The URL can be used to link to this page

2020-92-Minutes for Meeting February 05,2020 Recorded 3/4/2020Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2020-92 Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk Commissioners' Journal 03/04/2020 3:39:13 PM co II'II'�I�I'�II'�III'I'III'll 2020-92 • BOARD OF "COMMISSIONER 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon (541 ) 388-6570 10:00 AM WED ESDAY, February 5, 2020 BARNES & SAWYER ROOMS Present were Commissioners Patti Adair and Anthony DeBone Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator,- Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator, David Doyle, County Counsel; and Samantha Pepper, Administrative Assistant. Commissioner Phil Henderson was absent/excused. Several citizens and identified representatives of the media were in attendance. This meeting was audio and video recorded and can be accessed at the Deschutes County Meeting Portal website http://deschutescountyor.igm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx CALL TO ORDER: Chair Adair called the meeting to order at 10:00 am PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: CITIZEN INPUT: Annette Christensen lives on Lower Bend Loop and expressed concerns about the proposed Veterans Neighborhood transitional housing village. CONSENT AGENDA: Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda. BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 5, 2020 PAGE 1 OF 8 Consent Agenda Items: Commissioner Adair requested pulling agenda Item 2 for further discussion. Commissioner DeBone provided a slight edit to the January 15, 2020 Minutes. DeBONE: Move approval of Consent Agenda Items with stated changes. ADAIR: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 1. Consideration of Board Signature for Document No. 2020-067 and 2020-068, Tax Deeds 2. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-112, Lutheran Community Services NW 3. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-118 and 2020-119, Quitclaim Deeds 4. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter Thanking Nicole M. Precone for Service on the Two Rivers Special Road District 5. Consideration of Board Signature for Letter of Appointment of Nicole M. Phelps to Two Rivers Special Road District 6. Consideration of Board Signature for Letter of Appointment of Gil Levy to Deschutes County Public Safety Coordinating Council 7. Consideration of Board Signature for Letter of Reappointment of Colleen Halverson to Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Special Road District Board #8 8. Consideration of Board Signature for Letter of Reappointment of Melanie Butler to Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Special Road District Board #8 9. Approval of Minutes of the December 12, 2019 Budget Meeting 10. Approval of Minutes of the January 15, 2020 BOCC Meeting 11.Approval of Minutes of the January 21, 2020 BOCC Meeting BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 5, 2020 PAGE 2 OF 8 ACTION ITEMS: CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF BLACK BUTTE RANCH SERVICE DISTRICT Amy Heverly, Assistant Legal Counsel introduced the Black Butte Ranch Service District police levy. Chair Adair opened the hearing. Chief Denny Kelley and Black Butte Ranch Board Vice Chair Rosemary Norton expressed continued support of the levy to better serve the Ranch. The levy will increase tax from .55 cents to .65 cents per $1000 of assessed value. Chief Kelley noted that the .55 cent rate has been constant since 2010. Commissioner DeBone thanks all. Chair Adair called for further public testimony. No additional testimony. Hearing closed. DEBONE: Move approval Board Signature of Resolution 2020-001. ADAIR: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried RECONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF DESCHUTES COUNTY Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-112, Lutheran Community Services NW Dr. George Conway and Elizabeth Holden presented on behalf of Health Services. Contracted services are for acute health care for children with severe mental health issues. Commissioner Adair asked why the contract is delayed in coming before the BOCC - noting that the agreement dates back to July 1, 2019. Dave Doyle offered factors involved in the delay, including funding issues and delays internally with the contractor. VOTE Move approval of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-112. Second HENDERSON: DEBONE: ADAI R: BOCC MEETING Absent Yes Chair votes yes. Motion Carried FEBRUARY 5, 2020 PAGE 3 OF 8 12.Award Contract for Supplying and Hauling of Crushed, Pre Coated Rock for Chip Seal 2020 to High Desert Aggregate and Paving, Inc. Chris Doty, Director Road Department is stepping in for Cody Smith, County Engineer. There were 3 proposals and High Desert Aggregate was deemed the lowest bidder. DEBONE: Move approval of Chair Signature of Doc No. 2020-117. ADAIR: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 13. Award Contract for Engineering Services for the Hunnell Rd: Loco Rd to Tumalo Rd Project to Harper Houf Peterson Righellis, Inc. Chris Doty, Director Road Department is stepping in for Cody Smith, County Engineer. There were 5 proposals and Harper Houf Peterson Righellis Inc. (HHPR) scored the highest. Mr. Doty alerted the BOCC that he anticipates that this project will require road right-of-way legalization proceedings. DEBONE: Move approval of Chair Signature of Document No. 2020- 130. ADAIR: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried ORDER TO REOPEN HEARING: Non- Prime Resources Lands and Plan Amendment Zechariah Heck, Community Development presents on this Non -Prime Resource Land and Plan Amendment. The BOCC supports reopening the Record for new evidence and testimony. A public hearing is scheduled for April 1, 2020. BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 5, 2020 PAGE 4 OF 8 DEBONE: Move approval of reopening record of Board Order No. 2020- 006. ADAIR: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 14. Consideration of CCBHC Expansion Grant Application Request Dr. George Conway states that he is standing in for Janice Garceau and reads staff report. Cheryl Smallman, Health Department Fiscal also present. Commissioner DeBone clarifies that this grant is being applied for by Deschutes County for federal dollars. Oregon is one of 8 states that participate in this particular grant. DEBONE: Move approval of Application CCBHC Expansion grant to SANSA for submission. ADAI R: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 15. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-129, Denial of Nehmzow Marijuana Production Facility at 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend Isabella Liu, Community Development and Adam Smith, Assistant Legal Counsel presents the draft Nehmzow Marijuana Production Facility decision document. Mr. Smith confirms the changes from 2016 to 2018 to better reflect the particular code and Board. Discussion of deletion of paragraph on page 6. "Facilities" was added in as a factor in various places. Commissioner Adair identifies miss spellings on page 14. BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 5, 2020 PAGE 5 OF 8 ADAIR: Move approval of Board Signature Doc. 2020-129 with red line edits and minor modifications. DEBONE: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 16. PUBLIC HEARING: Plan Amendment to Allow Sewer Line Serving City of Bend Outback Water Facility Matthew Martin, Community Development introduces this Plan Amendment to allow sewer line serving City of Bend Outback Water Facility. Paul Rheault, City of Bend Facilities and Ian Leitheiser, Assistant City Attorney explain the proposal. The state has concerns that the wells are too close to the on - site septic tank serving just the city staff at this facility. There are seven supply wells currently onsite. Matthew Martin states this amendment would only serve the City of Bend Outback Facility. DEBONE: Motion to close oral and written records ADAIR: Second DEBONE: Move approval of Board Signature of Plan Amendment ADAIR: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 5, 2020 PAGE 6 OF 8 17. PUBLIC HEARING - Redmond UGB Amendment Cynthia Smidt, Community Development introduces the Redmond UGB Amendment. James Lewis, Property Manager thanks Greg Blackmore, Hayes McCoy, Joe Bessman for working on this project with the county. This land will be right outside of the City of Redmond and replaced with developmental land within the same area. Tom Anderson asked about City of Redmond annexing this land. Mr. Lewis states that there is an agreement with the City and then the formal annexation. Then send LCDC for final approval. DEBONE: Motion to close oral and written record ADAIR: Second DEBONE: Move approval of Redmond UGB Amendment with ordinance to follow. ADAI R: Second VOTE: HENDERSON: Absent DEBONE: Yes ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried OTHER ITEMS: • Tom Anderson thanks James Lewis for his service to Deschutes County as Property Manager. • Tom Anderson asks the board about a presentation on teen lead substance abuse and vaping on next Wednesday's agenda. BOCC MEETING FEBRUARY 5, 2020 PAGE 7 OF 8 Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 11:37 AM. DATED this `�-y� Day of /20 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners, J/1 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 10:00 AM, WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2020 Barnes Sawyer Rooms - Deschutes Services Center - 1300 NW Wall Street - Bend This meeting is open to the public, usually streamed live online and video recorded. To watch it online, visit www.deschutes.org/meetings. 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 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE CITIZEN INPUT This is the time provided for individuals wishing to address the Board, at the Board's discretion, regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Please complete a sign-up card (provided), and give the card to the Recording Secretary. Use the microphone and clearly state your name when the Board Chair calls on you to speak. PLEASE NOTE. Citizen input regarding matters that are or have been the subject of a public hearing not being conducted as a part of this meeting will NOT be included in the official record of that hearing. If you offer or display to the Board any written documents, photographs or other printed matter as part of your testimony during a public hearing, please be advised that staff is required to retain those documents as part of the permanent record of that hearing. CONSENT AGENDA Consideration of Board Signature for Document No. 2020-067 and 2020-068, Tax Deeds Board of Commissioners BOCC Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 5, 2020 Page 1 of 4 2. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-112, Lutheran Community Services NW 3. Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-118 and 2020-119, Quitclaim Deeds 4. