatch. Currently these amendments would only apply to EFU properties with designated Flood Plain that has been piped that are not in a wildlife management corridor. Commissioner Swisher wondered if the quasi-judicial process that put these amendments on hold has been resolved. Ms. Mardell said that it had not, but since the scope is so narrow the stakeholders were comfortable with this approach. Commissioner Beeger November 14, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 5 asked for the definition of "Significant Riparian Area". Ms. Mardell provided him with the three pronged test that applies to these areas. Commissioner Hudson wondered if these amendments would apply to any property owners besides the Netters. Ms. Mardell said that there are 2-3 other properties that would be affected, but that staff was focusing on the testimony received to address the concerns. Commissioner Hudson moved to close deliberations and approve the amendments as presented. Commissioner Palcic seconded. All members present were in favor. Mr. Gutowsky said that this will be Ms. Mardell's last meeting. She will be taking a position with the City of Sisters in December. VI. Nonprime Resource Lands / Work Session / Check - in Zechariah Heck, Associate Planner, handed out materials to the Commission that were not available in time for the Agenda Packet. He said that on October 28th the Board of County Commissioners directed staff to separate the NPR proposals. They would like to proceed with the amendments for six specific areas. The Board will hold a Public Hearing on Monday, November 18, to receive public testimony on the subject matter. As for the general quasi-judicial Nonprime Resource Land applications, Zechariah expects a joint work session with the Planning Commission and Board in the new year. Mr. Heck went over the table provided in the packet and described the changes to each Comprehensive Plan Goal. The Commissioners expressed comments and concerns about this process moving forward. Some of those comments included: confirmation this is an open and shut process that a landowner could not re -open; the differences in creating criteria to allow for quasi-judicial proceedings versus legislative proceedings; the lack of productivity of these lands; and the expected concerns from parties. Staff agreed with the Commissions concerns. Peter Gutowsky stated they were aware this is a vulnerable process and there are risks associated with its adoption. However, staff will do everything possible to reduce those risks. The Board is adamant that due to the lack of state rulemaking to address these unique properties, it is important to move forward with the proposed amendments. VII. Planning Commission & Staff Comments Mr. Heck provided an update about the Wildfire Mitigation Action Committee (WMAC). He said there are 12 members that have been discussing maps and other topics related to reducing the risks of Wildfire. He said that the biggest takeaway from the meetings to date are the differences in the R327 and hazard maps. He offered to the Commission that there are agenda packets, audio and minutes available on the website - www.deschutes.org/wildfirecommittee. November 14, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 5 Mr. Gutowsky said that the Planning Department is undergoing some staff changes with the loss of Mr. Mardell and a Senior Planner, Jacob Ripper. He said that the County is a cooperating agency for the Draft of the Deschutes Habitat and Conservation Plan. He discussed the demographics of that plan. He said that the plan is available online and will implement one of four alternatives. Commissioner Beeger congratulated Ms. Mardell on her new position with the City of Sisters. Commissioner Swisher wanted to recognize Vice -Chair Kirby's leadership this meeting. He said that the Sisters Country Plan is in the implementation stages which are going smoothly. Commissioner Hudson provided a brief update on the Tumalo roundabout project. He said that the cost is very high for the pedestrian underpass and that the stakeholders group is looking for the best ways to accommodate all affected parties. Next Planning Commission meeting will be on December 12, 2019. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:02. Respectfully submitted, Ashley Williams Administrative Assistant All materials including (but not limited to) video, presentations, written material and submittals are subject to the County Retention Policy; All items are posted and available for public viewing on the Deschutes County Meeting Portal. For further detail on this and other meetings please follow link below. https://deschutescountyor.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx November 14, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 of 5 Affidavit of Publication STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF DESCHUTES I, Tanya McKiernan, a citizen of the United State and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eigh- teen years, and not part to or interested in the above -entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of The Bulletin 1777 SW CHANDLER AVE, BEND OR 97702 a daily newspaper of general circulation, published in the aforesaid county and state as defined by ORS 192.010 and ORS 192.020, that Acct Name: DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEV. PO Number: Legal Description: Legal Notice NOV 12 2019 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Deschutes County Planning Commission will h�� �Y. ing on Thursday, November 14, 2019, at 5:30 p.m. in the De Services Center, 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, to take testimony on the fol- lowing i a printed copy of which is hereto affixed was published in each regular and entire issue of the said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates to wit: 11/02/2019 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. signature Dated at Bend, Oregon, this 4th day of November, 2019 AdName: 110985 State of Oregon, County of Deschutes Subscribed and Sworn to before me this day of , 20 L by Notary Publi r Oregon No. In the Court of the STATE OF OREGON for the COUNTY OF DESCHUTES AFFIDAVIT OF PUSUCA71ON Fled By From the office of Attorney for i OFFICL4 STAMP ALYSHIA VALDEZ NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.9M14 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES OCTOBER 21, 2022 TFIE BULLETIN ^ SATURDAY NOVEMBER 2, 2019 i Su.doku H� h IIves 1 1 �Y •" ........ $ 4 9 i 6 ,5 LAST WEEKS SOLUTION 7 3: 6 B 5] 4 219 ]:; 4 8 9 3 1 5 2 6 s s a z 3 6 s 1] sl6 9 7 z a 3 A T 2. 9 8 9 4 1 6 S.i3 Zit 3 4 6 5 8:9 7 9 4 2 7 9 3 5 ]6 3 9 6 8 5 2] 1 4 3 9 ]5968423!1 1]439b 285 8 1: 9 2, 1 41 3 8 % 4 6 ,:. : 1 7.. ,.. 3 9 5 .._._ 6 7 8 �, 3 9 6 ' 7 -- 7 4 6 9834]21- ]_48932 6] 4 t_6i8 62�S 3197 4'839126!5 6512894'J3 1 HOW SO play: Sudoku High Fives :. CORSIstS Of five rag• Ula( $UdOkU grids sharing one Set Of 3-by-3 boxes.,Each row, column and set Ot3-by-3 boxes must contain the numbers 1 through 9 without repetlt!on.The num- bars in any shared set of 3-by-3 boxes apply to each of the , individual Sudokus. fgp {'�S�''1r,, qp ®4 1 ULEllE%nBulle6.1n1 7' 5 7, 9 3 1 8 I 2 5 4.n:t7 5 6 8 3 9i2 6 5,7 A IS 7 5 1 3 9 5,2 - 8 2 s711,816 9 5 37 1 6 3 2 4 9 6 5 13 4 3 9': 6 7l,4191[511 28 2 319 614 7 1'. 5P11"" 2 9 6z4 �2 1 6 9 6 8= 5 3 2 4 ] 8 9 1 _6 8] 5 2 4' 3 5 8 '1 9 $ 4] �^ 7 3 7 i B; 8 3 6 2 s 1]. 4 2 1 3 8 -9. 6 3 5 2 E 2 u, % 311 9 72 3 8 6 5 4 8 2 6. 9 5 1 215 ] 8 9 6 4 3 1 6 3 9 8] 4 2 4 6.6 1 3 5 ] 2 9 1 5 7 4 6 9 3 812 t3 6 a 9 1 s 7 5 b 19 a 2 8 9 6'71:. 518 7 3 4 2 ] 7 3 -6 ] 4 3 2 7 3 6 9. a371A 1 .2 ;9 sId I ...._. P fast.®----- �� f� r stuff In Print and online with the Bulletin's Classifieds. Bell you du faster with --%afoY• - FOR JUST AODMONAL $1 PER DAY. 1Tet�,a�tu'+rtlr''p gy��j ��assif1e9. s �a - b Ptlb A "dr 41 u n,. 6 1 ;.• 9 4 ;8 7 5 3 ;: 6 '7 2 .3 81 3 i 9 I - 9 ;-. ,' 2 6L 1 " 4 1 81. 3 3 8 5 1 2 5 4 8 _ %' 1 9 S .3.: 4, 5 1 Z 7 3 � 1I i 1 ' S f 4. 7 4 7 2 5 001 tam no t7-7 Its rAwca 6; Le9ei Mo 8 ix9a1N II & PAklt HaAkeg] +MNe li .,,, 8 blkA Ices - Legal Notice 'tetl by a P I G 2 P `II fe1 L LGCSLATIVHFAFUE-RING anJ Ih6 ase ,,:a labe l edKs -sib Festvalon NOTICE, CRY OF BENO PLANNING le, in —In at city I . t p i le 15Uacn, Peres, Th CO�fiIiSSCOUNCH ad at a r5 �1.bie f ndudeIre IId rrv PROJECT NUM BER: PZ ,-653 CO\TACT PERSON. P.Wins ghl bainplrgr tl 1 n APPLICANT Coy Bend NATURE OF Had i( 7 693 2153 pi t 1 . d tl k II A imal d THE APPLICA ION Bond D p ,n f tl g- Send tt 2999 p p I. g code tl t Ch f 21 Re m PI Cliy iAPPLiCANT' leers InCa. Omaha 4.2 M'r. Do', c Cly of ! B ' COD 110 NW 4 teaks tres=nls LLC Developme t Stands d, Rare Wall S 103 - d Te maG LOCATION: Th b. IP P ny Go, Plan Rare' and Deep Re- tl state wrene—h—le Ix I 12108a tenon Rood Bend d Chapter 43 SM rray be subr'hed i ) p- I Tax h!aP C1 12.22 T L110 Portiere, R P. d P p tY L'r. 1 t :STA-F h r g 'I CONTACT. Kye C 11. N/I Aduslmenls AP PLICABLE CEN d-^ tl C Coll �tlsachu1Cs y, (54t)t3TI2. Y RIA. Bond Dlop Ced S."' n SH 4I 0 Cob"iII ail 46200 ava;labe C y H II. PROP Loss] Ntl NOR ICEOFPUBLIC t tl d b 'Y d by ERN LOCATION. Cnrioe. DATE HEARING The I, f I. 11� "a"" e pl- I Tu E, PLACE ANO LOCATION OF THE Co ty PI C enatl Plicatlble va 6 1 PLANNING Cott MISSION HEAR hid pi c reh, 1 fl -h tla� lion a, Ile Devi' I o ING No+�erber 25 2019. 5:30 p m. at NO,arrh. 201_ -t 5:30 P^, - the and oah be pe, chased for 25',,ants 710 N" OW S'•esl e tl OR Cey Dawn -.as - G ry S C a page The Slafi ra Itan IOo be DATE Tt AE Sl I E': � I p o t i PLACE AND LOCA TIOA OF THE CITY m ) h 1 I IT"its' : ! F h -. g. Doc i COUNCIL HEAR ING' December 18 FILE NUI10 H 24T 19-Llr^7W TA - —it b Inc al. ns tl 1 t 9. 2019 7:OD. . 711 NW W I. St t SUBJECT:P' d l i q 1 1 D h C } 9 P B d UR.ICM1 G y HIIC ih D h'o C tyZ C i p IP P be,, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION S e.+. d 10(A) 1 in ly g d 1 T' L Th PFI ! 11 tl tl evled be 9 • s P tl a I. EO Ple ri b- .il by II P b and Ine in be, hU S. � P 0tl tl I: k P. Ppl to she bt C Bus a Disincl Icp pCoo 01) C'tY Hall p d„' b at I6USP) APPLICANTS tlnalor at (54the 61>4.1 H rtl (5,11) 593 AGENT S I e v e n OICE 213. Ph ab tl g go S d Hilb p., BAd VJr P ThPBBLtlP SR s,tI 11 Ir PI - g Cr—STAFF Inde—Pt CON-> T D shictS d mE ml LT el hreashntd ON Co CiIY i T ) A le 1'a .:- 1 I 30 p I Bend CDD 710 Nt, 6]]03, "N-388 65 B. lan. rF U,e Ye;y Fang Wel: SL or Shen "a mea!In9s ya.saliz.^.,en Cide chutes C.e ember 5. 2018 al p. 5, tlsta'a yevrvie„s. DOCUMENTS: Ds once, 1Nritlen mints tc sWmieed Co. be vS"" and doom:'"ed fmm: 799 SVJ Columbia, 11, Bentl, Oregon. ha at1 lime prior to nv11"tinld':r.gperm:.ls mee ing ,•:t: be had ORS r I the hearings. Tne 1'—ings 'II oregon.yav antl Irllp:litl!al.ceschules. pursuartto 192.660(2)(e! hr be ontlub".d!I, ec- erg the pnurpese of des Meles nth BOC Secfian 4AZ00- Ccoies of :re eteH m- P rl, apFt,stcn, all cuss 9 real pro;ae IY 12nsa<t:e.:ns. TI'.s has nrr,�e. Leggal N tice =GIG LATINE PVB pallcabl1 c^:aand val'.aole 'cr inspsc- The re ga!ar n' ! g LIC HEARING NOTICE. CITY OF tier, of f^.a Plrn:Jr.9 D-vision a: ro cost ,+11 began ate 5:30 PnT aphl. II BEND PLANNING and be, be pur- wel.do an update COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL chased for 25 cents a pyge, T-= mer re- Irm'n the c!IY or, the l Sand Core Area U, PROJECT NUM BER: PZ 19-OTJ6 eaN shoo':: ba matl¢ v aUa ss en da)•a Can Renev:al Frc- act, a rec actin APPLICANT: C!IY pl Bend NATURE OF APPLICATION: prier C ire dale set Icr the M1aari:p. repoll on fall eperfs a anPmsenlal,on of an ORRA av:a,d THE Bend Deschutes Count' - uc video. _=,Ibpmell Ones unsndmenle to Chapters 12, v;9M1 d':.he solo parLnpa ;n all Pm :The business sassicn e vfll began al'/ pm fo UCliniters, 4l, De ICPmeni Rere,v gg es t ocalion Tnis a ":'It —not a das!gn tn:ld tram Icr JSFC Pmcetlure9 and 4.>, TmnePprlai!On Anal. Is aao":' to pee p!e rr,lh d, S::n!'it:Ss.11 Indoor pod! took 1 re—ob". e. r pod ys!s APPLICABLE CRITERIA: Bend you need .�sommo- I Tne C!ly of Be', C�imate Acllon Plan Development Ccda tlalions lc''^.ak¢par- licipatun ^^„c sI^le. vrilI be given and a Sec,, 46200 'Ieb!oln Giry Ha4.' pleeae c=: •.e AD.4 C'M" ;or a--(5c1) gmuntl !e' pp Cosal.[itNPJVol- PROPER'rY L4� CATION: C'C" 6174]4>. leybe4 Club for sand arts. DATE, TIME, PLACE AND LOCATION OF —.----- The a........... enda and sups PlCmenfaryy per THE PLANNING C0 k9ISSION Legal Nofice NOTICE OF PUBLIC a av .IaCle cn the Disfhcfs lklell. HEARING: No— bar 25, polo, •30 i REA-!:'JG IThe Des. n.:es Coun m'.bendparksam dro— In, mc"e Pm. al ]10 NNJ that, Slmel. Bend, OR, ly Board '.f Com ! m!ssi held 'n,o oleo ca11541 MR 7275. CCity Hal Council hambers- DATE. public r:nm cn 1 M-day, `: va bar TINE, PLACE AND LOCATION OF THE 251h, 20t9 5: 10:00 A.M. in :`= Barnes 11, Le sl tics NOTICE OF PUBLIC CITY COUNCIL HEARING: Becem n 1a, 2C10 >:00 and Sev:.c •. Room 1 1 It `,:: VJSII Sheet, lake HEARING The Dead 1-1 County Board al be'be' at >10 Nltl W faF Co Street Bend ORhoed G:ty Hall Council pp h 'ng o, N.e� Chambsrs. ADBI' .FILENUInO_',: 1247-19-�?u90 November 13. 201g, TIONAL INFORMA TION: The eppl':es- OIAG SUBJECT: T!a ap!: I 2.00 Pm 'n ,r Deschutes Ccunly all dopumen" antl Cents— sub- Is ragcsning ann oe'1 r " , L Boertl o! Com,o.s 1 carer_ — - Room al 13C0 NU P -'c D' -' n Legal Notice U' h les Co, my Appeals (LUSA). Amendments to the Wa. Street, 8 .tl to _ ke i I o y - I n t uchased1 25 NOTICE OF PUBLIC : T Ass¢ssors lAap Fa lure to p'Ovltle HEARINGS : 22 0�11 late Plan • Chapters t-12 La Phe Dov<!op thei I t a page The TheCfy IL P I REQUEST' Cernpre ! denrn If: I to met Cedo • Chap. FILE I.JI+13.-R 24] 19 OOD512 PA / a to I Id d'-.,She. Itl P' L' h 9 1 Pan Map .'ford des de..'s'on be h PI q A rd.me" end 1 maker an oFPodanl ter 15 SCN Teal antl Iv1ap Amendmerts 513 TA SUDJECT A 1 to M1 C fen se+ do)_ pi or to Ihe¢daI, I It I D h Com. a. 5.30 Z Change as Ili is Io msPontl to the Phi o1 Wetl,osday, sue pmc uric. np N-1-1 20 2019 E g Total Acres peal I LUDA based Oregon RcvSetl Sra.ules ORS 19]610 1: PI T 18 g C ly GG r L G y iL Pi5243 Pa kOpasatis l Ito ] 19 f L Z 9 F t' C Ch L s SP 8.48 R A oq t h ppiks -- -A tl -t.avr... Otl f.rompiy t M R t 4 P. Ilp d 163. Eh Shoal, La tl CtMdsl PI t_n d I Pre OR (RNPI 4995 1 no b R�III ORS 1 250 C mpl' nee Lord U tlT a na aid Pe i T 1 t n i 't'e FILE NUMBERS P p etl. Tot IAc inatl t b'MinGoals 02CA 19 antl 02ZC : - 5243 Pa k0 11 1 f i� Ppl L- neq'imd. ORS 19]]63. Cdn Act (RLU:PA). P 1 pl 1 d. 19 Sp Zone 0 - tl Pp d t i L I Dee PLICAM 6: UeSCM1'J.es Counl) 11 s I C lrrd HEARING DATE: No E Cor bl for —1,01 20, 2019 A.I ed Uw (CI Pe , C e J d Land Use H gs' Norce P,e STAFFCONTACT N 11 d 1 A e 4 T p t p Il 530 P!: P :nq 2.23 Resd L I ! ha.i tl g C en CI f ter Ptar (PIIP) W ,n h 1 q nle Oregon Ad I the Rules 5413t]315i n ore I'S GGppoo at! LDt)P1]1ci .>. c He ISl eel Le PneS 6t� 'All 50e2he astetl parse s he Cost P ov`a� uP nt. I (OAR) lel'ro660012 : d h tes rg OUCUMENTS "'- — APPLICANT! Sege y pp b quest a: a reason brush Osvelopmint - r b p t -I cae Imerasod 9 R 660015 0 go st ,e ntle PI cz b J tl d ! - i CHECKYCUR AD ft LLe owNER Po by 1 Pe ens ,:ay omem Box 2520 Le P ra tl ' Ian :. d Stall Report yA1h pRaie Id-gper �gov and Q1 the 0hrS 10 h111 able ! S OR 97739 1 :. ).All .'te ev nda)•s of d,e PROPERTY —A Is m b data of 'M1e heannp --- -------- USETHE CLASSIFIEDS! pJd .: hates. CCrrECt. S-a!Icl eaantl noN' me Prof ed by m cry Pas am city antes loealetl or to the t LLa P' PI Ing tgC7 f the Y p I, prli a hUm20 EP09 gC OCbir' COntdCl US ASAP s9 pr g vresl ofrH phviay 9], data or sub t d Casa t T . y 'I Dpa IC ride: sE!!ir91Y:'.h I d : -, t tl 'tl i that COl2CIn anG I{{ pp1 h g. F VJ Co. &96 n R rth IVlb 111111',.. have art'' obi 2.0 LSI �iSt710 E2iE5! ttt d by o b any agAta1ent3 Can i ryV ) C lh F¢. h h q SI C. ll D' �Appue. i,Cntcrle 'my IC themid to RI. half h fGan tl .,,'cable r UE rIIaO-(OjOUraU. 541-e855899 gornvrr p'a antl ?^ ppw degas appeal b; Procedures nroda' d Iletl Tax lo.s that le the ( ClyofLaPnCCOm- the Bullet'Classllied 1 :ate b, n r von a1 ih¢ as peso, SE I¢I nC asstlleCs 200' d 202 on the Land Use Beard o' Prehenshe Pan • V 5408MR09 Where 3 r }'• :'I � t�lJ �S 1 ir'lici t v� t1 4.1 Deschutes County Planning Commission i E S COG�� 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, OR 97708 SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ITEM (ID # 2907) Meeting: 10/10/19 05:30 PM Department: Community Development Category: Discussion Item Prepared By: Tanya Saltzman Initiator: Tanya Saltzman Sponsors: DOC ID: 2907 Work Session: Sunriver Employee Housing Text Amendments The Planning Commission will conduct a work session on October 10, 2019 in preparation for a public hearing on November 14, 2019 to consider text amendments to Chapter 18.108, Sunriver Business Park District (SUBP), File No. 247-19-000700-TA. The applicant, Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership, proposes amendments that would allow employee housing as an outright permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district. Updated: 10/3/2019 8:58 AM by Tanya Saltzman Page 1 Packet Pg. 3 4.1.a INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED 1. Complete the application form and provide appropriate original signatures. To ensure timely processing of your application, all materials must be submitted on singie-sided, 8.5" x 11" paper. Do not use binders, tabs/dividers, staples or tape. 2. This application shall include one full-sized plan set (to scale) and one plan set reduced to no larger than 11" x 17". Include a plot plan that shows all property lines and existing and proposed structures, parking, landscaping, lighting, etc. 3. Include a copy of the current deed showing the property owners. 4. Attach correct fee. 5. All applicable standards and criteria must be addressed in writing prior to acceptance of the application. Detailed descriptions, rnaps and other relevant information must be attached to the application. TYPE OF APPLICATION (check one): FEE: $6,129.00 Administrative Determination (AD)_ Partition (MP) Conditional Use (CU) — Subdivision (TP) _ Declaratory Ruling (DR) , Temporary Use (TU) _ Applicant's Name (print): Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership Mailing Address: PO Box 3609 Site Plan (SP) Variance (V) Setback Exception (SE) r Other Text Amendment Phone: (541 ) 593-7832 City/State/Zip: Sunriver, QR 97707 Applicant's Email Address: srunner@suiiriver-resort.com Property Owner/s Name (if different)*: Phone: ( ) Mailing Address: same as above. City/State/Zip: 1, Request: Text amendment to allow employee housing as permitted use in Sunriver UUC--Business Park zone. 2. Property Description: Township 20 s Range 11 E Section 5 Tax Lot N/A 3 Property Zone(s): Sunriver UUC--BP Zone Property Size (acres or sq. ft.): N/A 4. Lot of Record? (State reason): N/A for text amendment. All lots included in Business Park plat. 5. Property Address: Various located on Venture Lane and Enterprise Drive, Sunriver, Oregon. (over) 11 / NW U+fayetter Avenue, tie'nei, Orq on 97703 1 P 0. Box 6005, Heart, OR n7708-6005 �1 (541) 388-6575 @a cdd(0dees<hutes.019 (P WWW_desdhutes<;lghd Rev 18 _ Packet Pg. 4 4.1.a 6. Present Use of Property: Properties within the business park are developed for a wide variety of commercial uses. 7. Existing Structures: Multiple commercial structures are located within the SP zone in the business park. 8. Property will be served by: Sewer. Yes 9. Domestic Water Source: Sunriver Water, LLC Onsite Disposal System To the best of my knowledge, the proposal complies with all previous conditions of approval and all other applicable local, state, and federal laws. By signing this application, I acknowledge that Deschutes County planning staff may make a site visit(s) to the address(es) listed on this application in order to evaluate the property(ies) with the Deschutes County Code criteria applicable to the land use request(s) submitted. Please describe any special circumstances regarding a potential site visit: Applicant's Signature: Date:9112/2019 Property Owner's Signature (if different)*: ate: Agent's Name (if applicable): Steven Hultberg Phone: ( 541 ) 585-3697 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2007 City/State/Zip: Bend, Oregon 97709 Agent's Email Address: shultbergeradierwhite.com *If this application is not signed by the property owner, a letter authorizing signature by the applicant must be attached. By signing this application, the applicant understands and agrees that Deschutes County may require a deposit for hearings officers' fees prior to the application being deemed complete. If the application is heard by a hearings officer, the applicant will be responsible for the actual costs of the hearings officer. 11 7 NW Lafaye:tto Avenue, Band, Of 97/03 1 P O Box 6005. Bend, OR 97708-6005 'Q (541) 388-bS7S tea cdd@deschutes org @ www rieschules org/cd T Packet Pg. 5 4.1.a TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION NARRATIVE SUNRIVER BUSINESS PARK EMPLOYEE HOUSING Applicant: Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership PO Box 3609 Sunriver, Oregon 97707 Attn: Mr. Steven Runner Property Address: 17601 Center Drive Sunriver, Oregon 97707 Applicant's Attorney: Radler White Parks & Alexander LLP PO Box 2007 Bend, Oregon 97709 Attn: Mr. Steven Hultberg Project Description The applicant proposes to amend Deschutes County Code ("DCC") 18.108.110 to allow employee housing in the Business Park District within the Sunriver Unincorporated Community Zone. The proposed amended text is attached as Exhibit A. The Sunriver area is home to several resorts, including Sunriver Resort, Caldera Springs and Crosswater. These resort communities, as well as the larger Sunriver community, employ upwards of 1,000 peak summer seasonal employees, with about one-half of that number employed in the off-season. Many of these employees come to the Sunriver area for seasonal employment and depart in the shoulder season. Based on significant employee feedback, there is a critical need in the Sunriver area for affordable employee housing. The applicant proposes to amend DCC 18.108.110 to permit employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park. Although not the subject of the present application, the applicant owns a 3.25 acre vacant lot within the Business Park, upon which the applicant proposes to construct employee housing units to serve upwards of 200 employees. The draft text amendment includes provisions restricting use of units to employees engaged in the tourism, recreation or hospitality industries. The amendments are intended to serve Sunriver area employees during the summer months, as well as Mt. Bachelor employees during the winter months. During the high season, employee units would be restricted solely to eligible employees. During the off-season, units would be first made available to eligible employees, and then on a first come basis after employee needs have been met. Site Description The Sunriver Business Park is located south and east of SW Century Drive. The Caldera Springs destination resort is to the south, and the Burlington Northern mainline is to the east. Forest Service lands are to the east of the BNSF mainline. Although not within the Business Park District, the Powder Village Condominium complex is on the southern boundary of the Business Park. Most of the Sunriver Business Park is occupied by a mix of commercial, light industrial and residential uses. Six lots within the Sunriver Business Park are undeveloped, including the 3.25-acre parcel owned by the applicant. To be clear, the proposed text amendment would apply throughout the entire Business Park District. PAGE 1 (00901495;1) Packet Pg. 6 4.1.a Review Criteria Deschutes County lacks specific approval criteria in DCC Titles 18 and 22 for reviewing text amendments to DCC Title 18. That said, under county precedence and state law, legislative and quasi-judicial text amendments generally must be consistent with DCC Title 22, Chapter 22.12, Legislative Procedures, the Statewide Planning Goals, applicable Oregon Administrative Rules, applicable policies of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and the county's Transportation System Plan. This application narrative addressed each of the applicable standards. Proposed Findings Title 22 of the Deschutes County Code, Development Procedures Ordinance 22 12 030 Initiation of Legislative Changes. A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of required fees as well as by the Board of Commissioners or the Planning Commission. FINDING: As a property owner in Deschutes County, the applicant may initiate a legislative change to the DCC. As defined by the DCC "Legislative changes" "generally involve broad public policy decisions that apply to other than an individual property owner. These include, without limitation, amendments to the text of the comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, or the subdivision or partition ordinance and changes in zoning maps not directed at a small number of property owners." Because the proposed text amendment is an amendment to the text of the county's zoning ordinance, it qualifies as a "legislative change." Under the county's Development Procedures Ordinance, DCC Title 22, the county may elect to process this legislative change through a quasi-judicial procedure. Statewide Planning Goals Goal 1, Citizen Involvement FINDING: The text amendment will include hearings before both the Deschutes County Planning Commission and the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. All meetings will be publicly noticed, and the public may participate both orally and in person. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 1. Goal 2, Land Use Planning FINDING: ORS 197.610 allows local governments to initiate post acknowledgement plan amendments or changes to land use regulations, provided that certain notice standards are met. In very general terms, Goal 2 requires local governments to demonstrate that legislative text changes are consistent with the jurisdiction's acknowledged comprehensive plan and related acknowledged plans (e.g., transportation system plan). The applicant anticipates that the county will provide the required notices for the proposed amendments. The findings below demonstrate that the proposed text amendment is consistent with applicable goals and policies of the county's acknowledged planning documents. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 2. Goal 3, Agricultural Lands FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park. No agricultural lands are affected by the proposed text amendment. Goal 3 does not apply to this application. PAGE (00901495;1) _ Packet Pg. 7 4.1.a Goal 4, Forest Lands FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park. No Goal 4 forestlands are affected by the proposed text amendment. Although Goal 4 forestiand is adjacent to the Sunriver Business Park, the underlying property itself is within the Sunriver Unincorporated Community and not subject to Goal 4 standards. Goal 4 does not apply to this application. Goal 5, Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park. No Goal 5 resources are located within the Sunriver Business Park District. Goal 5 does not apply to this application. Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resource Quality FINDING: No development or land use changes are being proposed that impact air, water, or land resource qualities. Other areas of the County's code deal with protecting air, water, and land remain in full force and effect. To the extent that Goal 6 applies to this application, the provision of employee housing within close proximity to employment areas will necessarily reduce reliance on the automobile for work -related transportation needs. To the extent that Goal 6 is implicated by this application, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 6. Goal 7, Natural Hazards FINDING: The County's Comprehensive Plan identifies the dominant natural hazards as wildfire, winter storms, and flooding. The proposed text amendment merely adds employee housing as a permitted use in the underlying zone. The underlying property will remain subject to the county's existing wildfire plans, floodplain standards and other ordinance standards applicable to natural hazards. To the extent that Goal 7 is implicated by this application, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 7. Goal 8, Recreational Needs FINDING: Employee housing allowed by the proposed text amendment is intended to partially address the employee housing needs of the surrounding resorts and resort communities. Although not directly on point, by providing employment and employee housing to resort and recreational employees, the county's recreational needs are benefitted by the text amendment. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 8. Goal 9, Economic Development FINDING: The Sunriver Business Park in not within a recognized urban growth boundary. Consequently, O OAR 660-009 does not apply to the present application. In general terms, Goal 9 is intended to ensure an adequate supply of land for business and employment growth. In the greater Sunriver community, c tourism, including recreational activities, food and beverage service and related service industries, are a E the primary economic activities. Given the critical shortage of affordable employee housing, the tourism w industry is finding it challenging to find and retain employees. In order to support the tourism industry, > convenient and affordable housing solutions must be found. The adoption of the present text amendment will partially alleviate the housing pressures in the Sunriver area. The applicant has �? demonstrated compliance with Goal 9. :s c d Goal 10, Housing E t ro Q PAGE 3 (00901495:1) Packet Pg_ S 4.1.a FINDING: This goal pertains to urban or urbanizable lands. Consequently, Goal 10 does not apply to the present application. That said, the proposed text amendment will provide the opportunity to provide affordable employee housing in an area of high demand. To the extent that Goal 10 applies to this application, the applicant had demonstrated compliance with Goal 10. Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services FINDING: Goal 11 generally pertains more to water and sewer services. The Sunriver Business Park is served by Sunriver Water and Sunriver Environmental. Consequently, water and sewer services are available to the underlying business park. Given the wide range of uses already permitted in the Business Park, there is no indication that a limited amount of employee housing will have any greater effect on sewer and water services than would existing uses already permitted either outright or conditionally in the Sunriver Business Park District. The applicant had demonstrated compliance with Goal 12. Goal 13, Energy Conservation FINDING: This text amendment does not affect the County's regulation of solar setbacks, siting of small- scale windmills, land use or density, etc. The primary purpose of this text amendment is to provide employee housing in close proximity to the employment centers in and around the greater Sunriver community. Housing in close proximity to employment centers will necessarily reduce reliance on the automobile and reduce commute times, both of which will reduce the use of fuel, The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 13. Goal 14, Urbanization r —aft—: 'rhe ,.ount., ti-,.- .��.r l;.rl mith (;nal 1d rhrmiah tha arinntinn of the Sunriver Unincorporated rIIY 411YV. r Ic �uwny rra� �.vnrl..�... ..........,... .« -... ..._o.. _..- _. Community Zone under OAR 660-022-0030. As required by this administrative rule, changes in plan designations must comply with the post acknowledgement provisions of ORS 197.610 through 197.625. Findings below demonstrate compliance with the applicable provisions of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 14. Goals 15 through 19 FINDING: Goals 15 through 19 do not apply to this application. Oregon Administrative Rules; OAR Chapter 660, Division 22 The Sunriver Business Park is located within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community ("UUC), as defined by OAR 660-022-010(8). The county's designation of the Sunriver area as a UUC in 1997, together with the adoption of the county's unincorporated community zoning standards (DCC 18.108), o demonstrated compliance with the Division 22 rules. Upon adoption and acknowledgement of DCC Q 18.108, the county's obligations under Division 22 are limited to complying with the Division 22 planning w and zoning standards under OAR 660-022-0030. These standards expressly permit the county to amend the applicable UUC zoning standards under ORS 197.610 through 197.625. The UCC rules also permit the '- county to authorize residential uses consistent with the UUC regulations. The following provisions apply to the present text amendment: '- OAR 660-022-0030(2) County plans and land use regulations may authorize any residential use and density in unincorporated communities, subject to the requirements of this division. d PAGE (00901495;1) Packet Pg. 9 4.1.a FINDING: Employee housing is arguably a "residential use." Consequently, the county may allow employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park provided it meets other requirements of Division 22. OAR 660-022-0030(6) County plans and land use regulations shall ensure that new or expanded uses authorized within unincorporated communities do not adversely affect agricultural or forestry uses. FINDING: Employee housing would be classified as a "new or expanded use" within the Sunriver Business Park District. The Sunriver Business Park is located west of the BNSF mainline and further west from US Forest Service land to the east. Forestry uses on nearby Goal 4 lands are limited to recreational uses. No forestry operations are currently active in the area, nor are any planned for the immediate future. The addition of employee housing on with the Sunriver Business Park District will have no greater impact on adjacent or nearby forestry uses as would any of the existing permitted or conditional uses in the Sunriver Business Park District. The underlying zoning already permits a wide range of residential, commercial, office, retail, entertainment and light industrial uses. There is no evidence that employee housing will have any external impacts which would extend beyond the BNSF mainline onto US Forest Service lands. OAR 660-022-0030(7) County plans and land use regulations shall allow only those uses which are consistent with the identified function, capacity and level of service of transportation facilities serving the community, pursuant to OAR 660-012-0060(1)(a) through (c). FINDING: The findings immediately below under the "Transportation Planning Rule Compliance" section demonstrate consistency with this requirement. Tramportation Planning Rule Compliance; OAR 660-012-0060 When electing to adopt a post -acknowledgement plan amendment ("PAPA"), local governments are required under OAR 660-012-0060 to determine whether the PAPA will "significantly affect" any planned or existing transportation facilities. In very general terms, the significant affect" determination requires a local government to analyze the "reasonable worst -case scenario of transportation impacts under current zoning to the "reasonable worst -case scenario" of transportation impacts based on the new zone or new use allowed in a zone. In the present case, the county must determine whether the addition of employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park will result in additional transportation impacts over and above those currently anticipated based on existing uses. If employee housing will have additional trips associated with it over and above other existing uses, then the county must determine whether those additional trips will "significantly affect" a existing or planned transportation facility. Attached as Exhibit B is the applicant's transportation analysis, prepared by Transight Consulting (the "TIA"). The TIA examined all of the uses currently permitted in the Business Park zoning district and identified a reasonable development pattern assuming a variety of allowed uses. It should be noted that the TIA is conservative in that it could have identified the highest trip generating use and assumed that such use could be distributed throughout the zone. The TIA, however, assumed a "reasonable" worst case scenario and assumed a variety of development and a variety of trip generating uses within the zone. Based on this analysis, the TIA concludes that a reasonable development pattern could generate a total of 373.2 Peak PM trips, or 17 Peak PM trips per acre. The TIA then measured a reasonable development based on approximately 30 units of a combination of student housing and multi -family PAGE {00901495,1.} Packet Pg. 10 4.1.a housing per acre within the Sunriver Business Park. These two uses were used because there is no ITE rate for employee housing, especially employee housing located within the resort community it is intended to serve. The results demonstrate that employee housing will generate between 8.4 and 13.2 Peak PM trips per acre. This results in fewer trips generated on a per acre basis than what is currently allowed within the Sunriver Business Park. In addition to this quantitative analysis, Sunriver Resort will utilize both an employee shuttle service during the peak summer season and provide bicycles to its employees, further reducing the trip generation potential. According to Sunriver Resort management and human resources, very few employees come to Central Oregon with vehicles and rely on bicycle and shuttle transportation to get to and from work. Moreover, services are available to employees within the Sunriver Business Park, and the Sunriver town center is approximately %2 mile from the Sunriver Business Park. Based on the TIA, together with the transportation demand measures provided by the Resort, the proposed text amendment will not "significantly affect" any transportation facility within the meaning set forth under OAR 660-012-0060. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies The applicant believes that the following goals and policies are the only goals and polices applicable to this application: Comprehensive Plan Designation/Purpose Business Park District. The Sunriver Business Park lies at the southern end of the community boundary and is physically separated from the remainder of the community by Spring River Road. This plan designation was originally created to accommodate light industrial development to support the employment needs of the community and surrounding area. Since the inception of zoning regulations for this area, development has been primarily commercial in nature rather than industrial. T ne toning ordinance was modified in 1997 to reflect the existing businesses and the trend for commercial development while still allowing for industrial uses to develop. FINDING: As the above description indicates, development within the business park has shifted from light industrial uses to more commercial uses. The 1997 amendments which recognized existing uses and the trend towards commercial development acknowledged this trend. The addition of employee housing will compliment the business park by providing additional customers to the retail and commercial uses, as well as by providing housing options in close proximity to employment centers. Unlike Black Butte Ranch, which has areas specifically designated for employee housing (see, e.g., Policy 4.8.10, Policy 4.8,14, and Policy 4.8,15) the Sunriver UUC has no such designation. Complicating matters is the fact that most of Sunriver is already built -out, meaning that there is little, if any, vacant land available for employee housing in the greater Sunriver community. Policy 4.5.1 Land use regulations shall conform to the requirements of OAR 660 Division 22 or any successor. FINDING: The findings above demonstrate compliance with OAR 660, Division 22. Policy 4.5.2 County comprehensive plan policies and land use regulations shall ensure that new uses authorized within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community do not adversely affect forest uses in the surrounding Forest Use Zones. FINDING: The findings above demonstrate compliance with this standard. PAGE {00901495;1 i Packet Pg. 11 4.1.a Policy 4.5.10 Multiple -family residences and residential units in commercial buildings shall be permitted in the commercial area for the purpose of providing housing which is adjacent to places of employment. Single-family residences shall not be permitted in commercial areas. FINDING: Although not directly on point because the employee housing will not be maintained within " commercial buildings" the intent of this policy is to provide housing near places of employment. As described in this application, there is a critical shortage of affordable housing for nearby employees. The present text amendment will partially alleviate this critical shortage. Policy 4.5.16 A variety of commercial uses which support the needs of the community and surrounding rural area, and not uses solely intended to attract resort visitors, should be encouraged. FINDING: While not directly on point, the proposed text amendment will allow employee housing to meet the needs of employees who otherwise are forced to commute from La Pine and other areas outside the Sunriver area. These employees will be able to utilize commercial uses both within the Sunriver Business Park as well as the larger Sunriver community. Policy 4.5.17 Allow small-scale, low -impact commercial uses in conformance with the requirements of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22. Larger more intense commercial uses shall be permitted if they are intended to serve the community, the surrounding rural area and the travel needs of people passing through the area. FINDING: Again, while not directly on point, this policy directs the county to permit only small-scale uses intended to serve the community. Here, the employee housing is proposed to meet the direct needs of employees working in the immediate vicinity of the business park. industrial 6 oul d h ll d in 1000rMnnrc ;.tith the Policy 4.5.1>3 Small-scale, low -impact irwu�u ia� iiScs S�wulu uc^ anvrreu requirements of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22. FINDING: Again, while not on point, this policy stresses the need to permit only small scale uses in the business park. Policy 4.5.29 New uses or expansion of existing uses within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community which require land use approval shall be approved only upon confirmation from the Sunriver Utility Company that water and sewer service for such uses can be provided. FINDING: A wide range of commercial uses are already permitted in the Sunriver Business Park and utilize water and sewer services from the sewer and water companies. As a requirement of any site plan review application for employee housing, the applicant will be required to obtain "will serve" letters. Conclusion The Sunriver area faces a critical shortage of affordable, employee housing. This shortage seriously affects the ability of area employers to attract and retain employees, especially seasonal employees. While the present text amendment cannot solve the critical shortage, by providing employee housing options at the Sunriver Business Park, the applicant will be able to at least address this shortage for a r percentage of its seasonal employees and those otherwise employed in the immediate vicinity. m E m �. Y ct PAGE {00901495;1) Packet Pg_12 ] 4.1.a EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 18.108.110. Business Park - BP District. A. Uses Permitted Outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright: 1. Residential uses existing as of March 31, 1997. 2. Administrative, educational and other related facilities in conjunction with a use permitted outright. 3. Library. 4. Recreational path. 5. Post office. 6. Church in building or buildings not exceeding 5,000 square feet of floor area. 7. Child care facilities, nurseries, and/or preschools. 8. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: Retail/rental store, office and service establishment, including but not limited to the following: a. Automobile, motorcycle, boat, recreational vehicle, trailer or truck sales, rental, repair or maintenance business, including tire stores and parts stores. b. Agricultural equipment and supplies. c. Car wash. d. Contractor's office, including but not limited to, building, electrical, plumbing, heating and air conditioning, painter, etc.. e. Construction equipment sales, rental and/or service. f. Exterminator services. g. Golf cart sales and service. h. Lumber yard, home improvement or building materials store. i. Housekeeping and janitorial service. j. Dry cleaner and/or self-service laundry facility. k. Marine/boat sales and service. I. Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge including entertainment. p. Marijuana processing cannabinoid concentrates and cannabinoid products, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. q. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items or products at the same location. {00901619;1) Packet Pg. 13 4.1.a EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 9. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Scientific research or experimental development of materials, methods or products, including engineering and laboratory research. b. Light manufacturing, assembly, fabricating or packaging of products from previously prepared materials, including but not limited to cloth, paper, leather, precious or semi- precious metals or stones, etc. c. Manufacture of food products, pharmaceuticals and the like, but not including the production of fish or meat products, or the rendering of fats and oils. d. Warehouse and distribution uses in a building or buildings each less than 10,000 square feet of floor area. e. Eniplg_xee housing structures. B. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following conditional uses may be permitted subject to DCC 18.128 and a conditional use permit: 1. Public buildings and public utility structures and yards, including railroad yards. 2. A dwelling unit for a caretaker or watchman working on a developed property. 3. Law enforcement detention facility. 4. Parking lot. 5. Radio and television broadcast facilities. 6. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Bowling alley. b. Theater. c. Veterinary clinic and/or kennel. d. Marijuana processing including cannabinoid extracts, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330, e. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. 7. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Warehouses and distribution uses in a building or buildings exceeding 10,000 square CO feet of floor area. r c cu b. Distillery and beer/ale brewing facility, including wholesale sales thereof. E s c. Self/mini storage. Q {00901619;1} Packet Pg. 14 4.1.a EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT d. Trucking company dispatch/terminal. e. Solid waste/garbage operator, not including solid waste disposal or other forms of solid waste storage or transfer station. C. Use Limits. The following limitations and standards shall apply to uses listed in DCC 18.108.110(A) or (B): 1. A use expected to generate more than 30 truck -trailer or other heavy equipment trips per day to and from the subject property shall not be permitted to locate on a lot adjacent to or across the street from a lot in a residential district. 2. Storage, loading and parking areas shall be screened from residential zones. 3. No use requiring air contaminant discharge permits shall be approved by the Planning Director or Hearings Body prior to review by the applicable state or federal permit reviewing authority, nor shall such uses be permitted adjacent to or across the street from a residential lot. D. Special Requirements for Large Scale Uses. Any of the uses listed in DCC 18.108.110(A)(6) or (B)(6) may be allowed in a building or buildings each exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space if the Planning Director or Hearings Body finds: 1. That the intended customers for the proposed use will come from the community and surrounding rural area, or the use will meet the needs of the people passing through the area. ,For isle purposes of Drr 1Q im j in rho airrminriina rural area shall he that area identified as all property within five miles of the boundary of the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community; 2. The use will primarily employ a work force from the community and surrounding rural area; and 3, That it is not practical to locate the use in a building or buildings under 8,000 square feet of floor space. E. Height Regulations. No building or structure shall be hereafter erected, enlarged or structurally altered to exceed 45 feet in height. F. Lot Requirements. The following lot requirements shall be observed: 1. Lot Area. No requirements. 2. Lot Width. No requirements. 3. Lot Depth. Each lot shall have a minimum depth of 100 feet. 4. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet. r r 5. Side Yard. No side yard required, except when adjoining a lot in an RS or RM District and then the required side yard shall be 50 feet. No side yards are required on the side of a building E adjoining a railroad right of way. Q (00901619;1) Packet Pg. 15 EXHIBIT AMENDED TEXT 6. Rear Yard. Norear yard required, except when adjoining ulot inanRSorRMDistrict and then the rear yard shall beSOfeet, Norear yard isrequired onthe side ofabuilding adjoining a railroad right ufway. 7. Lot Coverage, The maximum lot coverage bybuildings and structures shall beSOpercent of the total lot area. IJ hall ean wient. multi -family or other similar gEqq2,Le���qse is to serve the N usinp, needs of Ernolovees. "Resort Seasons" shall Dean the_p d u1jR&th e izc u1g1j1i_qnths together with such person's spouse and minor _02c Resort Seasons an Employee Ho it mav be during the irnmeclia fille to HousiDF'U its 111ay b to -month basis on a first come, fi �erve(Lbaf is at tb,� qv Packet Pg. 16 4.1.a Exhibit B "SimTRANSIGHT 00NSULTING.LLC Date: To: From: Project Reference No.: Project Name: September 4, 2019 Steve Hultberg Joe Bessman, PE 1329 Sunriver Resort Employee Housing -i'o �,A�r76 a PE k ORKM C% ✓G�• 14 W. 6 The purpose of this memorandum is to highlight the potential TPR compliance issues raised with approval of a text amendment for the Sunriver Business Park to add employee housing as an allowable use. This would provide a means of supporting Sunriver employees within the resort property, reducing longer - distance trips from the surrounding communities and supporting employees that are experiencing a regional housing shortage. PROPOSED TEXT MODIFICATION As proposed, the Sunriver Business Park zoning would be amended to include Employee housing structures as an outright allowable use within buildings limited to 20,000 square -feet of floor space. The text amendment would include definition of employee housing, which is summarized as follows: • Use of employee housing would be open to persons io-yearold or IJIU=r wvl n,ig In .hc „vap......1, outdoor recreation, or tourism industry at least 25 hours per week • Place of employment is within 20 air miles (to allow this space to include Mt. Bachelor during the winter season) • Would allow spouse/minor children to reside on -site • Employee housing would be required to supply at least one parking stall for every six beds, and at least one bicycle parking space for every two beds. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE The requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule are contained within Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-12 (Transportation Planning). This Division, prepared by the Department of Land Conservation and Development, specifies the required elements for coordinated transportation and land use planning. Within this division are the requirements forthe preparation of transportation system plans, coordination with State and regional plans and policies, and measures to prevent urbanization or sprawl onto rural lands. Section -0060 (Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments) provides the specific transportation requirements for a zone change and plan amendment, ensuring that these changes remain consistent with the goals and requirements of the adopted Transportation System Plan. To test compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule the first step is to determine whether a r significant effect occurs. The administrative rule defines a plan or land use regulation amendment as significantly affecting a transportation facility if it: Changes the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; Q 1329REP Packet Pg. 17 4.1.a Simriver Business Park F01[40yee liousirul Exhibit B • Changes the standards implementing a functional classification system; • Results in types of travel that are inconsistent with the functional classification of a facility, or degrades the performance standards identified within the adopted Transportation System Plan. To test whether a significant effect occurs, a trip generation review was conducted of the allowed uses within the Sunriver Business Park zoning and what could occur with the text amendment. SUNRIVER BUSINESS PARK AREA The Sunriver Business Park zoning designation is only located on the lands shown in Figure 1, encompassing approximately 70 acres west of the BNSF railroad mainline and south of S Century Drive. The overall area is built -out across nearly 70 percent of the land area, leaving approximately 21 acres within eight separate tax lots that are fully or partially developable. Figure 1. Sunriver Business Park Zoning Boundary. Source: Deschutes County DIAL, Page 2 Packet Pg. 18 4.1.a Sunriver Business Pork Employee Housing Exhibit B Existing Outright Allowed Uses Deschutes County Code 18.108.110 outlines the allowable uses and density requirements within this zoning designation. The current zoning allows the following uses outright: • Library • Post Office • Church • Child care facilities, nurseries, preschools • A building or group of buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet with any combination of a retail, rental store, office, and service establishment, including but not limited to the following uses: o Car wash o Automotive sales, rental, and repair o Dry cleaning o Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge • A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: o Research space o Light manufacturing, production, or processing o Food product manufacturing o Warehousing and distribution uses with less than 10,000 square -feet of floor area. The Deschutes County Transportation System Plan is premised on weekday p.m. peak hour trips. This metric is used in the classification of roadway facilities and in the assessment of intersection and roadway improvement needs. Review of the trip generation potential of these uses is presented in Table 1. This table also identifies a reasonable maximum size of the use within this area, as 22 acres of developable land could not reasonably be built -out with automated car washes or post offices. With the remaining developable lands generally located on the east side of the business park farther from Century Drive these lands are more likely to be developed with lower intensity uses than the vehicle -oriented convenience commercial near the S Century Drive traffic signal. r Page 3 Packet Pg. 19 4.1.a Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Exhibit B -r IJ I c.... ry of ITF Trin Apneratinn Rates .ay.c a...+a....... a.. Y ITE Land Use and ITE Reasonable FAR and Land Use Code Maximum Acreage Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Rate 3.81 PM Trips/KSF Retail Shopping Center 0.25 FAR 41.49 PM Trips/Acre ITE 820 No Size Limit 27.38 Net New PM Trips/Acre General Office 0.25 FAR 1.15 PM Trips/KSF Office ITE 710 No Size Limit -- 12.52 PM Trips/Acre Library 0.25 8.16 PM Trips/KSF Library ITE 590 2.5 Acres 88.86 PM Trips/Acre US Post Office s 0.25 FAR 11.21 PM Trips/KSF Post Office ITE 732 2.5 Acres 122.07 PM Trips/Acre Day Care Center u 0.25 FAR 11.12 PM Trips/KSF Child Care Center ITE 565 2.5 Acres 121.09 PM Trips/Acre High -Turnover 0.25 FAR 9.77 PM Trips/KSF Restaurant (Sit -Down) Restaurant 5.0 Acres 106.39 PM Trips/Acre ITE 932 60.64 Net New PM Trips/Acre Auto Parts Sales 0.25 FAR 4.91 PM Trips/KSF Auto Parts Sales ITE 843 2.5 Acres 53.47 PM Trips/Acre 14.20 PM Trips/KSF Automated Car Wash 0.1 FAR 61.85 PM Trips/Acre Car Wash ITE 948 1.0 Acre Est. 30.93 Net New PM Trips/Acre Research Research and Development Center 0,25 FAR No Size Limit 0.49 PM Trips/KSF 5.33 PM Trips/Acre ITE 760 Manufacturing 0.20 FAR 0.67 PM Trips/KSF Manufacturing ITE 140 No Size Limit 5.84 PM Trips/Acre From this table, the 22 acres could be developed with the following uses that would be considered a "reasonable development scenario" for trip generation purposes: • 5 Acres of commercial uses (139.9 PM Trips) • 2.5 Acres of restaurant space (151.6 PM Trips) * 14.5 Acres of Light Industrial/Manufacturing space (84.7 PM Trips) This overall scenario could generate 373.2 PM Trips, or 17.0 PM Trips per Acre. Proposed Employee Housing Table 1 also provides a comparison to a three-story multifamily residential product within this area. A typical urban three-story apartment structure can reasonably be built with a density of 20 to 25 units per acre. This is based on balancing the building footprint, parking area, setbacks, and landscape requirements. With the text amendment allowing lower parking requirements, higher site densities than this typical range could be achieved. For analysis purposes 30 units per acre was assumed, which results in approximately 13.2 driveway trips per acre. This trip rate assumes suburban trip generation Page 4 CPacket Pg. 20 4.1.a Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Exhibit B characteristics and does not account for the modal splits or user type that this housing is intended to accommodate, A better trip generation surrogate for this use with the limiting employee housing provisions would be classification of the housing with ITE's Land Use 225: Off -Campus Student Apartment. The modal split and age range within a college campus is likely much more similar to Sunriver Resort employees (particularly seasonal employees) than typical suburban apartments. The land use description is provided below: An off -campus student apartment is part of an apartment complex that serves college or university students. These properties are generally located nearby and within walking distance of a college campus. Most apartments include student -related amenities such as free high-speed Internet, study lounges, fitness centers, sports courts, and swimming pools. Apartments included in this land use can be furnished or unfurnished and range in size from studio apartments to apartments with four bedrooms. Units typically have washer and dryers in each unit. Most facilities also include security and 24-hour emergency maintenance. .._e�9 ITC r %rGnnnr.