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter Thanking Nicole M. Precone for Service on the Two Rivers Special Road District 5. Consideration of Board Signature for Letter of Appointment of Nicole M. Phelps to Two Rivers Special Road District 6. Consideration of Board Signature for Letter of Appiontment of Gil Levy to Deschutes County Public Safety Coordinating Council 7. Consideration of Board Signature for Letter of Reappointment of Colleen Halverson to Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Special Road District Board #8 8. Consideration of Board Signature for Letter of Reappointment of Melanie Butler to Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Special Road District Board #8 9. Approval of Minutes of the December 12, 2019 Budget Meeting 10.Approval of Minutes of the January 15, 2020 BOCC Meeting 11.Approval of Minutes of the January 21, 2020 BOCC Meeting ACTION ITEMS CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF BLACK BUTTE RANCH SERVICE DISTRICT 10:10 AM PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Board Signature of Resolution No. 2020-001, Submitting to the Voters in the Black Butte Ranch Service District an Election on a New Five -Year Local Option Levy to Fund Law Enforcement Services - Amy Heverly, RECONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF DESCHUTES COUNTY Board of Commissioners BOCC Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 5, 2020 Page 2 of 4 12. 10:25 AM Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No. 2020-117, a Notice of Intent to Award Contract for Supplying and Hauling of Crushed, Pre - Coated Rock for Chip Seal 2020 to High Desert Aggregate and Paving, Inc. - Cody Smith, County Engineer 13. 10:35 AM Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No. 2020-130, a Notice of Intent to Award Contract for Engineering Services for the Hunnell Rd: Loco Rd to Tumalo Rd Project to Harper Houf Peterson Righellis, Inc. - Cody Smith, County Engineer 14. 10:55 AM Consideration of CCBHC Expansion Grant Application Request -Janice Garceau, BH Deputy Director 15. 11:10 AM Consideration of Board Signature of Document No. 2020-129, Denial of Nehmzow Marijuana Production Facility at 60148 Stirling Drive, Bend - Isabella Liu, Associate Planner 16. 11:25 AM PUBLIC HEARING: Plan Amendment to Allow Sewer Line Serving City of Bend Outback Water Facility - Matthew Martin, Associate Planner 17. 12:00 PM PUBLIC HEARING -Redmond UGB Amendment -Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner LUNCH RECESS 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 To watch this meeting on line, go to: www.deschutes.Or�/meetings Please note that the video will not show up until recording begins. You can also view past meetings on video by selecting the date shown on the website calendar. Board of Commissioners BOCC Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 5, 2020 Page 3 of 4 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/meetingcalendar (Please note: Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St, Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.) Board of Commissioners BOCC Meeting Agenda Wednesday, February 5, 2020 Page 4 of 4 �\}i C s C GI tt U—A oBOARD OF COMMISSIONERS "I DATE: �' '� r 2 0 2-0 NAME (please print): 4 �2JU 7 4 if 4 C ADDRESS: 62 AZU2 �� PRONE: 6, If you plan to submit written documents as a part of your testimony, please give a copy to the Board's Clerk so that they can be included as part of the record. If you're providing testimony related to a public hearing, please complete the following section: ® IN FAVOR ® NEUTRAL / UNDECIDED OPPOSED February 4, 202 Dear Deschutes County Commissioners: I understand that a transitional village for homeless veterans has received preliminary approval to build 15 individual pods and a central building with restroom, kitchen and other facilities on vacant property adjacent to the State Police Offices in Bend. I also understand that the facilities is intended to be similar to a shelter in Clackamas County. I would like to draw your attention to issues with the location of the village and the very significant differences between the Clackamas facility's location and the proposed location of the Bend facility. The Clackamas County Veterans Transitional Village is located on vacant land in an area surrounded by light industrial, including a Fred Meyer Distribution Center, a Kroger Bakery, Charlies Produce of Portland Warehouse, Precision Truss & Lumber, and J&D Refrigerated Services. No homes, schools, or childcare facilities are located in the surrounding blocks. In addition, the Clackamas Veteran's Village is located close to transportation services. See a map of the area at this link: . ® /mgpW!acelCla kqas C®tin +Veteran Villas / 45.4QLT? 5 m 122_5476313 877m/data_!3m1!lea!4m5!3m4!1s0x®:Cx398ale aa9538dib !Bm2!3d4 .4007458!4d- 122.5451809 The immediate neighborhood in which the Bend facility would be located is in a neighborhood that transitions from commercial and services to individual homes. The neighborhood begins along Poe Shales Drive and extends west, along with four or five other developments, over to O.B. Riley on the west and Empire Avenue on the south. Homes on Poe Shales Drive and Shetland Loop would be immediately adjacent to the proposed facility. A new elementary school was opened just this year north of the neighborhood to which children are able to walk to school. A child care facility operates in a home on Poe Sholes Drive. Quite frankly, the neighborhood immediately adjacent to the proposed facility is already challenged by the difficult mix of Deschutes Count services on Poe Sholes and Britta Ave., including the Deschutes County Juvenile Division, the Deschutes County Adult Parole & Probation Offices, the Deschutes County Adult Jail, a winter warming shelter, and, now I understand, a short term detox center is scheduled to open next to the parole offices when remodeling for it is completed. The human traffic from these services has been disruptive and worrisome at times with individuals being released from the jail at all hours of the day and night, frequently when transportation services are not available and individuals must walk a distance to reach bus service. In addition, individuals and groups who attend the various facilities often linger and sit on the curb in front of the facilities —far enough away to meet smoking restrictions. Vehicles of homeless, including RVs and trailers are seen parked near the area. Traffic through the neighborhood at night has been troublesome with cars seen stopped on occasion in an alley a few blocks to the west. I am unaware of any additional security provided to the neighborhood in spite of all these facilities. A facility to serve the homeless will attract more individuals that the 15 who will live in the village pods and will add further pressure on the neighborhood, particularly those whose back yards abut the property. My neighbors and I feel that the livability of the neighborhood is impacted by all of the existing county services already and believe that another such service will significantly deteriorate our livability and security. In addition, the presence of the Deschutes County services have a negative impact on property values in the neighborhood. Another similar facility like the proposed transition village immediately adjacent to the homes in the neighborhood will have further negative impact on the neighborhood and owners' property values. It is a neighborhood of modest homes, often purchased by first-time home buyers and others who have modest means. Additional pressure on a neighborhood of this kind will have an outsized impact on values and livability. My neighbors and I understand the significant need that the proposed village hopes to meet and we fully support the concept, however we urge the county to deny the request to construct the facility. We request that the organizers seek a location more similar to the Clackamas facility where light industrial are more predominant and where transportation services are more readily available. My neighbors and I would be happy to meet with you to discuss our concerns. Best Regards, Annette Christensen • • • • •W[CLIJA/ • Overview Map Map and Taxlot: 171217DC01400 AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT For Board of Commissioners BOCC Wednesday Meeting of February 5, 2020 DATE: January 30, 2020 FROM: Janice Garceau, Health Services, TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of CCBHC Expansion Grant Application Request RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED: Staff recommend approval to apply for Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA) Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinic Expansion Grant. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The purpose of this program is to increase access to and improve the quality of community mental health and substance use disorder treatment services through the expansion of Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics (CCBHCs). CCBHCs provide person- and family -centered integrated services. The CCBHC Expansion grant program must provide access to services including 24/7 crisis intervention services for individuals with serious mental illness or substance use disorders, including opioid use disorders; children and adolescents with serious emotional disturbance; and individuals with co- occurring mental and substance disorders. With this funding Health Services intends to continue services and integration efforts implemented during the CCBHC Demonstration grant and later Expansion grant, as well as expand services to individuals experiencing psychiatric crisis. New requirements in the current Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) require that Health Services fund new positions and activities under the grant this cycle. This required the elimination of some limited duration positions and the addition of several new FTE as indicated below: 19.50 Total FTE: • 3.0 Behavioral Health Specialist II (1.0 re -purposed) • 2.0 Behavioral Health Specialist I • 5.5 Peer Support Specialist (1.5 new FTE) • 2.0 Behavioral Health Technician (2.0 new FTE) • 4.0 Administrative Support Specialist • 1.0 Management Analyst • 1.0 Public Health Nurse II • 1.0 Language Access Coordinator (1.0 new FTE) CCBHCs provide a comprehensive collection of services that create access, stabilize people in crisis, and provide the needed treatment and recovery support services for those with the most serious and complex mental and substance use disorders. CCBHCs integrate services to ensure a comprehensive approach to healthcare. Research has shown that significant health care costs are driven by un/poorly managed mental health and substance use disorders, and that integration of behavioral and physical health services improves health outcomes for individuals (SAMHSA). Further, the CCBHC project requires clinics to adopt evidenced based practices such as Motivational Interviewing, Assertive Community Treatment, Intensive Care Coordination, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Peer Support, among others, to address mental and substance use disorders. The current evidence indicates that CCBHCs in Oregon have increased access to behavioral health for priority populations, reduced emergency room utilization, improved screening for suicide, depression and substance use disorders, and improved care coordination and safety planning (OHA). FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: Certified Behavioral Health Clinic Expansion Grant Fiscal Years 2021- 2023, starting 8/30/20 - 8/29122 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Total Personnel $ 832,014 $ 1,056,667.00 S 178,053 $ 5 5 2,066,734 Fringe Benefits S 570,767 $ 724,873 S 122,144 $ S 5 1,417,784 Travel $ 16,667 $ 9,167 $ 1„166 $ 5 $ 27,000 Equipment $ 9,667 $ - $ - 5 $ $ 9,667 Supplies $ 8,333 5 10,000 $ 1,667 S $ $ 20,000 Contractual $ 20,833 Construction $ $ $ $ S 5 Other $ $ $ 5 $ 5 Indirect Charges $ 144,861 S 180,487 $ 30,303 S S $ 355,651 Total Project Costs I S 1,603,1421 S 1,985361 15 333,333 1 $ S $ 3,921,936 The Certified Behavioral Health Clinic (CCBHC) Expansion Grant will pay up to $3,566,184 of direct program costs over two years, spanning Fiscal Year 2021 to Fiscal Year 2022. to addition, it will contribute a 103o de-minimus rate, $355,652, to the department's administrative overhead. The analysis assumes the grant will cover 19.5 limited -duration FTE to coincide vath the grant funding period, as well as $27,000 in travel and training expenses, $,J20,000 in various supplies, and $25,000 contractual expenses forthe purposes of evaluation and technical assistance. ' ` ATTENDANCE: Janice Garceau, Director of Behavioral Health; Cheryl Smallman, Business Intelligence Manager �vT E S CO 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 Wednesday Meeting of February 5, 2020 DATE: January 30, 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 production request. The decision is now presented to the Board for consideration of signature on Document No. 2020-129. ATTENDANCE: Izze Liu, Associate Planner I E S C0------------ 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 Wednesday Meeting of February 5, 2020 DATE: January 29, 2020 FROM: Matthew Martin, Community Development, 541-330-4620 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING: Plan Amendment to Allow Sewer Line Serving City of Bend Outback Water Facility BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: On August 13, 2019, an application was filed for a comprehensive plan amendment with exception to statewide land use planning Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow a sewer line on unincorporated lands to serve 18600 Skyliners Road (tax map and lot 17-11- 34 800) in the Rural Residential (RR-10) zone. Specifically, the applicant is proposing to use an existing process water line that is connected to the City of Bend sewer system to transport both process water and sewage produced from the existing on -site facilities. On November 12, 2019, the Deschutes County Hearings Officer conducted a public hearing to receive testimony. On December 10, 2019, the Hearings Officer issued a decision recommending approval of the proposed plan amendment. Pursuant to Section 22.28.030(C) of the County Land Use Procedures Ordinance, plan amendments requiring an exception to the Oregon Statewide Land Use Goals shall be heard de novo before the Board without the necessity of filing an appeal, regardless of the determination of the Hearings Officer. The complete record for the project was presented to the Board at the meeting on January 27, 2020. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: none. ATTENDANCE: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner INN MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner DATE: February 5, 2020 SUBJECT: Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to Allow a Sewer Line on Unincorporated Lands. (File No. 247-19-000628-PA). On February 5, 2020, the Board of Commissioners ('Board") will hold a public hearing to consider a proposal by the City of Bend ("City") for a comprehensive plan amendment with an exception to statewide land use planning Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow a sewer line on unincorporated lands. I. BACKGROUND On August 13, 2019, an application was filed for a comprehensive plan amendment with exception to statewide land use planning Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow a sewer line on unincorporated lands to serve 18600 Skyliners Road (tax map and lot 17-11-34 800) in the Rural Residential (RR-10) zone. Specifically, the applicant is proposing to use an existing process water line that is connected to the City of Bend sewer system to transport both process water and sewage produced from the existing on -site facilities. On November 12, 2019, the Deschutes County Hearings Officer conducted a public hearing to receive testimony. On December 10, 2019, the Hearings Officer issued a decision recommending approval of the proposed plan amendment. Pursuant to Section 22.28.030(C) of the County Land Use Procedures Ordinance, plan amendments requiring an exception to the Oregon Statewide Land Use Goals shall be heard de novo before the Board without the necessity of filing an appeal, regardless of the determination of the Hearings Officer. The complete record for the project was presented to the Board at the meeting on January 27, 20201. 1 1/27/2020 Board Meeting: http://deschutescountyor.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail Meeting.aspx?ID=2481 II. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED The Planning Division mailed written notice of public hearing to property owners within 250 feet of the subject property on January 9, 2020. Staff has not receive any additional written testimony at the time of this memorandum. III. NEXT STEPS The Board will hold the public hearing on February 5. At the conclusion of the testimony, the Board can consider the following options: 1. Close the public hearing and written record and begin deliberations; 2. Close the public hearing and leave the written record open to a date certain; or 3. Continue the public hearing to a date certain. According to Deschutes County Code 22.20.040(D), the review of the proposed quasi-judicial plan amendment application is not subject to the 150-day review period. 247-19-000628-PA Page 2 of 2 G 9 ?S t y} ® j iS 1 1 i $ '➢ Y E t J r' �5 } r ?i, l a zT < r-r rD ZT 0 rD LQ 0 0 U) rD :0 rD O r" cu �' rD rt-0 ZT _0 rD ' �' -5 n rD -0 v rD 0 v �, �' -0 O , -1 rtLA �• rD �_ _ N rt Q n D ee-r n• -0_ r(D rr) I rD � 0 CT � rD _ _. t_n J ` t LA rt < rD 0-rD O O Q rD p� -�- 0 ND O _ Q rt 0 rD rCL r�D � r* zT cu r-f e �' O � - 0 O CD LA rD: 0-N-0 rt N -0 � O rt rt — C LA rt 0 -7 rt 0"Q LA n. ai rat 9' � C (D rt rD rD r �E. D rt O 0 LA rt 3 rt r-t; rt 0 r-1 3 rD% =+� M rD = Q rD aj rD rD rD N � �N+ C. S2 l< 3 N ro O 'G r-r rDrD Q 0 LA 0 <• M Orq m Q m rt rn CD < D to -1 3 (D cu 3 n 3 :3O ° rD N Ca- I, :3 rt N `< O rD Q W r-n O • • �3 rD rt y rr Cu cn rD rt o cn CD _0 �' rD � a � rD 0- rD Cu -• O aj 0 pp �X � � Q 0 r�-r � . � o c- - :3 LA n (D o LA CD Cu M o Q 0- 0 � can ai o r. _. oZT r _ � � - Q o cu cu CD Q -I O CD Q CD n D ZT —� �-,: O O O 5- O rD M rD LA rt M C' o Q v � � ;- cn rt —. _ (D ro Ul rD o CU cn r-r '-r D rLn Q rt r-t 3 o O rD n �G -� O O D � �' :7 Ul Q ni _ D m Q. 0-0 m Ln L. L' � CU 0- 0 n (DD ai LA Z rD ZT rD = CD rD m OzT ova rD • • O --j ,-I zT Ln rn urD c rt FT-°0 L O rD D rD rD ZT O O -0 rD � rt QJ rD Q n_ l< O n -h rD � O C)L o Q' cu � n OLn = I 4' � z SJ: 4 - C 3 o • • v y 'fh ® , rD • 1 • rD • • • • • v • • 3- 1 1 , • \ L l f / 4t 1 • r z,' • •L X ?� IA 5 • • Z..� s „f • 2 • y rD • • ); • - • • ' • , r 1 • • t �\ vim`` R • 4 ` 1, < LA ,y3 s 4,a Cl • 4- a , x , 'a �j l �i S u 5 r a 00 E ?3, 1 a 1 r a l i -� E S COG 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 Wednesday Meeting of February 5, 2020 DATE: January 29, 2020 FROM: Cynthia Smidt, Community Development, 541-317-3150 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING - Redmond UGB Amendment RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED: Hold a de novo public hearing and make a decision based on the existing record and written and oral testimony. BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Board of County Commissioners (Board) will hold a public hearing on February 5, 2020 to consider an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) adjustment and amendments to Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning maps. The applicant, Deschutes County, requests a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The request also includes a Zone Change for each area of reconfigured and exchanged land. The exchange property is intended to better satisfy industrial land needs that were identified in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 by providing more development -ready land within the Redmond UGB. There will be no change in the amount of industrial zoned land in the City of Redmond nor a change in the amount of agricultural land in Deschutes County. The request includes a Comprehensive Plan amendment to Agricultural for those lands leaving the UGB and a corresponding zone change to Exclusive Farm Use - Alfalfa Subzone to match the zoning of adjacent properties. The lands entering the UGB will temporarily change from Exclusive Farm Use - Alfalfa Subzone to Urban Holding until such time the City of Redmond annexes the land, rezoning it to a combination of Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial. (County file nos. 247-19-000648- PA and 247-19-000649-ZC) City of Redmond has concurrently reviewed this proposal through Redmond file no. 711-19-000163-PA. Redmond City Council adopted the proposal on January 14, 2020 through Ordinance 2020-001, contingent on Board approval. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. ATTENDANCE: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner C-n COhM UNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner DATE: January 29, 2020 RE: Redmond UGB Amendment - Deschutes County Plan Amendment and Zone Change (247-19-000648-PA, 247-19-000649-ZC) The Board of County Commissioners (Board) will hold a public hearing on February 5, 2020 to consider an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) adjustment and amendments to Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning maps. The applicant, Deschutes County, requests a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The request also includes a Zone Change for each area of reconfigured and exchange -a' land. The exchange property is intended to better satisfy industrial land needs that were identified in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 by providing more development -ready land within the Redmond UGB. There will be no change in the amount of industrial zoned land in the City of Redmond nor a change in the amount of agricultural land in Deschutes County. The applicant has also submitted an amendment to the City of Redmond for the same reasons (Redmond file no. 711-19-000163-PA). Redmond City Council adopted the proposal unanimously on January 14, 2020 through Ordinance 2020-001 (attached) with the condition of approval that the Council approval is contingent upon the Board final approval. I. BACKGROUND The subject property is within the jurisdiction of both Deschutes County and City of Redmond. The proposal involves two areas, each approximately 156 acres in size, within the subject property that will be exchanged by Deschutes County and City of Redmond. For reference, the Inclusion and Exclusion Properties' together with the proposed zone changes are shown below on a map submitted by the applicant. ' Inclusion Property: The region of property proposed to be added to the Redmond UGB - referred to as the "Inclusion Property' (also "Inclusion Site" or "Inclusion Land"). The existing zoning for this region of the property is Exclusive Farm Use - Alfalfa Subzone (EFU-AL). The existing plan designation is Agriculture. 1 1 7 NW Lafayette Avenue, Rend, Orea.) i 97703 1 P.O. Eox 600S, Bend, OR 97708-600.5 (541 88 6575 @ (ddCg)descliiaies .org @vnn�w.descht.