*inn QAtac 1aorec.aurnn � aryy r 1 V ..�..�......,.. . ITE Land Use and ITE Reasonable FAR and Land Use Code Maximum Acreage Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Rate Multifamily Housing 30 Units/Acre 0.44 PM Trips/Unit Trips/Acre Employee (Mid -Rise) 13.2 PM Housing _ Off -Campus Student 0.28 PM Trips/Unit Apartment (ITE 225) 30 Units/Acre 8.4 PM Trips/Acre ..IJ generate O A F.. 1 Z 1 +lint Table 2 shows that the siting of employee housing within Sunriver Resort could generate o.-+ o 1 _ . t. per acre. If there were no use restrictions placed on the housing limiting the use to employees the higher range could be anticipated, and with effective management of users to limit the housing to the Sunriver employee the lower range could reasonably be obtained. This shows the potential to reduce the trip rate of employees by about 40 percent. Regardless of which land use classification is applied, the trip rate is lower than other allowed uses within the Sunriver Business Park based on a reasonable development scenario. Additional Trip Characteristics The trip rates shown in Table 1 and Table 2 provide an assessment of the "driveway" impacts without regard to trip length. Residential, retail, and employment trips vary in length, with retail trips generally shorter length (many of these would even be pass -by or diverted trips). Work trips are generally recurrent on a daily weekday basis and often impact the critical morning and evening peak periods, For example, trips to the Shell Station within the business park are typically short length trips that are already on S Century Drive or arriving from areas in Sunriver. Without this gas station travelers would have to drive farther for fuel. Conversely, a significant portion of new trips to a manufacturing facility would likely travel from Bend or La Pine. Employee housing serving Sunriver uses would be similar to a gas station; while there would be an impact of those trips on the system, the impact would be limited and could help avoid the longer -distance daily travel on the highway system. Page 5 Packet Pg. 21 ..IJ generate O A F.. 1 Z 1 +lint Table 2 shows that the siting of employee housing within Sunriver Resort could generate o.-+ o 1 _ . t. per acre. If there were no use restrictions placed on the housing limiting the use to employees the higher range could be anticipated, and with effective management of users to limit the housing to the Sunriver employee the lower range could reasonably be obtained. This shows the potential to reduce the trip rate of employees by about 40 percent. Regardless of which land use classification is applied, the trip rate is lower than other allowed uses within the Sunriver Business Park based on a reasonable development scenario. Additional Trip Characteristics The trip rates shown in Table 1 and Table 2 provide an assessment of the "driveway" impacts without regard to trip length. Residential, retail, and employment trips vary in length, with retail trips generally shorter length (many of these would even be pass -by or diverted trips). Work trips are generally recurrent on a daily weekday basis and often impact the critical morning and evening peak periods, For example, trips to the Shell Station within the business park are typically short length trips that are already on S Century Drive or arriving from areas in Sunriver. Without this gas station travelers would have to drive farther for fuel. Conversely, a significant portion of new trips to a manufacturing facility would likely travel from Bend or La Pine. Employee housing serving Sunriver uses would be similar to a gas station; while there would be an impact of those trips on the system, the impact would be limited and could help avoid the longer -distance daily travel on the highway system. Page 5 Packet Pg. 21 4.1.a Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Exhibit B Effectively, this employee housing is serving as a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measure. This on -site supply of employee housing, coupled with provision of employee bicycles and shuttle service, will help to reduce current travel demands on US 97 to Sunriver Resort. As part of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program requirement placed on a new destination resort within the Powell Butte area a requirement is included within the ODOT agreement for the resort to consider employee housing, as this has been an identified need at other area destination resorts, While there are localized trip impacts with this type of use there is also a regional benefit on the more critical regional transportation routes. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report summarizes the impacts of the proposed text amendment to include Employee Housing within the Sunriver Business Park Zoning District (SUBP). Comparison of trip rates between the existing allowed uses and the addition of employee housing would not increase the trip generation potential of the area and so would not result in a significant effect for Transportation Planning Rule purposes. This analysis does not include an assessment of the adequacy of the current system or a specific development proposal; separate review would be required as part of a future land use application. Please let me know if you have any questions on these materials at (503) 997-4473 or via email at jotransihtconsulting.,com. V_ Page 6 Packet Pg. 22 4.1.b ��E$ �-o COMMUNITY i_% I , V k C„ O P M E N' MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Planning Commission FROM: Tanya Saltzman, Associate Planner DATE: October 3, 2019 SUBJECT: Work Session: Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Text Amendment The Planning Commission will conduct a work session on October 10, 2019 in preparation for a public hearing on November 14, 2019 to consider text amendments to Chapter 18.108, Sunriver Business Park District (SUBP), File No. 247-19-000700-TA. The applicant, Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership, proposes amendments that would allow employee housing as an outright permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park zoning district. The proposed amendments and applicant findings are attached to this memorandum. I. BACKGROUND The purpose of the proposed amendments is to allow employee housing for those who work in the neighboring resorts, including Sunriver Resort, Caldera Springs, and Crosswater as well as the larger Sunriver community and Mt. Bachelor. According to the applicant's burden of proof, these communities employ upwards of 1,000 peak summer employees, and half of that in the off-season; lack of housing for employees has consistently been identified as a problem, both for the employees themselves as well as for their employers who are trying to attract and retain a workforce. The applicant states that the greater Sunriver community is largely built out with respect to potential development of employee housing, but six lots within the SUBP district are undeveloped, including a 3.25-acre parcel owned by the applicant. The applicant also notes that Black Butte Ranch, a resort community in northern Deschutes County, has areas designated specifically for employee housing in the Comprehensive Plan, whereas Sunriver does not. Based on this need for employee housing, the available land within the zoning district, and the wide range of uses permitted in the Sunriver Business Park district, the applicant has submitted a burden of proof stating that the text amendment is in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals, Packet Pg. 23 4.1.b applicable Oregon Administrative Rules, applicable policies of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and the county's Transportation System Plan. The proposed text amendments add employee housing structures to the outright permitted uses in the Sunriver Business Park (SUBP) zone. The amendments provide definitions for "employee," "employee housing unit," "employee housing structure," and "resort seasons," and provide requirements for duration/timing of employment required to qualify for such housing. As noted above, the applicant owns a 3.25-acre vacant lot within the Sunriver Business Park. While that property is not the subject of this application, the proposed text amendments would allow for the construction of employee housing on that lot and others in the Business Park zoning district subject to Deschutes County Code (DCC) Chapter 124, Site Plan Review' If the text amendments are approved, the applicant intends to construct employee housing on that lot to serve at least 200 employees. II. NEXT STEPS The Planning Commission will hold the initial public hearing for the text amendments on November 14, 2019. Attachments 1. Proposed Amendments and Applicant Findings 2. Sunriver Business Park zoning map 1 https://weblink.deschutes.org/public/0/doc/89195/Pagel.aspx Packet Pg. 24 4.1.c Sunriver Business Park Zoning Packet Pg. 25 1 r I 00, L w r re IMA � \ I � w CO / e � ce Qo 3. 0 . 3. 0 r 3.. +Ir J e 1, ro co QL 1 CJ Ln E 0 D.V) Lu 3: ct� < -0 c, W r- V 4-J A ) 6/ t ) (3) 0 E o .B ok Iq w ro 0 z o e To to 0 V) 00 E 6 V Lr) Minutes DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DESCHUTES SERVICES CENTER 1300 NW WALL STREET, BEND, OREGON, 97703 OCTOBER 10, 2019 - 5:30 P.M. I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chair Crawford. Board members present: Steve Swisher, Hugh Palcic, Jim Beeger, and Jessica Kieras. Staff present: Nick Lelack - Community Development Director, Peter Gutowsky - Planning Manager, Adam Smith - Assistant Legal Counsel, Nicole Mardell - Associate Planner, Tanya Saltzman - Associate Planner, and Ashley Williams - Administrative Assistant. 11. Approval of August 22, 2019 Minutes Commissioner Beeger moved to approve the minutes as presented. Commissioner Palcic seconded. All present members were in favor. III. Public Comments There were no public comments. IV. Sunriver Business Park / Employee Housing Text Amendments / Work Session Tanya Saltzman, Associate Planner, provided the application information for this applicant initiated text amendment. She said that the applicant, Sunriver Resort, would like to amend the uses in the Sunriver Business Park zone to allow for employee housing. She provided maps and said that this housing would be utilized by both the resort and Mt. Bachelor. She said that the Comprehensive Plan does not address this issue. She said that the applicant is currently addressing transportation. Commissioner Beeger asked if the existing businesses would be impacted adversely due to the residential development within a business park. It was recommended that businesses offer letters of support if that is their wish. Chair Crawford asked if types of residences had been established yet. Ms. Saltzman said that it had not. V. RLUIPA (Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act) Amendments / Deliberations 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 Q� (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes.org @ www.deschutes.org/cd Nicole Mardell, Associate Planner, gave a brief overview of the amendments. She said that the main comments raised were concerns with removing the prohibition of churches in the Wildlife Area Combining Zone. She went over the specific comments provided by Central Oregon LandWatch, including definition of church and substantial burden. She introduced Adam Smith, Assistant Legal Counsel and said that he would be providing a staff report. Commissioner Swisher directed a question to Mr. Smith about prohibiting all uses in the Wildlife Combining Zone. Mr. Smith discussed the substantial burden and equal terms tests which are both components of RLUIPA. He said that prohibiting all uses would not satisfy either of those tests. He further discussed the Sheperdsfield application and the Board of County Commissioner's interpretation of code that resulted in that decision. Commissioner Palcic asked about the Goal 3 (Agriculture) and Goal 5 (Natural Resources) arguments presented by Central Oregon LandWatch (COLW). Mr. Smith said COLW has presented these arguments to LUBA in prior cases and that LUBA was not persuaded by those arguments. There was discussion about the need to do something with the County's code to reduce liability versus the slippery slope these amendments could create. The Commissioners had questions about conditioning, equal treatment, options moving forward, substantial burden, and establishment clause. The commissioners expressed concerns with the amendments opening the door to development in the precious wildlife habitat. Commissioner Beeger said that he feels that there are not many options available to the ('nmmiccinn at this nnint Mc MarriPll cairi that she neeris direction on whether or not to adopt the redline text that has been presented this evening or to keep the amendments as presented prior. There was consensus that this was a difficult decision to make. Some of the options that the commission weighed were likelihood of appeal, past arguments presented by constituents, concerns in balancing religious freedoms and wildlife habitat. Mr. Smith cautioned the Commission that the Court of Appeals and LUBA have both concluded that our code is not compliant and that doing nothing leaves the County in a liable position. Director Lelack said that if the Commission denies the amendments they should consider presenting an avenue to move forward to the Board of County Commissioners. Commissioner Beeger moved to postpone deliberations to November 14tn Commissioner Palcic seconded. Commissioner Beeger said that he has learned a lot through this process. He described some of the arguments presented and his interpretation of those arguments. There was discussion about schedules and that Mr. Smith could not attend the November 14th meeting. Some commissioners wanted to review both Sheperdsfield cases. There was discussion about what tightening up the language presented would look like in terms of process. Fears of mega churches and the ripple effects of allowing developments were expressed. October 10, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 of 4 There was discussion about if these developments could be limited through Conditions of Approval and if those conditions could be viewed as a violating substantial burden since all conditions must be applicable to other assemblies in the Wildlife Area Combing Zone. There was discussion about removing all assemblies in the zone, and if that were logical. Mr. Smith said that it is more reasonable to limit uses rather than prohibit all uses. There was further discussion about substantially modifying the language proposed. Mr. Gutowsky said that staff was not willing to entertain a substantial change to the language at this point. Respectfully, the staff was tasked with applying the findings in the LUBA and COA decisions and would be uncomfortable straying from those objectives. He said that all land use is case by case, and is never a one size fits all approach. The process that Sheperdsfield went through was not desirable, and modifying the language proposed would promote more of the same when evaluating religious institution decisions. Chair Crawford called for a vote: Commissioner Beeger in favor. All others opposed. Commissioner Palcic moved to approve the amendments with redline submissions. Commissioner Swisher seconded. Commissioner Swisher said that regardless of how this vote goes the message sent to the Board of County Commissioners will be a clear one. Commissioner Kieras recommended considering a broader plan for Goal 5. No members were in favor of the motion. Chair abstained. Five against. The motion fails. No other motion is presented. VI. Flood Plain Test amendments - Model Flood Plain Code / Deliberation Nicole Mardell, Associate Planner, said that the Commission began deliberations on this topic on September 26t". She said that the language that the Commissioner's reviewed had been added per their request. There was clarification about the model flood and housekeeping amendments. Commissioner Swisher noted that of all the Flood Plain amendments this was the most simple. Commissioner Swisher moved to accept the amendments as presented. Commissioner Palcic seconded. All present members were in favor. VII. Flood Plain Text amendments - Split Zone Amendment / Deliberation Nicole Mardell, Associate Planner, said that this amendment is affected by the quasi-judicial decision at Lower Bridge. Staff is recommending that we table these until a decision has been made on the quasi-judicial matter. October 10, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 4 Commissioner Palcic moved that we postpone this until the quasi-judicial matter has been resolved. Commissioner Swisher seconded. All members were in favor. VIII. Planning Commission & Staff Comments Director Lelack provided an update on the Planning Commissioners Retreat next week. He said that the schedule will begin at 1:00 at a Solar Farm and then go to the airport. He is currently working with some Hemp Producers to see if the Commission could get a tour of a Hemp Farm. He recommended meeting at the CDD office to carpool at 12:30. Next Planning Commission meeting will be on November 14, 2019 There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7:23. Respectfully submitted, Ashley Williams Administrative Assistant All materials including (but not limited to) video, presentations, written material and submittals are subject to the Comity "eten tiOn Policy; All items are posted and available for public viewing on the Deschutes County Meeting Portal. For further detail on this and other meetings please follow link below. https://deschutescountyor.