�tes.org/cd /n� _ -- PROPOSED V ZONE: Nil (94.C++ACRES +,y PROPOSED UG9 INCLUSION�-i ,t55.84ACRES +f-i _ - PROPOSED ! ZONE: MI (1 11.8 ACRES +J-} 14 I i 15 PROPOSED O ZONE: EFUAL PROPOSED UGB EXCLUSION (t SE ACRES + -) In 2013, a regional industrial land needs analysis was conducted to maintain a stable and sustainable rural economy in the Redmond area. The Exclusion Site and surrounding area was brought into the Redmond UGB to accommodate the regional industrial land needs. However, industrial land along the eastern boundary of Redmond continued to develop, which resulted in the Exclusion Property: The region of the property proposed to be removed from the Redmond UGB - referred to as the "Exclusion Property" (also "Exclusion Site" or "Exclusion Land"). The existing zoning for this region of the property is Light Industrial (M-1) for approximately 111 acres and Heavy Industrial (M-2) for approximately 45 acres. The existing plan designation for this region is Urban Industrial -Light and Urban Industrial -Heavy, respectively. 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 2 of 5 extension of facilities and services away from the Exclusion Site. As such, the Exclusion site is no longer the preferred location for new industrial development. Accordingly, the applicant has requested to revise the location of the UGB to accommodate the industrial land need. By shifting this large -lot industrial land closer to developing areas of the City of Redmond, the Inclusion Site will be more readily available for development. This is based on current growth patterns as well as availability and extension of facilities and services for such uses. As such, the Inclusion Site will better achieve the needs detailed in SB 1544. As proposed, the amount of land needed by the regional large lot industrial lands program (County Ordinance 2013- 002) will be maintained, provided in the same general vicinity, and located to take advantage of recent development patterns. The Deschutes County and City of Redmond plan designation and primary zone change information is noted below. Inclusion Property Exclusion Property Comprehensive Plan Designation Primary Zone Area Current ` Proposed Current Proposed (acres) Agriculture UGB / Urban EFUAL UH-10 to 111 Industrial M-1 Agriculture UGB / Urban EFUAL UH-10 to 45 Industrial M-2 UGB / Urban Agriculture M-1 EFUAL 111 industrial - UGB / Urban Agriculture M-2 EFUAL 45 Industrial The proposal will also change Deschutes County combining zones, including the Redmond Urban Reserve Area (RURA), Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA), and Airport Safety (AS) Combining Zones. The Deschutes County combining zone change information is noted below. Inclusion Property Exclusion Property Combining Zone Current Proposed RURA, SMIA -- RURA, AS 2 The land being added to the UGB will temporarily change from Exclusive Farm Use - Alfalfa subzone (EFUAL) to Urban Holding (UH-10). Once the City of Redmond annexes the land, the zoning will include a combination of Light Industrial (M-1) and Heavy Industrial (M-2). 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 3 of 5 11. HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATION A public hearing was held by the Deschutes County Hearings Officer on November 19, 2019. The Hearings Officer issued a decision recommending approval of the proposed Plan Amendment and Zone Change on December 24, 2019. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS The Planning Division mailed written notice of public hearing to property owners within 750 feet of the subject property on January 14, 2020. Staff has not receive any additional written testimony at the time of this memorandum. At the public hearing before the Hearings Officer, there were two formal public comments from neighbors, Izaac Ross and jenni Carver -Ross, who believe that their property should be brought into the UGB before or in conjunction with the Inclusion Site. The Hearings Officer agreed with the applicant and found that since the proposed Redmond UGB amendment is a quasi-judicial application specific to an "acre for acre" adjustment and not a legislative UGB expansion, the request by the neighbors is not applicable nor is it the proper proceeding for such a request. Patrick Brady with EzraTerra, a business that acquires contaminated properties to cleanup for redevelopment, testified at the public hearing and provided written comments during the open record period. The Hearings Officer summarized Mr. Brady's comments as follows: Mr. Brady expresses concerns that the County has not exercised due care in pr otecting the public from toxic dusts. In short, Mr. Brady contends contamination and drug use on the Exclusion Property will limit development opportunities and, by rezoning to EFU, the Exclusion Property will remain in state of blight that threatens public health. Accordingly, according to Mr. Brady, the proposal violates various approval criteria and Comprehensive Plan policies. Mr. Brady identified several criteria and policies where the proposal was in violation. Moreover, Mr. Brady argues that there has not be a change in circumstances; rather the change is the symptom of contamination on the Exclusion Site. The Hearings Officer addressed all comments and concerns in his decision found that the rezoning the two areas will not affect the quality of the air, water, and land resources. Moreover, the County has adopted policies to protect such resources and the remediation plan for the Exclusion Site will ensure appropriate clean up of the property prior to or in conjunction with development, meeting all Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) requirements. IV. NEXT STEPS At the conclusion of the testimony, the Board can consider the following options: 1. Close the public hearing and written record and begin deliberations; 2. Close the public hearing and leave the written record open to a date certain; or 3. Continue the public hearing to a date certain. 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 4 of 5 According to DCC 22.20.040, quasi-judicial plan amendment and zone change requests are exempt from the 150-day time limit. V. RECORD The record for the project was presented to the Board at their meeting on January 27, 20203. Attachments: Binder Document 2020-01-14 City of Redmond Ordinance 2020-001 2020-01-14 Notice of Public Hearing Item No. 33 32 3 January 27, 2020 Board Meeting: http://deschutescountyor.iqm2.com/Citizens/DetaiI Meeting.aspx?0=2481 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 5 of 5 Attachment A CITY OF REDMOND ORDINANCE NO. 2020-01 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO RECONFIGURE THE REDMOND URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY TO REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 166 ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM THE UGB (EXCLUSION PROPERTY) AND INCLUDE AN EQUIVALENT AREA INTO THE UGB (INCLUSION PROPERTY) AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDMOND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE REDMOND ZONING MAP TO REZONE THE INCLUSION PROPERTY FROM DESCHUTES COUNTY ZONE EFU-AL (EXCLUSIVE FARM USE -ALFALFA SUBZONE) TO CITY OF REDMOND ZONES M-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) AND M-2 (HEAVY INDUSTRIAL) FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY DESCHUTES COUNTY LOCATED AT 2525 W. HIGHWAY 126 (DESCHUTES COUNTY TAX LOT #1513000000103) REDMOND, OR 97756. WHEREAS, the City of Redmond has adopted zoning and planning regulations in accordance with Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 227 that regulate and control the development of land within the City; and WHEREAS, the Redmond City Council has an adopted a set of goals that include: develop and maintain an environment that promotes and supports a strong, healthy and diverse economic base, maintain Redmond's reputation as "the place to do business in Central Oregon and ensure an adequate supply of planned commercial and industrial land"; and WHEREAS, the City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan is the product of hundreds of citizens from the public and private sector who participated in the Redmond Vision 2020 planning process; and WHEREAS, the City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan 2020 Addendum contains multiple visioning �_te .. lu + is providingj ade^date o--ortunities throughout the state for a variety 5l'dICIIIeIIIS, IIII,IUdrilg StaleiiiGiito on �.nvv�u �y y`"`"` "NN g"---"_ of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens; and WHEREAS, the City of Redmond has set the action steps necessary to implement the goals and policies in the Comprehensive Plan related to the vision; and WHEREAS, the Joint Management Agreement between Deschutes County and the City of Redmond states that Urban Growth Boundary Amendments shall be approved by both Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners and the Redmond City Council; and WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Hearings Officer held a public hearing on November 19, 2019, to consider a request to amend to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing an equivalent area of land from the UGB and a Zone Change of the land being removed from the UGB from City of Redmond M-1 and M-2 to EFU-AL, review the existing record and gather additional evidence and public testimony and issued approval on December 24, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners will conduct a public hearing on February 5, 2020, to consider the recommendation of the Deschutes County Hearing Officer for proposed changes to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing an equivalent area of land from the UGB and a Zone Change of the land being removed from the UGB from City of Redmond M-1 and M-2 to EFU-AL, review the existing record and gather additional evidence and public testimony; and Ordinance No. 2020-01 Attachment A WHEREAS, the Redmond Urban Area Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 19, 2019 and, after reviewing the record and gathering public testimony, has recommended that the Redmond City Council approve the Amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary to swap property owned by Deschutes County to include 156 acres of property into the UGB in exchange for removing 156 acres, and Amendment to the Redmond Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map to rezone the 156 acres of the property included in the UGB from Deschutes County zone EFU-AL (Exclusive Farm Use -Alfalfa Subzone) to M-1 (Light Industrial) and M-2 (Heavy Industrial), subject to conditions of approval; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on January 14, 2020 to consider the recommendation of the Redmond Urban Area Planning Commission, review the existing record and gather additional evidence and public testimony; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the Planning Commission's recommendation and, after receiving additional evidence and testimony, determined that the requested Amendment to the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map is in compliance with the Redmond Development Code and would contribute to the Redmond Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the findings for the Amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map have fully addressed the City's Comprehensive Plan amendment process, the applicable state law, the Statewide Planning Goals and the City's standards and criteria for an amendment to the Redmond Development Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed Amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary, Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map, furthers the interests of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, THE Ci TY OF REDIVIOND ORDAINS A$ FOLL^WW& SECTION ONE: The City of Redmond hereby approves the Amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary to swap property owned by Deschutes County to include 156 acres of property into the UGB in exchange for removing 156 acres, and Amendment to the Redmond Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map to rezone the 156 acres of the property included in the UGB from Deschutes County zone EFU-AL (Exclusive Farm Use -Alfalfa Subzone) to M-1 (Light Industrial) and M-2 (Heavy Industrial), subject to conditions of approval. The Decision, Findings, Project Plans and Public Record are attached hereto as "Exhibits A, B, C and D." SECTION TWO: In support of the approval, the City of Redmond hereby adopts the findings, which are attached hereto as Exhibit B of Attachment A, which were prepared by City staff and demonstrate compliance with the Redmond Development Code, Section 8.0760 Amendments and the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. SECTION THREE: SEVERABILITY. The provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The invalidity of any section, clause, sentence, or provision of this Ordinance shall not affect the validity of any other part of this Ordinance, which can be given without such invalid part, or parts. Ordinance No. 2020-01 Attachment A PASSED by the City Council and APPROVED by the Mayor this 14th day of January 2020. ATTEST: Ordinance No. 2020-01 orge gydicott, Mayor Kell Mo e, Ci Recorder FINDINGS OF THE REDMOND CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO RECONFIGURE THE REDMOND URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY TO REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 156 ACRES OF PROPERTY FROM THE UGB AND INCLUDE AN EQUIVALENT AREA INTO THE UGB; AN AMENDMENT TO THE REDMOND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE REDMOND ZONING MAP TO REZONE THE PROPERTY INCLUDED IN THE UGB FROM DESCHUTES COUNTY ZONE EFU-AL (EXCLUSIVE FARM USE -ALFALFA SUBZONE) TO CITY OF REDMOND ZONES M-1 (LIGHT INDUSTRIAL) AND M-2 (HEAVY INDUSTRIAL) FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY DESCHUTES COUNTY FILE NO. Deschutes County Urban Growth Boundary Swap File #711-19-000163-PA REQUEST: Amendment to the Redmond Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by adding approximately 156 acres of land in the UGB in exchange for removing an equivalent area of land from the UGB and Amendment to the Zoning Map to rezone the land to be added to the UGB from Deschutes County zone EFU-AL (Exclusive Farm Use — Alfalfa Subzone) to City zones M-1 (Light Industrial) and M-2 (Heavy Industrial). LOCATION: 2525 W. Highway 126, Redmond, OR 97756 (Tax Lot #1513000000103) APPLICANT: Deschutes County, c/o James Lewis, PO Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708 STAFF: Scott Woodford, Senior Planner HEARINGS ING BODY De_dmond City (:rnmcil nnri Rarimnnd Urban Area Planning Commission ncAR��.�5 FOLJ 1 . � ♦cui i wi w v.ay .............. ........ . ......... DATE & TIME: November 18, 2019 at 6:30 pm, Redmond Urban Area Planning Commission and January 14, 2020 at Redmond City Council; Meetings held at City Council Chambers, 411 SW 9'" Street, Redmond, Oregon Attachment A Vicinity Map llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilllii/iliii DECISION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII HNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII HIIIIIIIIIIIII111I11111 /IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII SUMMARY Approval of an Amendment to the Redmond Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by adding approximately 156 acres of land in the UGB in exchange for removing an equivalent area of land from the UGB and Amendment to the Zoning Map to rezone the land to be included from the UGB from County zone EFU-AL (Exclusive Farm Use — Alfalfa Subzone) to City zones M-1 (Light Industrial) and M-2 (Heavy Industrial). COMMENTS Informational comments from related agencies concerning this project are presented in the record. At the time of the completion of this staff report, there was no public comment received from noticed neighbors by the Planning Department concerning this application during the comment period. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 5 Attachment A EXHIBITS The following exhibits are on -file and make up the record in this matter: 1, Proposed Findings and Conclusions included herein. 2. The Staff Report. 3. Public Notices. 4. Planning Commission Work Session/Public Hearing Staff Reports. 5. Public testimony received. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report available by request: • Applicant Burden of Proof • Public Facilities and Utilities Report • Transportation Report Eastside Framework Plan • City of Redmond Annexation Agreement Exhibit D -- Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Exhibit A— Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 6 Attachment A EXHIBIT A — DECISION AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DECISION Based on the submitted plans, staff findings and conclusions, the Planning Commission recommends approval of an Amendment to the Redmond Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by adding approximately 156 acres of land in the UGB in exchange for removing an equivalent area of land from the UGB and Amendment to the Zoning Map to rezone the land to be included in the UGB from EFU-AL (Exclusive Farm Use — Alfalfa Subzone) to M-1 (Light Industrial) and M-2 (Heavy Industrial) (City File #711-19-000163-PA), subject to the condition of approval below. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Annexation shall occur prior to the land being rezoned and prior to any land use requests for partition, subdivision, or site and design review. 2. City approval of Ordinance 2020-01 is subject to the applicant's request to the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners for approval of an Amendment to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary to swap equal amounts of acreage the County owns in and out of the UGB and Zone Change of the swapped parcels. This will be heard on February 5, 2020. lll111111llllllll1111111lllllIlllllllllllllll1111lIlll END OF CONDITIONS 11111111111111111111111111111111111111lllllllll Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 7 Attachment A EXHIBIT B—CONCLUSIONARY FINDINGS I. APPLICABLE CRITERIA: Oregon Revised Statutes: • ORS 197.298 Oregon Planning Goals: • Statewide Planning Goals 1 through 14. Oregon Administrative Rules: • OAR 660-012-0060 (Transportation Planning Rule) • OAR 660-024-0020 (UGB Amendment) City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan: • Chapter 2: Land Use Planning • Chapter 3: Agricultural Land • Chapter 9: Economic Development • Chapter 11: Public Facilities and Services • Chapter 12: Transportation • Chapter 14: Urbanization City of Redmond Development Code: • 8.0085 (Zoning Annexed Areas) 0 n7rn_n775 (nnarn, Amenrlments) -VI • 8.1100 (Legislative Procedures) 8.1010 (Application Requirements) • 8.1110 (Notice) II. BASIC FINDINGS: A. LOCATION: The subject properties are part of a 1,610-acre parcel owned by Deschutes County located on the eastern edge of Redmond, north of Highway 126, partially within the City of Redmond and partially in Deschutes County, but within the Redmond Urban Reserve Area. The site is also identified as Deschutes County Tax Assessor's Map as Tax Lot #1513000000103. B. JURISDICTION: Both the City of Redmond and Deschutes County have jurisdiction over the 1,610-acre property, as a portion is located within the City and a portion within Deschutes County. After the UGB swap is approved, the Inclusion Property will be annexed and be under the jurisdiction of the City of Redmond and the Exclusion Property will be de -annexed and under the jurisdiction of Deschutes County. C. ZONING: The existing zoning for the Inclusion Property is Exclusive Farm Use -Alfalfa Subzone (EFU-AL). The existing zoning for the Exclusion Property is Light Industrial (M- 1) and Heavy Industrial (M-2). The proposed zoning of the Inclusion Property is M-1 and M-2 and the Exclusion Property is EFU-AL (see map below). Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 8 Attachment A UGB SWAP PROPOSED ZONING I � PROPOSED 10 ZONE: M2 (50.0 ACRES � ) I i - - PROPOSED UOS 1 INCLUSION (155.80ACRES +l•) -- PROPOSED __ ZONE: M 1 i. (105.0 ACRES +1-) I 14 i - - 15 PROPOSED F I ZONE: EPUAL PROPOSED UGB t EXCLUSION (156 ACRES +1•) D. PROPOSAL & BACKGROUND: The applicant proposes to adjust the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by removing the Exclusion Property from the City of Redmond and adding the Inclusion Property into the UGB. With the exchange, the Exclusion Property will be de -annexed from the City into Deschutes County. It will remain in the Redmond Urban Area Reserve (URA), which means that it will be a candidate in the future to be brought back into the UGB when the demand for additional employment lands occurs. With the exchange, the Inclusion Property will temporarily be under the jurisdiction of Deschutes County, but within the Redmond UGB, which means it can be annexed into the City upon request by the owners. The County intends to annex the property and an Annexation Agreement has been signed by the County and the City regarding annexation of this property. The 156-acre Exclusion Property is in the City boundaries and consists of 111 acres of Light Industrial Zoning (M-1) and 45 acres of Heavy Industrial Zoning (M-2) and is currently undeveloped, although it has been used in the past as a dump, a shooting range, and contains several undesignated roads. The Inclusion Property is also 156-acres and is currently in Deschutes County, zoned Exclusive Farm Use — Alfalfa Subzone (EFU-AL) and is vacant, undeveloped and unfarmed. With the exchange, there will be no net gain or loss of land within the UGB. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 9 Attachment A Senate Bill 1544: According to the applicant, the primary purpose of the exchange of UGB land is to facilitate timely, orderly and efficient development of industrial land within the City of Redmond as intended by the 2012 Senate Bill 1544, which is to develop: • Reliable large -lot, high -value employment sites • A large site that can be served readily with infrastructure • A site adjacent to the city's employment and industrial lands • A site adjacent to Oregon Route 126 • A site close to the Redmond airport; and • A framework plan for the site that identifies industrial zoning and service commercial zoning. As documented by the applicant in the record, the Exclusion Property has significant limitations on its developability due to water and sewer availability and/or serviceability and other utility issues, while the Inclusion Property is in closer proximity to utilities and other facilities and can be developed more efficiently. Coordination with Redmond Economic Development, Inc. confirms this property is more suitable for Redmond's industrial needs. The adjustment of the UGB with swapping of land will not impact the Eastside Framework Plan as both the Inclusion Property and the Exclusion Property were designated industrial and/or employment lands for future land uses. Swapping them will not have a net increase or decrease in industrial and/or employment lands. In preparation for eventual annexation of the Inclusion Property, the applicant has also submitted an Annexation Request and the Annexation Agreernent signed and approved by the applicant and the City of Redmond stipulates the annexation of the Inclusion Property will occur upon successful Amendment of the Urban Growth Boundary and Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map and De -Annexation of the Exclusion Property. At that time, the City will zone the Inclusion Property M-1 and M-2. Concurrent to this application, the applicant submitted an application to Deschutes County to Amend the County's Comprehensive Plan for this UGB Amendment and to rezone the Exclusion Property from M-1 and M-2 to EFU. Exhibit A— Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 10 ;.i Attachment A Inclusion Property: • Sewer.