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx October 10, 2019 Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 of 4 Deschutes County 1 010-19 Page 1 of 2 !A Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development PAPA Online Submittal Tanya Saltzma Home /PAPA Online Deschutes County (Read Only) Reports (/PAPA_Online/Jurisdictions/Jurisdiction/Get/62) -> A/mendment 010-19 (https://db.lCd.s ate.or.us papa_on ine_reports) Report A Problem subject=PAPA PR Report a Problem) Revise 010-19 Status: Proposed Change Submitted by Jurisdiction Revision Type: Jurisdiction Submissior Local File #: 247-19-000700-TA Date of 1st Hearing: 111/14/2019 © (42 Days difference Dale of Final Hearing F _ © [----Days difference Type: ❑ Comprehensive Plan Map Change ❑ Zoning Map Change ❑ Comprehensive Plan Map & Zoning Map Change ❑ Comprehensive Plan Text Change © Land Use Regulation Change ❑ UGB using Simplified Method (div 38) ❑ UGB amendment by city with population less than 2,500 within UGB (div24) ❑ UGB amendment of 50 acres or less by a city with population 2,500 or more within UGB (div 24) ❑ UGB auierw'ment adding more than 50 acres by city 'with population 2,500 or more .fitly,, UGB (div 24) ❑ UGB amendment that adds more than 100 acres by Metro (div 24) ❑ Urban Reserve designation by Metro or a city with population 2,500 or more within UGB ❑ Urban Reserve amendment to add over 50 acres by a city with population 2,500 or more within UGB ❑ Urban Reserve designation or amendment by a city with population less than 2,500 within UGB ❑ Urban Reserve amendment by Metro ❑ Urban Reserve Other ❑ Other l ❑ Periodic Review Task Summary The proposed text amendments to Deschutes County Code (DCC), Section 18.108.110, would allow employee housing as a permitted use in the Sunriver Business Park (SUBP) zoning district. An exception to a statewide planning goal is proposed: ❑ Total Acres: Locations (if there's a large number of tax lots associated with this amendment, please contact DLCD for assistance. plan. a mendmentsastate. or. us (mailto�plan amendments0state.or us?subject=PAPA % 20on-line % 201ocation % 20entry % 20assistancel) Type Tax Lot From To Acres Addhions and changes to tax lots won't be permanently saved until you click the "Save" button at the bottom of this page. Contacts Contacts Tanya Saltzman Associate Planner (Local) Documents Upload supporting documentation. Administrative rule requires that you include all of the following materials that may apply: • The text of the amendment (e.g., plan or code text changes, exception findings, justification for change) Any staff report on the proposed change or information that describes when the staff report will be available and how a copy may be obtained https://db.lcd.state.or.us/PAPA_Online/Amendments/ExternalForm/Get/26761 10/3/2019 Deschutes County 1 010-19 Page 2 of 2 A map of the affected area showing existing and proposed plan and zone designations A copy of the notice or a draft of the notice regarding a quasi-judicial land use hearing, if applicable Any other information necessary to advise DLCD of the effect of the proposal Uploaded Name User 10/3/2019 Proposal Sunriver Employee Housing 19-700-TA Application 2019-10-03 09-44-21.pdf (/PAPA Online/Document/Get?documentlD=245593) https://db.lcd.state.or.us/PAPA_Online/Amendments/ExternalForm/Get/26761 10/3/2019 Tanya Saltzman From: DLCD Plan Amendments <plan.amendments@state.or.us> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2019 9:49 AM To: Tanya Saltzman Subject: Confirmation of PAPA Online submittal to DLCD [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Deschutes County Your notice of a proposed change to a comprehensive plan or land use regulation has been received by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. Local File #: 247-19-000700-TA DLCD File #: 010-19 Proposal Received: 10/3/2019 First Evidentiary Hearing: 11/14/2019 Submitted by: tsaltzman If you have any questions about this notice, please reply or send an email to plan. amendments(abstate. or.us. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED 1. Complete the application form and provide appropriate original signatures. To ensure timely processing of your application, all materials must be submitted on single -sided, 8.5" x 11" paper. Do not use binders, tabs/dividers, staples or tape. 2. This application shall include one full-sized plan set (to scale) and one plan set reduced to no larger than 11" x 17". Include a plot plan that shows all property lines and existing and proposed structures, parking, landscaping, lighting, etc. 3. Include a copy of the current deed showing the property owners. 4. Attach correct fee. 5. All applicable standards and criteria must be addressed in writing prior to acceptance of the application. Detailed descriptions, maps and other relevant information must be attached to the application. TYPE OF APPLICATION (check one): Administrative Determination (AD)_ Partition (MP) _ Conditional Use (CU) _ Subdivision (TP) _ Declaratory Ruling (DR)_ Temporary Use (TU) _ FEE: $6,129.00 Site Plan (SP) Variance (V) ,_ Setback Exception (SE) _ Other Text Amendment Applicant's Name (print): Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership Phone: 5( 41 } 593-7832 Mailing Address. PO Box 3609 City/State/Zip: , Sunriver, OR 97707 Appliicant's Email Address: srunner@sunriver-resort.com Property Owner/s Name (if different)*: Phone: ( ) Mailing Address: same as above. City/State/Zip: 1. Request: Text amendment to allow employee housing as permitted use in Sunriver UUC--Business Park zone. 2. Property Description: Township 20 s Range. 11 E Section 5 Tax Lot N/A 3. Property Zone(s): Sunriver UUC--BP Zone Property Size (acres or sq. ft.): N/A 4. Lot of Record? (State reason): N/A for text amendment. All lots included in Business Park plat. 5. Property Address: Various located on Venture Lane and Enterprise Drive, Sunriver, Oregon. (over) 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Fiend, Oregon 97703 ( P O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 Q, (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes.org @ www deschutes org/cd Rev 5J18 6. Present Use of Property: Properties within the business park are developed for a wide variety of commercial uses. 7. Existing Structures: Multiple commercial structures are located within the BP zone in the business park. 8. Property will be served by: Sewer Yes 9. Domestic Water Source: Sunriver Water, LLc Onsite Disposal System To the best of my knowledge, the proposal complies with all previous conditions of approval and all other applicable local, state, and federal laws. By signing this application, I acknowledge that Deschutes County planning staff may make a site visit(s) to the address(es) listed on this application in order to evaluate the property(ies) with the Deschutes County Code criteria applicable to the land use request(s) submitted. Please describe any special circumstances regardinga potential site visit: Applicant's Signature: Date:9/12/2019 Property Owner's Signature (if different)*: Date: Agent's Name (if applicable): Steven Hultbeg Phone:( 541) 585-3697 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2007 City/State/Zip: Bend, Oregon 97709 Agent's Email Address: shultberg@radierwhite.com *If this application is not signed by the property owner, a letter authorizing signature by the applicant must be attached. By signing this application, the applicant understands and agrees that Deschutes County may require a deposit for hearings officers' fees prior to the application being deemed complete. If the application is heard by a hearings officer, the applicant will be responsible for the actual costs of the hearings officer. 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P O Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 I, (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes org @ www deschutes org/cd TEXT AMENDMENT APPLICATION NARRATIVE SUNRIVER BUSINESS PARK EMPLOYEE HOUSING Applicant: Sunriver Resort Limited Partnership PO Box 3609 Sunriver, Oregon 97707 Attn: Mr. Steven Runner Property Address: 17601 Center Drive Sunriver, Oregon 97707 Applicant's Attorney: Radler White Parks & Alexander LLP PO Box 2007 Bend, Oregon 97709 Attn: Mr. Steven Hultberg Project Description The applicant proposes to amend Deschutes County Code ("DCC") 18.108.110 to allow employee housing in the Business Park District within the Sunriver Unincorporated Community Zone. The proposed amended text is attached as Exhibit A. The Sunriver area is home to several resorts, including Sunriver Resort, Caldera Springs and Crosswater. These resort communities, as well as the larger Sunriver community, employ upwards of 1,000 peak summer seasonal employees, with about one-half of that number employed in the off-season. Many of these employees come to the Sunriver area for seasonal employment and depart in the shoulder season. Based on significant employee feedback, there is a critical need in the Sunriver area for affordable employee housing. The applicant proposes to amend DCC 18.108.110 to permit employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park. Although not the subject of the present application, the applicant owns a 3.25 acre vacant lot within the Business Park, upon which the applicant proposes to construct employee housing units to serve upwards of 200 employees. The draft text amendment includes provisions restricting use of units to employees engaged in the tourism, recreation or hospitality industries. The amendments are intended to serve Sunriver area employees during the summer months, as well as Mt. Bachelor employees during the winter months. During the high season, employee units would be restricted solely to eligible employees. During the off-season, units would be first made available to eligible employees, and then on a first come basis after employee needs have been met. Site Description The Sunriver Business Park is located south and east of SW Century Drive. The Caldera Springs destination resort is to the south, and the Burlington Northern mainline is to the east. Forest Service lands are to the east of the BNSF mainline. Although not within the Business Park District, the Powder Village Condominium complex is on the southern boundary of the Business Park. Most of the Sunriver Business Park is occupied by a mix of commercial, light industrial and residential uses. Six lots within the Sunriver Business Park are undeveloped, including the 3.25-acre parcel owned by the applicant. To be clear, the proposed text amendment would apply throughout the entire Business Park District. PAGE 1 {00901495;1} Review Criteria Deschutes County lacks specific approval criteria in DCC Titles 18 and 22 for reviewing text amendments to DCC Title 18. That said, under county precedence and state law, legislative and quasi-judicial text amendments generally must be consistent with DCC Title 22, Chapter 22.12, Legislative Procedures, the Statewide Planning Goals, applicable Oregon Administrative Rules, applicable policies of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and the county's Transportation System Plan. This application narrative addressed each of the applicable standards. Proposed Findings Title 22 of the Deschutes County Code, Development Procedures Ordinance 22 12 030. Initiation of Legislative Changes. A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of required fees as well as by the Board of Commissioners or the Planning Commission. FINDING: As a property owner in Deschutes County, the applicant may initiate a legislative change to the DCC. As defined by the DCC "Legislative changes" "generally involve broad public policy decisions that apply to other than an individual property owner. These include, without limitation, amendments to the text of the comprehensive plans, zoning ordinances, or the subdivision or partition ordinance and changes in zoning maps not directed at a small number of property owners." Because the proposed text amendment is an amendment to the text of the county's zoning ordinance, it qualifies as a "legislative change." Under the county's Development Procedures Ordinance, DCC Title 22, the county may elect to process this legislative change through a quasi-judicial procedure. Statewide Planning Goals Goal 1, Citizen Involvement FINDING: The text amendment will include hearings before both the Deschutes County Planning Commission and the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. All meetings will be publicly noticed, and the public may participate both orally and in person. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 1. Goal 2, Land Use Planning FINDING: ORS 197.610 allows local governments to initiate post acknowledgement plan amendments or changes to land use regulations, provided that certain notice standards are met. In very general terms, Goal 2 requires local governments to demonstrate that legislative text changes are consistent with the jurisdiction's acknowledged comprehensive plan and related acknowledged plans (e.g., transportation system plan). The applicant anticipates that the county will provide the required notices for the proposed amendments. The findings below demonstrate that the proposed text amendment is consistent with applicable goals and policies of the county's acknowledged planning documents. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 2. Goal 3, Agricultural Lands FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park. No agricultural lands are affected by the proposed text amendment. Goal 3 does not apply to this application. PAGE (00901495;1) Goal 4, Forest Lands FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park. No Goal 4 forestlands are affected by the proposed text amendment. Although Goal 4 forestland is adjacent to the Sunriver Business Park, the underlying property itself is within the Sunriver Unincorporated Community and not subject to Goal 4 standards. Goal 4 does not apply to this application. Goal 5, Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces FINDING: The text amendment relates only to the Sunriver Business Park. No Goal 5 resources are located within the Sunriver Business Park District. Goal 5 does not apply to this application. Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resource Quality FINDING: No development or land use changes are being proposed that impact air, water, or land resource qualities. Other areas of the County's code deal with protecting air, water, and land remain in full force and effect. To the extent that Goal 6 applies to this application, the provision of employee housing within close proximity to employment areas will necessarily reduce reliance on the automobile for work -related transportation needs. To the extent that Goal 6 is implicated by this application, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 6. Goal 7, Natural Hazards FINDING: The County's Comprehensive Plan identifies the dominant natural hazards as wildfire, winter storms, and flooding. The proposed text amendment merely adds employee housing as a permitted use in the underlying zone. The underlying property will remain subject to the county's existing wildfire plans, floodplain standards and other ordinance standards applicable to natural hazards. To the extent that Goal 7 is implicated by this application, the applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 7. Goal 8, Recreational Needs FINDING: Employee housing allowed by the proposed text amendment is intended to partially address the employee housing needs of the surrounding resorts and resort communities. Although not directly on point, by providing employment and employee housing to resort and recreational employees, the county's recreational needs are benefitted by the text amendment. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 8. Goal 9, Economic Development FINDING: The Sunriver Business Park in not within a recognized urban growth boundary. Consequently, OAR 660-009 does not apply to the present application. In general terms, Goal 9 is intended to ensure an adequate supply of land for business and employment growth. In the greater Sunriver community, tourism, including recreational activities, food and beverage service and related service industries, are the primary economic activities. Given the critical shortage of affordable employee housing, the tourism industry is finding it challenging to find and retain employees. In order to support the tourism industry, convenient and affordable housing solutions must be found. The adoption of the present text amendment will partially alleviate the housing pressures in the Sunriver area. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 9. Goal 10, Housing PAGE 3 {00901495;1} FINDING: This goal pertains to urban or urbanizable lands. Consequently, Goal 10 does not apply to the present application. That said, the proposed text amendment will provide the opportunity to provide affordable employee housing in an area of high demand. To the extent that Goal 10 applies to this application, the applicant had demonstrated compliance with Goal 10. Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services FINDING: Goal 11 generally pertains more to water and sewer services. The Sunriver Business Park is served by Sunriver Water and Sunriver Environmental. Consequently, water and sewer services are available to the underlying business park. Given the wide range of uses already permitted in the Business Park, there is no indication that a limited amount of employee housing will have any greater effect on sewer and water services than would existing uses already permitted either outright or conditionally in the Sunriver Business Park District. The applicant had demonstrated compliance with Goal 12. Goal 13, Energy Conservation FINDING: This text amendment does not affect the County's regulation of solar setbacks, siting of small- scale windmills, land use or density, etc. The primary purpose of this text amendment is to provide employee housing in close proximity to the employment centers in and around the greater Sunriver community. Housing in close proximity to employment centers will necessarily reduce reliance on the automobile and reduce commute times, both of which will reduce the use of fuel. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 13. Goal 14, Urbanization EAr"DING: The -1-tv hac rmmnliarl With r;nal 14 through the adoption of the Sunriver Unincorporated Community Zone under OAR 660-022-0030. As required by this administrative rule, changes in plan designations must comply with the post acknowledgement provisions of ORS 197.610 through 197.625. Findings below demonstrate compliance with the applicable provisions of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22. The applicant has demonstrated compliance with Goal 14. Goals 15 through 19 FINDING: Goals 15 through 19 do not apply to this application. Oregon Administrative Rules; OAR Chapter 660, Division 22 The Sunriver Business Park is located within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community ("UUC"), as defined by OAR 660-022-010(8). The county's designation of the Sunriver area as a UUC in 1997, together with the adoption of the county's unincorporated community zoning standards (DCC 18.108), demonstrated compliance with the Division 22 rules. Upon adoption and acknowledgement of DCC 18.108, the county's obligations under Division 22 are limited to complying with the Division 22 planning and zoning standards under OAR 660-022-0030. These standards expressly permit the county to amend the applicable UUC zoning standards under ORS 197.610 through 197.625. The UCC rules also permit the county to authorize residential uses consistent with the UUC regulations. The following provisions apply to the present text amendment: OAR 660-022-0030(2) County plans and land use regulations may authorize any residential use and density in unincorporated communities, subject to the requirements of this division. PAGE 4 {00901495;1} FINDING: Employee housing is arguably a "residential use." Consequently, the county may allow employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park provided it meets other requirements of Division 22. OAR 660-022-0030(6) County plans and land use regulations shall ensure that new or expanded uses authorized within unincorporated communities do not adversely affect agricultural or forestry uses. FINDING: Employee housing would be classified as a "new or expanded use" within the Sunriver Business Park District. The Sunriver Business Park is located west of the BNSF mainline and further west from US Forest Service land to the east. Forestry uses on nearby Goal 4 lands are limited to recreational uses. No forestry operations are currently active in the area, nor are any planned for the immediate future. The addition of employee housing on with the Sunriver Business Park District will have no greater impact on adjacent or nearby forestry uses as would any of the existing permitted or conditional uses in the Sunriver Business Park District. The underlying zoning already permits a wide range of residential, commercial, office, retail, entertainment and light industrial uses. There is no evidence that employee housing will have any external impacts which would extend beyond the BNSF mainline onto US Forest Service lands. OAR 660-022-0030(7) County plans and land use regulations shall allow only those uses which are consistent with the identified