• The inclusion property has sewer adjacent and available at the intersection of NE Kingwood Avenue and NE 17th Street and there is the ability to gravity sewer all the property. There will be off -site improvements necessary to increase wastewater capacity, but overall there is the ability to serve the property. • Water.' Water mains are adjacent and available to serve the property along NE 17th Street. According to City Engineering, the parcel is not presently included in the City's Water Master Plan, but public water service could serve these lands with an amendment to the Plan. Traffic: A Transportation Study was conducted by Transight Consulting, LLC to satisfy the Transportation Planning Rule requirement in support of the rezone of the Inclusion Property. A traffic study was done in conjunction with the Eastside Framework Plan. The conclusions of the Transight study is that no changes to the original findings are necessary. The reconfiguration of the UGB (which will result in no net gain or loss of acreage to the UGB) will merely push the impacts farther from OR 126 and onto NE 9th Street, which will serve as an eastern route parallel to US 97 when extended and will reduce reliance on the OR 126 and US 97 corridors. The needed improvements are noted in the City's Transportation System Plan. E. CURRENT LAND USE: The Exclusion Property is currently unused, although it has been used in the past as a dump and a shooting range and has several undesignated roads. The Inclusion Property is also currently vacant, undeveloped and unfarmed, but has been the site of dispersed homeless camps. F. SURROUNDING LAND USE: Surrounding the 1,610 acre Deschutes County owned property is Bureau of Land Management land to the east, the Redmond Airport to the south, residential lots of Lake Park Estates to the north, and a combination of low density residential land in the County and industrial zoned land (both developed and undeveloped) within the City of Redmond to the west. G. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS: The Planning Division mailed notice of the application to impacted agencies and received no responses: Agencies included: Fire Department, Police, Engineering, Parks, Airport, ODOT, ODOT Rail, PP&L, CEC, Century Link, Bend Broadband, Finance, Wastewater, School District and COID. H. PUBLIC COMMENTS: The Planning Division sent notice of this application to property owners within 250 feet of the subject property. Additionally, the Planning Division posted a land use action poster on the subject property. The City has not received any responses as of the publishing of this report. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 12 Attachment A III. BACKGROUND Deschutes County owns a 1,610-acre parcel on the east side of Redmond, a portion of which is located within the City of Redmond and the remainder is outside of the City located within the Redmond Urban Area Reserve (the City's 20-40-year supply of land). The County desires to swap portions of their land so that 156 acres of the property located within the UGB is removed from the UGB (called the Exclusion Property) and 156 acres of the property currently located outside of the UGB is brought into the UGB (called the "Inclusion Property"). A map showing the location of the Exclusion and Inclusion Property is below. According to the County, the purpose of the swap is to allow for quicker and more efficient development of their industrial and employment lands, as required in Senate Bill 1544. The Inclusion Property is more readily developable than the Exclusion Property due to the closer availability of utilities and access. Locator Map - Exclusion/Inclusion Properties The map below shows the boundary of the 1,610-acre County ownership (in red) with the portion of County owned land within the City boundaries in light blue and dark red and the remainder of the County owned property in the Urban Area Reserve shown with in cross- hatch. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 13 Attachment A The Exclusion Property has an interesting history. It was originally zoned industrial, but later zoned OSPR (Open Space, Parks and Recreation) in 1980 so it could be used for a fairgrounds project which was never built. After that proposal failed, the City desired to rezone it back to industrial, but were constrained from doing so by transportation improvements required by the State's Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). In 2007, the Eastside Framework Plan, encompassing the subject property, was adopted. It provided a general development pattern for the County owned property and designated the Exclusion Property as future industrial and service commercial land (see map on following pages). In 2012, Senate Bill 1544 was approved by the State Legislature to address the need for a "reliable supply of large -lot, high value employment sites to attract investment and create jobs or Oregonians and to be competitive for employment projects on a regional, national and global scale." Per the bill, the traffic impacts were approved to be mitigated incrementally and the Exclusion Property was identified as a suitable location for large lot industrial development. With the approval of the Bill, 456 acres of the County owned property zoned OSPR was approved to be developed in accordance with the Eastside Framework Plan and as industrial and service commercial uses. Since that time, no development has occurred on the Exclusion Property. More recently, the Redmond Urban Area Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 19, 2019 and, after reviewing the record and gathering public testimony, recommended approval of the proposal subject to one condition of approval as noted at the end of this report. Map Urban Reserve and City Zoned Lands 126 Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 14 Attachment A Map - Eastside Framework Plan (showing Exclusion and Inclusion Lands) �mllnd 3 i A3 4° f� � t i a Srr yi � RasUN+.aI Lou?1[aum oereN ¢ # � 1 E=3Fklc ta' bbptm mwy � ! A� , r. Ro krcal-Nyn OamN 3 t , t 6 + a s sas ! In rd u. . e�fm,n:m ..-. usfillyd.1,41(14 ij ©W VI0-4Ul(nos( Q PWoe,.nse PetriCunrero l(C 7) i W 'l k, 8' l a''rks � a`Y n OEMe1 AA401 'tfi F I,�i�arIty Simun i t ► a s } Ili I�' Irrcttx 6h PiOpldr 1 ) t x s 1 rr y xl 1 11 ) a e 5 av: NV,,tt�i � Isi1CF�y } }3 s g a r�r'k4i(5�'�, a µpi ygv�cna s u r I i a ns n.(.@I Pp D � t l� 7l } a✓ � iy t x r # '� 2 � � �s'a� s' i y 4 l� 1 3 t 7 t di; J-4 s. t Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 15 Attachment A IV. FINDINGS Pursuant to statutory authority and implementing regulations, a local government may adjust or reconfigure a UGB at any time by exchanging land inside of a UGB for land outside of a UGB. The Land Conservation and Development Commission ("LCDC") has adopted administrative regulations, which implement the statutory authority for UGB reconfigurations, and which serve as criteria for UGB reconfiguration decisions of a City and County. Additionally, the City of Redmond and Deschutes County each have local ordinances that provide standards and criteria for UGB changes within their respective jurisdictions. All UGB modifications must be made according to the applicable state and local criteria. The findings are divided into separate sections that address the following regulatory standards: A. Oregon Revised Statutes B. Oregon Statewide Planning Goals C. Oregon Administrative Rules D. Redmond Community Development Code E. Redmond Comprehensive Plan A. UGB ADJUSTMENTS - OAR 660-024-0070 1) A local government may adjust the UGB at any time to better achieve the purposes of Goal 14 and this division. Such adjustment may occur by adding or removing land from the UGB, or by exchanging land inside the UGB for land outside the UGB. The requirements of section (2) of this rule apply when removing land from the UGB. The roi 11;rnmonfc of anal 44 and thhz rflilkinn hand ORS 197.2987 apply when land is added to the UGB, including land added in exchange for land removed. The requirements of ORS 197.296 may also apply when land is added to a UGB, as specified in that statute. If a local government exchanges land inside the UGB for land outside the UGB, the applicable local government must adopt appropriate rural zoning designations for the land removed from the UGB prior to or at the time of adoption of the UGB amendment and must apply applicable location and priority provisions of OAR 660-024-0060 through 660-020-0067. 2) A local government may remove land from a UGB following the procedures and requirements of ORS 197.764. Alternatively, a local government may remove land from the UGB following the procedures and requirements of 197.610 to 197.650, provided it determines: a) The removal of land would not violate applicable statewide planning goals and rules, b) The UGB would provide a 20-year supply of land for estimated needs after the land is removed, or would provide roughly the same supply of buildable land as prior to the removal, taking into consideration land added to the UGB at the same time; c) Public facilities agreements adopted under ORS 195,020 do not intend to provide for urban services on the subject land unless the public facilities provider agrees to removal of the land from the UGB and concurrent modification of the agreement, Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 16 Attachment A d) Removal of the land does not preclude the efficient provision of urban services to any other buildable land that remains inside the UGB; and e) The land removed from the UGB is planned and zoned for rural use consistent with all applicable laws. ➢ Staff Response: As detailed in UGB ADJUSTMENTS - OAR 660-024-0070(3), an exchange of land inside the UGB for land outside the UGB may be allowed pursuant to OAR 660-024-0070(3) notwithstanding OAR 660-024-0070(1) and (2). OAR 660-024- 0070(1) is the rule that triggers compliance with the Priority Lands statute and OAR 660- 024-0070(2) is the rule that directs local jurisdiction procedures for UGB land removal. OAR 660-024-0070(3) provides an exemption to said subsections (1) and (2), which therefore provides an exemption to direct Priority Lands compliance. Despite Subsection (1) including language that pertains to the exchange of land within a UGB for land outside the UGB, to apply it as applicable criteria in addition to Subsection (3), would render the "Notwithstanding" term within Subsection (3) without meaning. Should it be found that Subsection 3 does apply, the applicant has addressed it in detail in their burden of proof, which is part of the record. 660-024-0070(3) provides in relevant part, the following: (3) Notwithstanding sections (1) and (2) of this rule, a local government considering an exchange of land may rely on its acknowledged population forecast and land needs analysis, rather than adopt a new forecast and need analysis, provided...: Therefore, a demonstration of direct or indirect compliance with OAR 660-024- 0070(1) and (2) (and subsequently the Priority Lands Statute) is not required. The provisions (subsections e aic" invare not Iegl11eU oluly when compliance vVith Qi thiertinne ('11 (a1 kI)ukG)) vu r� and (b) can be demonstrated. A demonstration of compliance with Subsections (3)(a) and (b) is provided above. Thusly, the exchange complies with OAR 660-027-0070(1) and (2) (and subsequently the Priority Lands Statute) by manner of inapplicability. OAR 660-024-0070 (3) provides the following: 3) Notwithstanding sections (1) and (2) of this rule, a local government considering an exchange of land may rely on the land needs analysis that provided a basis for its current acknowledged plan, rather than adopting a new need analysis, provided: (a) The amount of buildable land added to the UGB to meet: (A) A specific type of residential need is substantially equivalent to the amount of buildable residential land removed, or (B) The amount of employment land added to the UGB to meet an employment need is substantially equivalent to the amount of employment land removed, and (b) The local government must apply comprehensive plan designations and, if applicable, urban zoning to the land added to the UGB, such that the land added is designated: (A) For the same residential uses and at the same housing density as the land removed from the UGB, or (B) For the same employment uses as allowed on the land removed from the UGB, Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 17 Attachment A or (C) If the land exchange is intended to provide for a particular industrial use that requires specific site characteristics, only land zoned for commercial or industrial use may be removed, and the land added must be zoned for the particular industrial use and meet other applicable requirements of ORS 997A.320(6). Several important implications stem from a UGB exchange proposal, as opposed to a net UGB expansion or reduction. First and foremost, the burden of proof does not require a clear demonstration that there is a need for more urban land, because no appreciable additional urban land will be included within the boundary. OAR 660-024- 0070 stipulates that: "a local government considering an exchange of land may rely on its acknowledged population forecast and land needs analysis, rather than adopt a new forecast and need analysis, provided the land added to the UGB is planned for the same uses," In terms of a UGB reconfiguration, such as the one proposed here, no additional analysis of population and land need is required, which significantly reduces the scope of a "needs analysis" because the land to be added is planned for the same uses. Subsection (a)(A) pertains to residential land and is therefore not relevant to this proposal. Subsection (a)(B) is relevant and pertains to the exchange of employment land. The manner in which substantial equivalency is used herein relates specifically to the amount of land. With regard to the type of land, the language makes a clear and important distinction between suitable and developable employment land to be added and suitable and developed employment land to be removed. Neither the Inclusion Land nor the Exclusion Land areas contain otherwise developed lands, so the accounting of employment land is limited that which is suitable. Therefore, the accounting of suitable employment land for inclusion is to be based on land that is suitable to meet a specific employment need and the amount of suitable land for removal is to be based on land that is suitable employment land without limitations on specific types, uses or needs. The Alternatives Analysis, includes an ESEE and Goal 14 Analysis, which demonstrates the manner in which the subject Inclusion Property is suitable to meet a specific type of employment need, specifically industrial lands detailed in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544. More specifically, the aforementioned Exhibit demonstrates the comparative ways in which the Exclusion Site is generally suitable for employment uses, however it is comparatively less appropriate for industrial lands detailed in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 based on a comprehensive and thorough ESEE and Goal 14 boundary location alternatives analysis. The accounting of Inclusion Land and Exclusion Land thusly, equates to the amount of suitable employment land to be included for a specific type of employment land compared to the amount of exclusion land generally suitable for employment. As evidenced by Exhibits K and L the Inclusion Site is 156 acres and the Exclusion Site is 156 acres of similarly developable land, thus substantially equivalent. In regard to Subsection (b)(A), the proposal will not impact residential lands or densities; therefore, that subsection does not apply. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 18 Attachment A In regards to Subsection (b)(B), the Exclusion Lands and the Inclusion Lands will directly swap plan designations and zoning; thereby providing an equal amount of land for employment uses in the Redmond UGB. In regard to Subsection (b)(C), the proposal will exchange industrial land for the uses established in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544. The proposed exchange will provide more development ready land within the Redmond UGB, by removing 111 acres of M-1 zoned land and 45 acres of M-2 zoned land and replacing it with the same industrial acres of the same zones (111 acres of M-1 and 45 acres of M-2). Regarding the other applicable requirements of ORS 197A.320(6), that section establishes: (6) When the primary purpose for expansion of the urban growth boundary is to accommodate a particular industry use that requires specific site characteristics, or to accommodate a public facility that requires specific site characteristics and the site characteristics may be found in only a small number of locations, the city may limit the study area to land that has, or could be improved to provide, the required site characteristics. Lands included within an urban growth boundary for a particular industrial use, or a particular public facility, must remain planned and zoned for the intended use: (a) Except as allowed by rule of the commission that is based on a significant change in circumstance or the passage of time; or (b) Unless the city removes the land from within the urban growth boundary. ➢ Staff Response: The exchange property is being offered to better achieve land needs that were detailed in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544. As detailed in the Exhibit, this Bill was adopted to accommodate a large lot industrial land type; as detailed therein, amongst other characteristics, the needed land includes: • Reliable large -lot, high -value employment sites • A large site that can be served readily with infrastructure • A site adjacent to the city's employment and industrial lands • A site adjacent to Oregon Route 126 • A site close to the Redmond airport; and • A framework plan for the site that identifies industrial zoning and service commercial zoning Given the provisions of this section, along with the goal and intent of the 2012 Senate Bill 1544, an Alternative Lands study area is included in this application and it is limited to properties that are immediately adjacent to the land defined in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 (and could comprehensively maintain these site characteristics). When considering the site specific needs of large -lot, high -value, readily served with infrastructure, adjacent to employment and industrial lands, adjacent to Oregon Route 126, close proximity to the Redmond Airport, and an area where the framework plan identifies industrial zoning and service commercial uses, the Alternatives Analysis documents that the Inclusion Property is the most suitable property of the Alternatives Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 19 Attachment A Analysis. As documented herein and in the Alternatives Analysis, the proposal meets the applicable requirements of ORS 197A.320(6) ➢ Staff Response: As detailed above, OAR 660-024-0070(3) precludes the need for new land needs analyses. Furthermore, as documented above and referenced in the Alternatives Analysis, with an ESEE and Goal 14 Boundary Analysis, the proposal conforms to all applicable approval criteria, those listed in OAR 660-024-0070(3). Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 20 Attachment A B. STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS Applicable Goals Pursuant to OAR 660-024-0020, any adoption or amendment of a UGB must be consistent with the statewide planning goals and related administrative rules, except as follows: a) The exceptions process in Goal 2 and OAR 660, division 4, is not applicable unless a local government chooses to take an exception to a particular goal requirement, for example, as provided in OAR 660-004-0010(1); b) Goal 4 (Forest Land) is not applicable; c) Goal 5 and related rules under OAR 660, Division 23, apply only in areas that are on a local government's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory; d) Goal 8 is not applicable; e) The Oregon Transportation Planning Rule requirements under OAR 660-012- 0060 are satisfied if impacts are not significant. As detailed in the Traffic Report prepared by Transight Consulting, LLC the findings conclude that the proposed urban growth boundary (UGB) reconfiguration can be approved on the transportation system without creating any adverse impacts. f) Goals 15-19 apply to specific geographies in the State and no lands in Lake County are within the stated geographic applicability of these Goals. Respecting the exceptions noted above, the following Statewide Planning Goals must be applied to the proposed UGB Adjustment. As documented below, all applicable Goal requirements are met. Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement ➢ Staff Response: Goal AI states 4a4.ia+ +a4is piannninn prn.o.ee muic+ inxinkm tho ri+i-7anr% generally, and more specifically calls for any adopted comprehensive plan to include a strategy which clearly defines the processes by which the public will be involved in the on -going planning process. Consistency with this goal requires that a system of citizen outreach, notification, and public meetings or hearings be established to review quasi- judicial and legislative land use actions. Both Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted procedural requirements for amending the UGB, Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Zone Changes. As these procedural requirements are part of the acknowledged comprehensive plans of both Deschutes County and the City of Redmond, applications processed under their auspices are by implication consistent with Goal 1. For these reasons, the proposal is consistent with the Statewide Planning Goal 1. Goal 2 — Land Use Planning ➢ Staff Response: Goal 2 is the primary framework upon which all other planning goals rest. It requires that local governments establish a comprehensive plan and implementing measures to govern the uses of land within their jurisdiction and which may be urbanized in the future. It also requires that land use decisions be made "based on an adequate factual basis. Evaluation of a particular proposal in term of Goal 2 is based on two important considerations: 1. the local government's own land use plan, and 2. the extent to which the proposal is consistent with that plan or other applicable planning framework. Goal 2 also sets forth criteria for allowing an exception to other Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 21 Attachment A statewide planning goals; such