function, capacity and level of service of transportation facilities serving the community, pursuant to OAR 660-012-0060(1)(a) through (c). FINDING: The findings immediately below under the "Transportation Planning Rule Compliance" section demonstrate consistency with this requirement. Transportation Planning Rule Compliance; OAR 660-012-0060 When electing to adopt a post -acknowledgement plan amendment ("PAPA"), local governments are required under OAR 660-012-0060 to determine whether the PAPA will "significantly affect" any planned or existing transportation facilities. In very general terms, the significant affect" determination requires a local government to analyze the "reasonable worst -case scenario' of transportation impacts under current zoning to the "reasonable worst -case scenario" of transportation impacts based on the new zone or new use allowed in a zone. In the present case, the county must determine whether the addition of employee housing within the Sunriver Business Park will result in additional transportation impacts over and above those currently anticipated based on existing uses. If employee housing will have additional trips associated with it over and above other existing uses, then the county must determine whether those additional trips will "significantly affect" a existing or planned transportation facility. Attached as Exhibit B is the applicant's transportation analysis, prepared by Transight Consulting (the "TIA"). The TIA examined all of the uses currently permitted in the Business Park zoning district and identified a reasonable development pattern assuming a variety of allowed uses. It should be noted that the TIA is conservative in that it could have identified the highest trip generating use and assumed that such use could be distributed throughout the zone. The TIA, however, assumed a "reasonable" worst case scenario and assumed a variety of development and a variety of trip generating uses within the zone. Based on this analysis, the TIA concludes that a reasonable development pattern could generate a total of 373,2 Peak PM trips, or 17 Peak PM trips per acre. The TIA then measured a reasonable development based on approximately 30 units of a combination of student housing and multi -family PAGE {00901495;1} housing per acre within the Sunriver Business Park. These two uses were used because there is no iTE rate for employee housing, especially employee housing located within the resort community it is intended to serve. The results demonstrate that employee housing will generate between 8.4 and 13.2 Peak PM trips per acre. This results in fewer trips generated on a per acre basis than what is currently allowed within the Sunriver Business Park. In addition to this quantitative analysis, Sunriver Resort will utilize both an employee shuttle service during the peak summer season and provide bicycles to its employees, further reducing the trip generation potential. According to Sunriver Resort management and human resources, very few employees come to Central Oregon with vehicles and rely on bicycle and shuttle transportation to get to and from work. Moreover, services are available to employees within the Sunriver Business Park, and the Sunriver town center is approximately % mile from the Sunriver Business Park. Based on the TIA, together with the transportation demand measures provided by the Resort, the proposed text amendment will not "significantly affect" any transportation facility within the meaning set forth under OAR 660-012-0060. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies The applicant believes that the following goals and policies are the only goals and polices applicable to this application: Comprehensive Plan Designation/Purpose Business Park District. The Sunriver Business Park lies at the southern end of the community boundary and is physically separated from the remainder of the community by Spring River Road. This plan designation was originally created to accommodate light industrial development to support the employment needs of the community and surrounding area. Since the inception of zoning regulations for this area, development has been primarily commercial in nature rather than industrial. I IIC LU11111g ordinance was modified in 1997 to reflect the existing businesses and the trend for commercial development while still allowing for industrial uses to develop. FINDING: As the above description indicates, development within the business park has shifted from light industrial uses to more commercial uses. The 1997 amendments which recognized existing uses and the trend towards commercial development acknowledged this trend. The addition of employee housing will compliment the business park by providing additional customers to the retail and commercial uses, as well as by providing housing options in close proximity to employment centers. Unlike Black Butte Ranch, which has areas specifically designated for employee housing (see, e.g., Policy 4.8.10, Policy 4.8.14, and Policy 4.8.15) the Sunriver UUC has no such designation. Complicating matters is the fact that most of Sunriver is already built -out, meaning that there is little, if any, vacant land available for employee housing in the greater Sunriver community. Policy 4.5.1 Land use regulations shall conform to the requirements of OAR 660 Division 22 or any successor. FINDING: The findings above demonstrate compliance with OAR 660, Division 22. Policy 4.5.2 County comprehensive plan policies and land use regulations shall ensure that new uses authorized within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community do not adversely affect forest uses in the surrounding Forest Use Zones. FINDING: The findings above demonstrate compliance with this standard. PAGE 6 {00901495;1} Policy 4.5.10 Multiple -family residences and residential units in commercial buildings shall be permitted in the commercial area for the purpose of providing housing which is adjacent to places of employment. Single-family residences shall not be permitted in commercial areas. FINDING: Although not directly on point because the employee housing will not be maintained within " commercial buildings" the intent of this policy is to provide housing near places of employment. As described in this application, there is a critical shortage of affordable housing for nearby employees. The present text amendment will partially alleviate this critical shortage. Policy 4.5.16 A variety of commercial uses which support the needs of the community and surrounding rural area, and not uses solely intended to attract resort visitors, should be encouraged. FINDING: While not directly on point, the proposed text amendment will allow employee housing to meet the needs of employees who otherwise are forced to commute from La Pine and other areas outside the Sunriver area. These employees will be able to utilize commercial uses both within the Sunriver Business Park as well as the larger Sunriver community. Policy 4.5.17 Allow small-scale, low -impact commercial uses in conformance with the requirements of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22. Larger more intense commercial uses shall be permitted if they are intended to serve the community, the surrounding rural area and the travel needs of people passing through the area, FINDING: Again, while not directly on point, this policy directs the county to permit only small-scale uses intended to serve the community. Here, the employee housing is proposed to meet the direct needs of employees working in the immediate vicinity of the business park. .• _ _ -- Small-scale, - low -impact ,....,.:..i �.�,...-L, .,..IA h� �Il.,�.�orl in i-n nfnrm�n........ tMP Policy 4.5.18 Small-scale, low -impact Indust ial uses should be allowed ;n . with t.._ requirements of OAR Chapter 660, Division 22. FINDING: Again, while not on point, this policy stresses the need to permit only small scale uses in the business park. Policy 4.5.29 New uses or expansion of existing uses within the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community which require land use approval shall be approved only upon confirmation from the Sunriver Utility Company that water and sewer service for such uses can be provided. FINDING: A wide range of commercial uses are already permitted in the Sunriver Business Park and utilize water and sewer services from the sewer and water companies. As a requirement of any site plan review application for employee housing, the applicant will be required to obtain "will serve" letters. Conclusion The Sunriver area faces a critical shortage of affordable, employee housing. This shortage seriously affects the ability of area employers to attract and retain employees, especially seasonal employees. While the present text amendment cannot solve the critical shortage, by providing employee housing options at the Sunriver Business Park, the applicant will be able to at least address this shortage for a percentage of its seasonal employees and those otherwise employed in the immediate vicinity. PAGE f 00901495;1) EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 18.108.110. Business Park - BP District. A. Uses Permitted Outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright: 1. Residential uses existing as of March 31, 1997. 2. Administrative, educational and other related facilities in conjunction with a use permitted outright. 3. Library. 4. Recreational path. 5. Post office. 6. Church in building or buildings not exceeding 5,000 square feet of floor area. 7. Child care facilities, nurseries, and/or preschools. 8. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: Retail/rental store, office and service establishment, including but not limited to the following: a. Automobile, motorcycle, boat, recreational vehicle, trailer or truck sales, rental, repair or maintenance business, including tire stores and parts stores. b. Agricultural equipment and supplies. c. Car wash. d. Contractor's office, including but not limited to, building, electrical, plumbing, heating and air conditioning, painter, etc.. e. Construction equipment sales, rental and/or service. f. Exterminator services. g. Golf cart sales and service. h. Lumber yard, home improvement or building materials store. i. Housekeeping and janitorial service. j. Dry cleaner and/or self-service laundry facility. k. Marine/boat sales and service. I. Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge including entertainment. p. Marijuana processing cannabinoid concentrates and cannabinoid products, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. q. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items or products at the same location. f 00901619;11 EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 9. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Scientific research or experimental development of materials, methods or products, including engineering and laboratory research. b. Light manufacturing, assembly, fabricating or packaging of products from previously prepared materials, including but not limited to cloth, paper, leather, precious or semi- precious metals or stones, etc. c. Manufacture of food products, pharmaceuticals and the like, but not including the production of fish or meat products, or the rendering of fats and oils. d. Warehouse and distribution uses in a building or buildings each less than 10,000 square feet of floor area. l i Ill,i_rlt)�1! (.'. lltl a Ili:s Cl ucLUI t 5. B. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following conditional uses may be permitted subject to DCC 18.128 and a conditional use permit: 1. Public buildings and public utility structures and yards, including railroad yards. 2. A dwelling unit for a caretaker or watchman working on a developed property. 3. Law enforcement detention facility. 4 Pnrkinu Int, 5. Radio and television broadcast facilities. 6. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Bowling alley. b. Theater. c. Veterinary clinic and/or kennel. d. Marijuana processing including cannabinoid extracts, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. e. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330. 7. A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: a. Warehouses and distribution uses in a building or buildings exceeding 10,000 square feet of floor area. b. Distillery and beer/ale brewing facility, including wholesale sales thereof. c. Self/mini storage. {00901619;11 EXH I BIT A AMENDED TEXT d. Trucking company dispatch/terminal. e. Solid waste/garbage operator, not including solid waste disposal or other forms of solid waste storage or transfer station. C. Use Limits. The following limitations and standards shall apply to uses listed in DCC 18.108.110(A) or (B): 1. A use expected to generate more than 30 truck -trailer or other heavy equipment trips per day to and from the subject property shall not be permitted to locate on a lot adjacent to or across the street from a lot in a residential district. 2. Storage, loading and parking areas shall be screened from residential zones. 3. No use requiring air contaminant discharge permits shall be approved by the Planning Director or Hearings Body prior to review by the applicable state or federal permit reviewing authority, nor shall such uses be permitted adjacent to or across the street from a residential lot. D. Special Requirements for Large Scale Uses. Any of the uses listed in DCC 18.108.110(A)(6) or (B)(6) may be allowed in a building or buildings each exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space if the Planning Director or Hearings Body finds: 1. That the intended customers for the proposed use will come from the community and surrounding rural area, or the use will meet the needs of the people passing through the area. For the purposes of DCC 18.108.110, the surrounding rural area shall be that area identified as all property within five miles of the boundary of the Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community; 2. The use will primarily employ a work force from the community and surrounding rural area; and 3. That it is not practical to locate the use in a building or buildings under 8,000 square feet of floor space. E. Height Regulations. No building or structure shall be hereafter erected, enlarged or structurally altered to exceed 45 feet in height. F. Lot Requirements. The following lot requirements shall be observed: 1. Lot Area. No requirements. 2. Lot Width. No requirements. 3. Lot Depth. Each lot shall have a minimum depth of 100 feet. 4. Front Yard. The front yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet. 5. Side Yard. No side yard required, except when adjoining a lot in an RS or RM District and then the required side yard shall be 50 feet. No side yards are required on the side of a building adjoining a -railroad right of way. f00901619;11 EXHIBIT A AMENDED TEXT 6. Rear Yard. No rear yard required, except when adjoining a lot in an RS or RM District and then the rear yard shall be 50 feet. No rear yard is required on the side of a building adjoining a railroad right of way. 7. Lot Coverage. The maximum lot coverage by buildings and structures shall be 50 percent of the total lot area. C:, �uWrali��£yun,���7rrll�lclii�l�,tic?���iEuu.in 2. 1Ihe following OffinitJons shall aI.rl:ly io DCC. 3,8.108,110(A),_(9Lfe) „Li i),' E'sllall ins ail _rwrson i l rG<<£ {3,E� Syr a�ws rsi 1, f or older \n/her..(,arns _1-lis or her !iv%1i7 `V Working in f ospiralifyr ou(do£)i r(."nt ,iltrrl or :otail m indusWuvinihin 20 air iniles of the i tliplovf. £ i tousiI_t(_ for m-i f t �e _ t wen �/ 5) iv (_ hoursri er wce _ Such E'rnrfloy : ,., �..,. Aat. ! hall he o_F inon ,ti a ied chi £Jti.gh ro£ of t Il [.iIoVn : ,7t mcli lthly. rl i:flov��( ( ousinR � i ii h 'l) rn I1 _i dy,/( ilirl t E�"}!!l� i.lrll� Ct7' Lai ed vk/i llin "fin __. .. �... n ._. _ c _ _ _ .._ -- ,--___ ii(1I irf� ru lur , CfiC o cup z t V' of 1lUiilC l I ( '!:!"I� �( id Lr:� i Ir jxiCJ� ( o'f �h:�r 1N �1 such1 i'rsC)#1 l-,o 1 e ai d minor i hildi £ 'n,if ;r7V "i_ItrF)(. E C iloi.a.ili(bz ill!dki r_ shiIwain c3 - E% i11ir 'fl ia,s�„il11( ftLz rlttaltl 2i1111�/ i't)h�CY E---- sttllaur() whose rii-neN j lllD >C to t �Vf '`i.{K h( i.,(si r(, need }3l( of Fli w es, i R( rzl : Seasons" I� iI r11C c r'1 d,i ( periods �fk£ fl �� and Ch( ',jtrSi /�t idCi£s / f(:)Jj Wlrll 3 _.... s _.. . _.. � _n ..__ p _ i _ _ . i ,r I i l _ j i i ng _. _... .I . . Janii,l1-v ?i anv vear, and between 6 n lVienricin< l Dav and he Hadladons sha,11 I.r"l,)lo` e" r Ptiu in , >trudui )f r ilitLC (i under DCC a, During, Hie Resort SC clrls n r rilg ov ,�e r i(lu,ings Unit m v on _. .. �„ U!"ltii t li lba °_...!?1/.. rLzril/ criiltiC.,��:£��U!� i ii� I1 ' )>i Wlri haslit C li Sri ,_.11 iH i ui! P H pidilisr, ._1 i )ii�r7" !Jlt i Vli such "C! (!i S spoused _._ ... , c _....., _....,. _. _ _ ..._.� _....._ ..__.. n-iinor £hildi,e r, it anv and ii£r .'d'ie ,a( rsoris. i lal`(I1t iiriiie 0 (.heelf 'i o C ideR , ;I! ;t soii`£ ailIhi'1U.)�/('C'.;'3tall.Ir£'� iril it 3� r.T _. basis b I fi NCO � ( i/ ilr person Who Vllrl / Off U )iC �� ti 1 i nond) iir :11£)i drl has lb n an L rnploye dU:`Illf the ' l'I n V ou iv/,'cIVC i iond i of (ir� )Ilv/ pe on Vt hu Can __...._ demonstra(e liirot,.I h proo l of e.rnplovinenl. chatli 31�x r Ali shall Lie m i inplove dUi'iI"1,7,the hrmlC.dli rek// oll V/Jirw � £ so Y. S on, (/�,E �:hi ( vlidl tJC,h perao!i p Crll e nd inIiio r Ci1JICIi-en ii i Illy ,1 Id" f no o L I i e i p e r s o it; h E Ittp s I i i g I n I ts C i i i i o be filled du inn it _.J_>el iod £�/� l r�,�<,d k £av/e lav , gi-A liil�rd rl I0v r, l�i� (rrii/lave e Hr)t,•iiiPlrllia rilay :)e f)C££lr, £ ci oil a In ih f) rnorilh baisis on a first coin£ first ;E rve.0 basis i i`he ('t4llle'r' d'isci,e ioi . _..,. ....._........MilliiMlin U_Vfhicula riiLin%,_p c_ for_._.. .....__..... 6Y lirLli)i�i! must +C __. fit A_?VId_E,G� l {il( (l£ (')<,Uijr (3tf ( YC�(dl N(�i1NC}tfi _,_.g�..vi_d_e _,. - _ f00901619;11 ,s TRANSIGHT ' CONSULTING,LLC Date: To: From: Project Reference No.: September4, 2019 Steve Hultberg Joe Bessman, PE 1329 ffff - �U 1. RO,��;� x^ �706.1PE! ! Project Name: Sunriver Resort Employee Housing p 171 -I The purpose of this memorandum is to highlight the potential TPR compliance issues raised with approval of a text amendment for the Sunriver Business Park to add employee housing as an allowable use. This would provide a means of supporting Sunriver employees within the resort property, reducing longer - distance trips from the surrounding communities and supporting employees that are experiencing a regional housing shortage. PROPOSED TEXT MODIFICATION As proposed, the Sunriver Business Park zoning would be amended to include Employee housing structures as an outright allowable use within buildings limited to 20,000 square -feet of floor space. The text amendment would include definition of employee housing, which is summarized as follows: _ a n old o . lde rkin n the hospitalitu • Use of employee nOU51ng WOUId be open `LU persona io-year v,u or olderworking �,,,g R, ,,,.. hospitality, outdoor outdoor recreation, or tourism industry at least 25 hours per week • Place of employment is within 20 air miles (to allow this space to include Mt. Bachelor during the winter season) • Would allow spouse/minor children to reside on -site • Employee housing would be required to supply at least one parking stall for every six beds, and at least one bicycle parking space for every two beds. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE The requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule are contained within Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-12 (Transportation Planning). This Division, prepared by the Department of Land Conservation and Development, specifies the required elements for coordinated transportation and land use planning. Within this division are the requirements forthe preparation of transportation system plans, coordination with State and regional plans and policies, and measures to prevent urbanization or sprawl onto rural lands. Section -0060 (Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments) provides the specific transportation requirements for a zone change and plan amendment, ensuring that these changes remain consistent with the goals and requirements of the adopted Transportation System Plan. To test compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule the first step is to determine whether a significant effect occurs. The administrative rule defines a plan or land use regulation amendment as significantly affecting a transportation facility if it: • Changes the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; 1329REP Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Exhibit B • Changes the standards implementing a functional classification system; • Results in types of travel that are inconsistent with the functional classification of a facility, or degrades the performance standards identified within the adopted Transportation System Plan. To test whether a significant effect occurs, a trip generation review was conducted of the allowed uses within the Sunriver Business Park zoning and what could occur with the text amendment. SUNRIVER BUSINESS PARK AREA The Sunriver Business Park zoning designation is only located on the lands shown in Figure 1, encompassing approximately 70 acres west of the BNSF railroad mainline and south of S Century Drive. The overall area is built -out across nearly 70 percent of the land area, leaving approximately 21 acres within eight separate tax lots that are fully or partially developable. Figure 1. Sunriver Business Park Zoning Boundary. Source: Deschutes County DIAL. Page 2 Sunriver Business Pork Employee Housing Exhibit B Existing Outright Allowed Uses Deschutes County Code 18.108.110 outlines the allowable uses and density requirements within this zoning designation. The current zoning allows the following uses outright: • Library • Post Office • Church • Child care facilities, nurseries, preschools • A building or group of buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet with any combination of a retail, rental store, office, and service establishment, including but not limited to the following uses: o Car wash o Automotive sales, rental, and repair o Dry cleaning o Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge • A building or buildings each not exceeding 20,000 square feet of floor space housing any combination of: o Research space o Light manufacturing, production, or processing o Food product manufacturing o Warehousing and distribution uses with less than 10,000 square -feet of floor area. The Deschutes County Transportation Svstem Plan is premised on weekday p.m. peak hour trips. This metric is used in the classification of roadway facilities and in the assessment of intersection and roadway improvement needs. Review of the trip generation potential of these uses is presented in Table 1. This table also identifies a reasonable maximum size of the use within this area, as 22 acres of developable land could not reasonably be built -out with automated car washes or post offices. With the remaining developable lands generally located on the east side of the business park farther from Century Drive these lands are more likely to be developed with lower intensity uses than the vehicle -oriented convenience commercial near the S Century Drive traffic signal. Page 3 Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Exhibit B T.hlc 9 SignMary of ITF Trin Generation Rates 'T ITE Land Use and ITE Reasonable FAR and Land Use Code Maximum Acreage Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip Rate 3.81 PM Trips/KSF Retail Shopping Center 0.25 FAR 41.49 PM Trips/Acre ITE 820 No Size Limit 27.38 Net New PM Trips/Acre General Office 0.25 FAR 1.15 PM Trips/KSF Office ITE 710 No Size Limit 12.52 PM Trips/Acre Library 0.25 8.16 PM Trips/KSF Library ITE 590 2.5 Acres 88.86 PM Trips/Acre US Post Office 0.25 FAR 11.21 PM Trips/KSF Post Office ITE 732 2.5 Acres 122.07 PM Trips/Acre Day Care Center 0.25 FAR 11.12 PM Trips/KSF Child Care Center ITE 565 2.5 Acres 121.09 PM Trips/Acre High -Turnover 0.25 FAR 9.77 PM Trips/KSF Restaurant (Sit -Down) Restaurant 5.0 Acres 106.39 PM Trips/Acre ITE 932 60.64 Net New PM Trips/Acre Auto Parts Sales 0.25 FAR 4.91 PM Trips/KSF Auto Parts Sales ITE 843 2.5 Acres 53.47 PM Trips/Acre 14.20 PM Trips/KSF Car Wash Automated Car Wash 0.1 FAR 61.85 PM Trips/Acre ITE 948 1,0 Acre Est. 30.93 Net New PM Trips/Acre Research Research and Development Center 0.25 FAR No Size Limit 0.49 PM Trips/KSF 5.33 PM Trips/Acre ITE 760 Manufacturing 0.20 FAR 0.67 PM Trips/KSF Manufacturing ITE 140 No Size Limit 5.84 PM Trips/Acre From this table, the 22 acres could be developed with the following uses that would be considered a "reasonable development scenario" for trip generation purposes: • 5 Acres of commercial uses (139.9 PM Trips) • 2.5 Acres of restaurant space (151.6 PM Trips) • 14.5 Acres of Light Industrial/Manufacturing space (84.7 PM Trips) This overall scenario could generate 373.2 PM Trips, or 17.0 PM Trips per Acre. Proposed Employee Housing Table 1 also provides a comparison to a three-story multifamily residential product within this area. A typical urban three-story apartment structure can reasonably be built with a density of 20 to 25 units per acre. This is based on balancing the building footprint, parking area, setbacks, and landscape requirements. With the text amendment allowing lower parking requirements, higher site densities than this typical range could be achieved. For analysis purposes 30 units per acre was assumed, which results in approximately 13.2 driveway trips per acre. This trip rate assumes suburban trip generation Page 4 Sunriver Business Par]( Employee Housing Exhibit B characteristics and does not account for the modal splits or user type that this housing is intended to accommodate. A better trip generation surrogate for this use with the limiting employee housing provisions would be classification of the housing with ITE's Land Use 225: off -Campus Student Apartment. The modal split and age range within a college campus is likely much more similar to Sunriver Resort employees (particularly seasonal employees) than typical suburban apartments. The land use description is provided below: An off -campus student apartment is part of an apartment complex that serves college or university students. These properties are generally located nearby and within walking distance of a college campus. Most apartments include student -related amenities such as free high-speed Internet, study lounges, fitness centers, sports courts, and swimming pools. Apartments included in this land use can be furnished or unfurnished and range in size from studio apartments to apartments with four bedrooms. Units typically have washer and dryers in each unit. Most facilities also include security and 24-hour emergency maintenance, T bl 2 S m r of ITE Tri Generation Rates a e . um ay p ITE Land Use and ITE Reasonable FAR and Land Use Code Maximum Acreage Weekday PM Peak Hour Trip: Rate Multifamily Housing 30 Units/Acre 0.44 PM Trips/Unit Employee (Mid -Rise) 13.2 PM Trips/Acre Housing Off -Campus Student 30 Units/Acre 0.28 PM Trips/Unit Apartment (ITE 225) 8.4 PM Trips/Acre .. ..,,.�_._ r..._._.._.. n........a .,....I.J .........-..+.. O A +� 'I � 7 trine Table 2 shows that the siting of employee housing within Sunriver 'Resort could generate e ca.-. o 13.2 .rips per acre. If there were no use restrictions placed on the housing limiting the use to employees the higher range could be anticipated, and with effective management of users to limit the housing to the Sunriver employee the lower range could reasonably be obtained. This shows the potential to reduce the trip rate of employees by about 40 percent. Regardless of which land use classification is applied, the trip rate is lower than other allowed uses within the Sunriver Business Park based on a reasonable development scenario. Additional Trip Characteristics The trip rates shown in Table 1 and Table 2 provide an assessment of the "driveway" impacts without regard to trip length. Residential, retail, and employment trips vary in length, with retail trips generally shorter length (many of these would even be pass -by or diverted trips). Work trips are generally recurrent on a daily weekday basis and often impact the critical morning and evening peak periods. For example, trips to the Shell Station within the business park are typically short length trips that are already on S Century Drive or arriving from areas in Sunriver. Without this gas station travelers would have to drive farther for fuel. Conversely, a significant portion of new trips to a manufacturing facility would likely travel from Bend or La Pine. Employee housing serving Sunriver uses would be similar to a gas station; while there would be an impact of those trips on the system, the impact would be limited and could help avoid the longer -distance daily travel on the highway system. Page 5 Sunriver Business Park Employee Housing Exhibit B Effectively, this employee housing is serving as a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measure. This on -site supply of employee housing, coupled with provision of employee bicycles and shuttle service, will help to reduce current travel demands on US 97 to Sunriver Resort. As part of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program requirement placed on a new destination resort within the Powell Butte area a requirement is included within the ODOT agreement for the resort to consider employee housing, as this has been an identified need at other area destination resorts. While there are localized trip impacts with this type of use there is also a regional benefit on the more critical regional transportation routes. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS This report summarizes the impacts of the proposed text amendment to include Employee Housing within the Sunriver Business Park Zoning District (SUBP). Comparison of trip rates between the existing allowed uses and the addition of employee housing would not increase the trip generation potential of the area and so would not result in a significant effect for Transportation Planning Rule purposes. This analysis does not include an assessment of the adequacy of the current system or a specific development proposal; separate review would be required as part of a future land use application. Please let me know if you have any questions on these materials at (503) 997-4473 or via email at joe@transi htconsultin.com. Page 6 ES COG � 2 4.0 ca 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 BOCC Monday Meeting of February 3, 2020 DATE: January 29, 2020 FROM: Nick Lelack, Community Development, 541-385-1708 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Joint Planning Commission Work Session / Draft Agenda RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED: Discussion item. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Board of County Commissioners will be conducting a joint work session with the Planning Commission on February 13 at 5:30 p.m. at the Deschutes Service Center, 1300 Wall Street, Barnes and Sawyer rooms. Staff has prepared a draft agenda for the Board's consideration. The goal is to finalize it on February 3 at a Board work session. Once the agenda is finalized, a robust work session memorandum with attachments will be provided to the Board and the Planning Commission by Friday, February 7. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. ATTENDANCE: Nick Lelack, CDD Director; Peter Gutowsky, Planning Manager V J-A k . -4r / k- tJ rl 101 U 0�� E.,k..rT I�,IJ ° , VZ a V E K, ..: MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Nick Lelack, AICP, Director Peter Gutowsky, AICP, Planning Manager DATE: January 29, 2020 SUBJECT: joint Planning Commission Work Session / Draft Agenda The Board of County Commissioners (Board) will be conducting a joint work session with the Planning Commission on February 13 at 5:30 p.m. at the Deschutes Service Center, 1300 Wall Street, Barnes and Sawyer rooms. Staff has prepared a draft agenda for the Board's consideration. The goal is to finalize it on February 3 at a Board work session. Once the agenda is finalized, a robust work session memorandum with attachments will be provided to the Board and the Planning Commission by Friday, February 7. I. DRAFT AGENDA Staff is proposing the following list of topics for the joint work session. A. Welcome, Introductions, Citizen Comments (5:30-5:45) B. Nonprime Resource Lands / Proposal 2 / Discussion (5:45-6:30) C. Wildfire Mitigation Advisory Committee Recommendations (6:30-7:00) D. Planning Division FY 2019-2020 Update and Prep for FY2020-2021 Work Plan (7:00-7:30) E. Other Board / PC Coordination Issues / Items (7:30 - adjournment) II. BACKGROUND A. Welcome, Introduction, Citizen Comments B. Nonprime Resource Lands / Proposal The joint work session provides an opportunity for the Board and the Planning Commission to share their perspectives on Proposal 2, relating to draft Nonprime Resource Lands (non -resource lands) eligibility criteria for quasi-judicial applications. A decision whether to initiate a public hearing or table this amendment until Proposal 1 is adopted and acknowledged will be determined by the Board at a later date. For context: The Planning Commission approved the following the recommendations on July 9 and 11: Page 1 of 3 PROPOSAL 1: Recommended by 5-0-1 vote (five in favor, one abstention) to support the Comprehensive Plan amendments to establish criteria that would enable the County in a subsequent phase to establish a NPR-10 zone and rezone six (6) residentially committed areas. Status: Pending before the Board.' 2. PROPOSAL 2: Recommended by a 5-1-1 (five in favor, one opposed, and one abstention) vote to check - in with the Board to gain approval to further review and likely expand the Comprehensive Plan eligibility criteria pertaining to rezoning other farm and forest lands to a NPR-20 zone, and establishing a process to review and expand those criteria. The majority (5) want to confirm the Board supports their efforts to potentially expand the proposed criteria beyond the proposed criteria. While they did not elaborate on the process, staff assumes they may want to re -open the public record to allow additional public comments on these criteria. Status: Pending before the Board: subject of the loint Meeting 3. LETTER TO DEVELOP STATE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES: Recommended 5-0-2 (five in favor, two abstentions) to support resubmitting the County's 2015 letter (with an updated date and members) from both the Board and Planning Commission to the Land Conservation and Development Commission to develop and adopt statewide non -resource lands administrative rules. Status: Completed Subsequently, on October 28, 2019 the Board directed staff to: • Separate the Nonprime Resource Lands amendments into two (2) proposals; • Schedule amendments to correct mapping errors for the six (6) rural residential areas for a Board work session and public hearing (Proposal 1); • Conduct a Planning Commission work session to discuss and identify potential amendments to the eligibility criteria for quasi-judicial applications (Proposal 2); and • Conduct a work session with the Planning Commission in early 2020 to discuss potential changes to the eligibility criteria prior to determining next steps. The Planning Commission during their December 12, 2019 and January 9, 2020 meetings requested spatial data to better understand potential eligibility criteria for Nonprime Resource Lands quasi-judicial applications. The Commission continued its discussion of potential Proposal 2 eligibility factors at its January 23 meeting. Staff will describe spatial data and show the interactive map at the joint work session. Staff is also available to provide a more in-depth update of the Planning Commission's meetings and discussions prior to February 13 with Commissioners individually or at a meeting (e.g., February 12). 'The Board held public hearings on six legacy rural residential areas on November 18, 2019 and January 15, 2020. At the conclusion of the January 15 hearing, the Board kept the written record open for one week, January23 at 5:00 p.m. Deliberations are anticipated for March 4. As mentioned above, staff will inform both bodies of the Board's potential next steps on Feb. 13, but not seek direction at this meeting. Rather, staff will seek direction from the Board at a subsequent Board meeting in late February or March. C. Wildfire Mitigation Advisory Committee (WMAQ Recommendations Staff will summarize the WMAC's recommendations to: • Update the Countys Wildfire Hazard Zone/Map; • Implement the Oregon Residential Specialty Code (ORSC) Wildfire Hazard Mitigation Standards, R327.4; and • Develop land use standards and implementation approaches. Staff will also discuss options for the next steps to consider the recommendations, which the Board will decide at a future meeting, likely in March. D. Planning Division FY2019-2020 Update and Prep for FY2020-2021 Work Plan Planning Division FY 2019-2020 Update Staff will provide a brief update on the Planning Division's annual work plan specifically relating to long- range planning projects. The update will include a list of completed projects, ongoing projects, and projects not -yet -initiated. Preparation for FY 2020-2021 Work Plan This discussion may begin with the Board summarizing its draft/final 2020-21 Goals and Objectives pertaining to rural land use planning. Staff will briefly discuss a draft FY 2020-2021 work plan that will be made available in late March or April 2020, including opportunities for public input and Planning Commission and Board public hearings. E. Other Board / PC Coordination Issues / Items To be determined by the Board and Planning Commission. 01 ES CGG o 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 BOCC Monday Meeting of February 3, 2020 DATE: January 29, 2020 FROM: Erik Kropp, Administrative Services, 541-388-6584 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Discussion and Consideration of Update to Grant Policy, GA-20 RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED: Staff recommends County Administrator signature of the update to the Grant Application and Administration policy, No. GA-20. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The County's Grant Application and Administration policy, GA-20, was last updated in June 2012. Staff is proposing the following main changes to Luc yviiuy. 1. Remove references to County Grant Writer - position has not existed for several years. 2. Remove mention of a centralized tracking system for all grants (section 2) -- this system has never been created. 3. Rather than having the Board approve all grants, allow the County Administrator or Department Head approve grants up to $150,000 and $25,000, respectively, if no FTEs are being added. 4. Provide more information about when a department should submit a budget adjustment as the result of a grant award. 5. Provides a sample Grant Application Request form that can be used when taking grants to the Board. The form includes information about FTE requests and grant budgets. Attachments: Current "Grant Application and Administration Policy, GA-20" Draft Update to the "Grant Application and Administration Policy, GA-20" (clean version) Grant Application Request Form Draft Update to the "Grant Application and Administration Policy, GA-20" (redline version) FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None ATTENDANCE: Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator AJ�i_s OU p { Deschutes County Administrative Policy No. GA-20 Effective Date: June 6, 2012 GRANT APPLICATION AND ADMINISTRATION STATEMENT OF POLICY It is the policy of Deschutes County to seek grant funding, when appropriate, to support services and operate programs that further County goals and objectives, are consistent with core County functions, or that otherwise benefit County citizens. Grant funds and grant -funded projects or programs will be managed and monitored in accordance with established County systems, processes, and procedures to ensure compliance with funding agency requirements. APPLICABILITY This policy applies to any Deschutes County department, division, program, staff member, elected official, or affiliate agency preparing and submitting grant applications on behalf of Deschutes County for funds, materials, or equipment to be received and administered by the County or by an organization for which the County acts as grant applicant or fiscal agent. DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this policy, unless otherwise specified, the following definitions shall apply: • Grant: Funds awarded to the County by a Funding Agency and usually required to be used for a specific purpose or function as defined in an application for funding. • Funding Agency: Federal, state, or local government, private foundation or business organization, non-profit agency, individual, or other source that provides grant funds to the County. • Grant Requestor: Department Director or designee, or County Grant Writer. • Grant Administrator: Person authorized and responsible for managing, tracking, and reporting grant progress and financial activities. POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1. The Grant Requestor and Department Director, or designee, must review the risks and benefits of grant funding prior to application and will only pursue those opportunities which are financially and operationally prudent and which support services and operate programs that further County goals and objectives, are consistent with core County functions, or that otherwise benefit County citizens. The Department Director must inform the County Administrator and receive approval from the Board of County Commissioners to proceed with any proposed grant application. 2. Grant applications, supporting materials, and award documents will be managed and maintained consistent with County systems, processes, and procedures for public documents. The Department of Administrative Services will be responsible for establishing a workflow and tracking system for all grants from point of application through closeout or project completion. 3. At such time as a notice of award is received, the affected County Department will assign a Grant Administrator to be responsible for compliance with all grant requirements and oversight. 4. The Grant Administrator will review all restrictions and conditions specified in the award documents and will communicate and address any that may require special handling or involvement by other County departments or staff members. 5. Prior to acceptance of any funding or expenditure of funds for any grant -funded activity, the Grant Administrator will prepare and submit a written contract, agreement, or award notice consistent with Policy No. GA-17: Legal Review of County Documents. In lieu of a written contract, agreement, or award notice provided by the Funding Agency, the Grant Administrator will use a copy of the grant application for this purpose. 6. The Grant Administrator will forward the contract, agreement, award notice, or other documentation to the Board of County Commissioners through the County's established Board meeting procedures for acceptance and approval of the grant. 7. Following the Board of Commissioners' acceptance and approval of the award, the Grant Administrator will forward a copy of the grant application and approved award documents to the County Finance Department. 8. The Grant Administrator shall ensure proper oversight for all grant funds awarded by a funding agency, including thoroughly reviewing award conditions, completing and submitting award documents, monitoring grant -funded activities, tracking expenditures, accounting for grant payments, and preparing and submitting grant reports as required. 9. At such time as payment or reimbursement is requested from the funding agency, the Grant Administrator, or designee, will inform the County's Finance Department of the funding source, amount expected, anticipated date of payment, and County revenue account in which payment will be recorded. 10. When all grant requirements have been met, the Grant Administrator shall complete and submit a final report or grant closeout agreement to the funding agency as required by the grant award. Approved by the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners June 6, 2012. Erik Kropp Interim County Administrator r G; Deschutes County Administrative Policy No. GA-20 Effective Date: 1-29-20 DRAFT GRANT APPLICATION AND ADMINISTRATION STATEMENT OF POLICY It is the policy of Deschutes County to seek grant funding, when appropriate, to support services and operate programs that further County goals and objectives, are consistent with core County functions, or that otherwise benefit County citizens. Grant funds and grant -funded projects or programs will be approved, managed, and monitored in accordance with established County systems, processes, and procedures to ensure compliance with funding agency requirements. APPLICABILITY This policy applies to any Deschutes County department, division, program, staff member, elected official, or affiliate agency preparing and submitting grant applications on behalf of Deschutes County for funds, materials, or equipment to be received and administered by the County or by an organization for which the County acts as grant applicant or fiscal agent. DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this policy, unless otherwise specified, the following definitions shall apply: • Grant: Funds awarded to the County by a Funding Agency and usually required to be used for a specific purpose or function as defined in an application for funding. • Funding Agency: Federal, state, or local government, private foundation or business organization, non-profit agency, individual, or other source that provides grant funds to the County. • Grant Requestor: Department Director or designee. • Grant Administrator: Department staff person authorized and responsible for managing, tracking, and reporting grant progress and financial activities. POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1. The Grant Requestor and Department Director, or designee, must review the risks and benefits of grant funding prior to application and will only pursue those opportunities which are financially and operationally prudent and which support services and operate programs that further County goals and objectives, are consistent with core County functions, or that otherwise benefit County citizens. 2. The requesting department shall assign a Grant Administrator to be responsible for compliance with all grant requirements and oversight. 3. Approval requirements to apply and accept grants depends on whether the grant includes the addition of County FTEs and the grant dollar amount. The grant dollar amount approval is based on the County signature requirements for contracts. To determine the approval requirement, the grant dollar amount is based on a per year basis, as opposed to the amount for the life of the grant. Listed below is a table with approval requirements to apply for a grant. Approval Required to Apply/Accept a Grant Grant Type — per, year Required Approval Level 1 - Less than $25,000, no FTEs Department Head Level 2 - $25,000 - $150,000, no FTEs Count Administrator Level 3 - $150,001 and hi tier BOCC Level 4 - Any grant that includes adding County FTE or converting a limited duration position to regular status BOCC For the Health Services Department, per Resolution 2017-009, the following approvals apply: • Deputy Health Services Director can approve Level 1 grants that are less than $15,000. • Health Services Director can approve Level 2 grants that are $50,000 and less. 4. For extended/renewed grants, the amount of the additional funds determine the approval required to apply for the grant per the Grant Approval Table. If an extended/renewed grant includes the continuance of FTEs, but the FTEs are not increasing or changing from limited duration to regular, BOCC approval to apply for the grant is not needed unless the new grant dollar amount reaches Level 3. If an extended/renewed grant results in any increase in FTE (for example, a position is moving from a 0.5 FTE to a 0.75 FTE) or FTEs are changing from limited duration to regular, Level 4 approval is required. 5. Attached is a recommended Grant Application template that can be used when BOCC approval is required to apply for a��.�. 6. Grant applications, supporting materials, and award documents will be managed and maintained consistent with County systems, processes, and procedures for public documents. 4. The department's Grant Administrator will review all restrictions and conditions specified in the award documents and will communicate and address any that may require special handling or involvement by other County departments or staff members. 5. Prior to acceptance of any funding or expenditure of funds for any grant -funded activity, the department Grant Administrator will request approval from the Department Head, County Administrator, or BOCC (based on the required approval) and submit a written contract, agreement, or award notice consistent with Policy No. GA-17: Legal Review of County Documents — which includes the assignment of a document number by Administrative Services. 6. When a grant is awarded, the Grant Administrator will work with Finance to complete a budget adjustment to reflect the grant revenue and corresponding expenditures and FTEs, if applicable. Budget adjustments require Board approval and is one way to gain Board approval to accept the grant. Another avenue for approval is to submit a staff report for Board consideration at a Board meeting. In some cases, a Level I or 2 grant may not require a budget adjustment (when the department has enough expenditure authorization to implement the grant without a budget change). In these cases, after consulting with Finance and HR, the grant may be accepted without a budget adjustment. 7. Following the acceptance and approval of the award, the Grant Administrator will forward a copy of the grant application and approved award documents to the County Finance Department. In addition, the Grant Administrator, or designee, will inform the County's Finance Department of the funding source, amount expected, anticipated date of payment, and County revenue account in which payment will be recorded. 8. The Grant Administrator shall ensure proper oversight for all grant funds awarded by a funding agency, including thoroughly reviewing award conditions, completing and submitting award documents, monitoring grant -funded activities, tracking expenditures, accounting for grant payments, and preparing and submitting grant reports as required. 9. When all grant requirements have been met, the Grant Administrator shall complete and submit a final report or grant closeout agreement to the funding agency as required by the grant award. Approved by the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners DATE. Tom Anderson County Administrator PVT ES-' CO Grant Application Request Date: 1. Name of Grant: 2. Deschutes County contact: 3. Funding Agency: 4. Grant Amount: 5. Does the grant require matching funds? ` Yes No If yes, how much are the required matching funds and what funds does the department plan to use for matching funds? 6. Grant duration: 7. Grant application deadline: 8. Grant description: 9. Requested budget (please provide additional line item details under the broad categories listed below): Amount Personnel Services Materials and Services Total 10. If the grant request includes FTEs, please fill out the table below. Position Title Limited duration or re larposition? FTEs Notes 11.Other information: EJ Deschutes County Administrative Policy No. GA-20 Effective Date: 1-29-20 DRAFT GRANT APPLICATION AND ADMINISTRATION STATEMENT OF POLICY It is the policy of Deschutes County to seek grant funding, when appropriate, to support services and operate programs that further County goals and objectives, are consistent with core County functions, or that otherwise benefit County citizens. Grant funds and grant -funded projects or programs will be #pproved, managed, and monitored in accordance with established County systems, processes, and procedures to ensure compliance with funding agency requirements. APPLICABILITY This policy applies to any Deschutes County department, division, program, staff member, elected official, or affiliate agency preparing and submitting grant applications on behalf of Deschutes County for funds, materials, or equipment to be received and administered by the County or by an organization for which the County acts as grant applicant or fiscal agent. DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this policy, unless otherwise specified, the following definitions shall apply: • Grant: Funds awarded to the County by a Funding Agency and usually required to be used for a specific purpose or function as defined in an application for funding. • Funding Agency: Federal, state, or local government, private foundation or business orgaNni7atinn� nnn-nrofi_t agencv, individual, or other source that provides grant funds to the County. • Grant Requestor: Department Director or designees or-Ceuflty-G - i -. • Grant Administrator: Department gaff P-person authorized and responsible for managing, tracking, and reporting grant progress and financial activities. POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1. The Grant Requestor and Department Director, or designee, must review the risks and benefits of grant funding prior to application and will only pursue those opportunities which are financially and operationally prudent and which support services and operate programs that further County goals and objectives, are consistent with core County functions, or that otherwise benefit County citizens.l�e-lat��t-I3ireet-�=mot-;mr� applioation, 23.�The requestin , department shall ^� �t ;v Ecrtcatr1} �s5ifr� a Ga»t Atlniinistiator to be respnizsiblc fir e�nliaiicc with ill grant regiuieentsa1d a� c c sagllt, . 3. Approval requirements to apply and accept grrants defends on whether the grant includes the addition of Count FTEs and the rant dollar amount. The tram dollar amount a royal is based on the County signature re uirements for contracts. To determine the a royal re uirement. the grant dollar amount is based on a per year basis as opposed to the amount for the life of the rant Listed below is a table with approval requirements to apply for a grant. APPROVAL REQUIRED TO APPLY FOR A GRANT Grant Type — per year Required Approval Level 1 - Less than $25.000, no FTEs Department Head Level 2 - $25 000 - $150.000, no FTEs County Administrator 3 - $150 001 and higher BOCC _Level Level 4 - Any grant that includes adding County FTE BOCC or converting a limited duration position to regular status For the Health Services Dartment�per Resolution 2017-009 the follo�ying approvals apply: s Deputy Health Services Director can approve Level 1 grants that are less than $15.000. m Health Services Director can approve Level 2 grants that are $50.000 and less. 4. For extended/renewed grants the amount of the additional funds determine the approval required to a. Iy --for grant per the Grant Approval Table. If an extended/renewed Want includes the continuance of FTEs, but the FTEs are not increasing or changing from limited duration to regular BOCC approval to apply for the grant is not needed unless the new .grant dollar amount reaches Level 3 If an extended/renewed grant results in any increase in FTE for r n 5 FT t,. n 75 FTE) FTEs n irnm limile example a position is moving morn d v � FTE, r, w a � � � FTE) L, or FTEs Li.7 are changing i.y■+. ___•_•�'d duration to regular Level 4 approval is required. 5 Attached is a recommended Grant Application template that can be used when BOCC approval is mired to applY-for a rUaant. 62. Grant applications, supporting materials, and award documents will be managed and maintained consistent with County systems, processes, and procedures for public documents. 4. The department's Grant Administrator will review all restrictions and conditions specified in the award documents and will communicate and address any that may require special handling or involvement by other County departments or staff members. 5. Prior to acceptance of any funding or expenditure of funds for any grant -funded activity, the department Grant Administrator will prepare -request approval from the De n�cnt lead, County Administrator, or BOCC (based on the required approval) and submit a written contract, agreement, or award notice consistent with Policy No. GA-17: Legal Review of County Documents — which includes the assignment of a -document number by Administrative Services. r The m&ant n d n, str tofu , V1., i�lLar l i� eCH3 s award nottee, doetiffle xit�tiE?ii ttQ ' meetifig proe-edtifes-for and approval of the gfant. 6 When a grant, is awarded the Grant Administrator will work with Finance to complete a budget adjustment to reflect the nax�t revenue and corres ondin 7 ex enditures and FTEs. if a plicable. Bud let ad'ustmeaits re uire Board a royal and is one wavmeel i a} togain ggrd approval to accept the grant Another avenue for approval is to submit a staff report for Board consideration at a Board meeting. In some cases, a Level I or 2 grant may not require a bug t adjustment (when the department has enough expenditure authorization to implement the grant without a budget change). In these eases. after consulting with Finance and I3R the �a'ant may be accepted without a bud e= t adiustnient. 7. Following the Ike€-Cerr•,�,,;sskme , I acceptance and approval of the award, the Grant Administrator will forward a copy of the grant application and approved award documents to the County Finance Department. In addition. -A4-s ac-I!-_r c rs a t a a as x� lee -tl�i��a-tlic Gi_ani Adini»sti�at��_, Q7_.dcs�nec r��ill__inforin.tlle C��u�lty_s I-�nailce Del�aitn�unt t�_f the ;Fund�ng.Sputc.e._a�nput�i e�.�cteci aalttc.i 2atcd date c�f_pa� mc,nt_ancl County vevenuc, acc.<�u»t i�1 _wlltcls_Lymea�t_ �aJill lre ic.c,c�rtled. 8. The Grant Administrator shall ensure proper oversight for all grant funds awarded by a funding agency, including thoroughly reviewing award conditions, completing and submitting award documents, monitoring grant -funded activities, tracking expenditures, accounting for grant payments, and preparing and submitting grant reports as required. 9.kl time�ryn3r riau3scav}t i,€�stcf fern tl�iarg=g�tl�e Ad-M. 10. When all grant requirements have been met, the Grant Administrator shall complete and submit a final report or grant closeout agreement to the funding agency as required by the grant award. Approved by the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners DATE une 6, 2012. Tom Anderson Wiz,— pp. interim County Administrator