an exception is not requested in this case, as the proposal is to modify a UGB through the procedure required by Goal 14, Urbanization. Redmond and Deschutes County both have acknowledged comprehensive plans as required by Goal 2. These plans are implemented by zoning codes, growth management mechanisms, and environmental regulations, all of which have been acknowledged for Goal consistency purposes. Furthermore, both implementation programs include established decision -making criteria, which require that proposals demonstrate compliance with applicable review criteria for all land use decisions. This proposal includes comprehensive evaluation of the proposal in terms of all applicable elements of the City's and County's comprehensive plans, as well as the statutes and administrative rules governing urban growth boundaries. The UGB reconfiguration relies upon evidence in the record that includes a thorough geographic analysis of alternative sites and their respective characteristics, such as slopes, soil types and proximity to public facilities. In summary, sufficient evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the UGB reconfiguration can be reviewed and approved through a planning process and policy framework that is appropriate under Goal 2 and the decision to reconfigure the UGB and exchange Comprehensive Plan designated lands has an adequate factual base. For this reason and because the proposal is based on acknowledged comprehensive plans, it is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Goal 3 - Agricultural Land ➢ Staff Response: Consistency with applicable Goal 3 requirements is assured through the proposed designation of the Exclusion Property as Agricultural on the County Comprehensive Plan Map, maintaining an equivalent amount of agricultural land in Deschutes County. Goal 4 - Forest Land ➢ Staff Response: The proposal does not impact any forest land; therefore, this goal is not applicable. Goal 5 - Natural Resources ➢ Staff Response: Goal 5 is a wide-ranging policy initiative intended to protect natural resources and open spaces and is typically implemented through inventories of significant natural resources, including streams, riparian corridors, and wetlands, and establishing development standards intended to protect such resources. The comprehensive plans of the City of Redmond and Deschutes County include goals and policies to protect such resources when included on an acknowledged Goal 5 inventory. Neither the Inclusion nor the Exclusion Lands include inventoried Goal 5 resources; therefore, this goal is not applicable. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 22 Attachment A Goal 6 — Air, Water, and Land Resource Quality ➢ Staff Response: Intended to "maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources," Goal 6 primarily addresses site -specific pollution generators and wastewater discharges, and requires cities to only allow development where sewerage is available and, in the case of pollution -causing uses, where such activities would have the lowest possible impact on air, water, and land resources, Like most jurisdictions throughout Oregon, both the City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted policies to protect these resources and to situate pollution -causing development accordingly. The adopted regulations of the City and County ensure consistency with Goal 6. Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Hazards ➢ Staff Response: Goal 7 requires local governments to adopt comprehensive plans intended to reduce the risk to people and property from natural hazards, including floods, landslides, earthquakes, wildfires, and erosion. A review of potential natural hazards is included in Section IV - Findings of Fact of this narrative. Like most jurisdictions throughout Oregon, both the City and the County have adopted policies to protect against natural hazards. Given that the Inclusion Property and the Exclusion property have similar exposure to potential natural hazards, the adopted regulations of the City and County are adequate to ensure consistency with Statewide Planning Goal 7. Goal 8 — Recreational Needs ➢ Staff Response: Goal 8 is [t]o satisfy the recreational needs of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts." No land within the boundaries of either the Inclusion or Exclusion Lands are planned for or intended to supply future parks or recreational facilities. Therefore, Goal 8 is deemed to be inapplicable to this application. Goal 9 - Economic Development ➢ Staff Response: Intended to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities, Goal 9 requires that land be designated for commercial and industrial uses according to the needs of the local and regional economy, current economic base, workforce, availability of land, availability of key public facilities, etc. Practically speaking, Goal 9 requires communities to preserve employment and industrial land for future business uses. Goal 9 is implemented by the Division 009 rule, however, OAR 660-024-0070(3) makes clear that the full needs analysis requirements of Division 009 that typically apply when adding land to the UGB is not required for the exchange of lands. The Inclusion Lands address a specific need and contain the needed site characteristics; therefore, the proposal is consistent with Goal 9. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 23 Attachment A Goal 10 - Housing ➢ Staff Response: This proposal entails neither a reduction nor an increase of residential land and has no effect on residential land throughout the City or County. This goal is therefore inapplicable. Goal 11 - Public Facilities and Services ➢ Staff Response: Goal 11 requires local governments to establish public facilities plans in order to provide for the "timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development." This Goal is primarily implemented by the City of Redmond, which has adopted public facilities plans and standards. The Inclusion Land is better able to be served by public water, sanitary sewer, and transportation systems than the Exclusion Land. The proposal is consistent with the current public facilities master plans and can be provided public facilities and services. The proposal is therefore consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11. Goal 12 -Transportation ➢ Staff Response: Goal 12 requires that the proposal be consistent with adopted transportation plans and that future development of the property can be served with public transportation facilities. OR Highway 126 is a state highway, is located south of the Exclusion Land and near the Inclusion Land. Although the majority of the policies set forth in Goal 12 relate to the establishment of a comprehensive transportation system plan (TSP), the application of Goal 12 to proposed applications requires demonstration that a proposal is consistent with the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as implemented through OAR 660-012-0060(1), which states that, "Amendments to functional plans, acknowledged comprehensive plans, and land use regulations which significantly affect a transportation facility shall assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility." Under OAR 660-012-0060, no further consideration of traffic is required if the impacts from a potential land use action are deemed not to be significant. As detailed in the Traffic Report prepared by Transight Consulting, LLC the findings conclude that the proposed urban growth boundary (UGB) reconfiguration can be approved on the transportation system without creating any significant impacts. Based on the evidence attached and herein relied upon, transportation impacts are determined to not be significant and therefore the proposal is in compliance with TPR. Therefore, the proposed exchange, UGB amendment and associated Comprehensive Plans and Zoning Map amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 12. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 24 Attachment A Goal 13 - Energy Conservation ➢ Staff Response: This goal requires that land use patterns be established to provide a logical transition of high -density to low -density development which takes advantages of the existing transportation network and underdeveloped properties whenever possible. It also encourages development to adopt measures to limit their energy consumption. Since the Inclusion Property and the Exclusion Property are located in the same vicinity, efficiencies are achieved (by exchanging the Inclusion Lands for the Exclusions Lands) because the Inclusions Lands can better be served by existing transportation and utility infrastructure, rather than (the Exclusion Lands which would necessitate) costly and energy -intensive extension of public and private utilities. Additionally, locating the Industrial land closer to improved local streets that have water, sewer, and utilities developed therein will further increase energy efficiency. Ultimately, the proposal is consistent with Goal 13 because of the locational efficiencies provided by the Inclusion Lands. Goal 14 - Urbanization ➢ Staff Response: Goal 14 requires that all cities develop an urbanization framework as part of their comprehensive plan, appropriate implementing measures, and to periodically review the supply of land within the urban growth boundary. A unique review framework, the Eastside Framework Plan, has been established by Deschutes County and the City of Redmond, which directs development in the area of the proposed land exchange. Because urbanization policies have been adopted as part of Redmond's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and the Eastside Framework Plan, along with the fact that implementing measures have been established, the City of Redmond's planning framework is consistent with Goal 14. There are also six factors that are evaluated to ensure consistency with Goal 14, which emphasize two central questions: is there enough land within the UGB to accommodate future population growth over 20 years, and if not, which land is suitable to bring within the existing UGB. These factors were evaluated in this report. As demonstrated therein, there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposal is consistent with all of them. For these reasons, the proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 14. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 25 Attachment A C. OREGON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE - SECTION 660-012-0060 PLAN AND LAND USE REGULATION AMENDMENTS ➢ Staff Response: Under OAR 660-012-0060, no further consideration of traffic is required if the impacts from a potential land use action are deemed not to be significant. As detailed in the Traffic Report prepared by Transight Consulting, LLC the findings conclude that the proposed urban growth boundary (UGB) reconfiguration can be approved without creating any significant impacts. Based on the findings of the traffic report, the proposed land exchange will retain an equivalent acreage of industrial lands within the City's Urban Growth Boundary, but will shift the lands farther from the OR 126 corridor and onto NE 9th Street. The extension and completion of the NE 9th Street corridor as an eastern route parallel to US 97 was identified within the original analysis as the primary mitigation measure. The increased reliance on this route for primary site access will reduce the reliance and impacts onto the OR 126 and US 97 corridors. As the original report findings were adopted into the City's Transportation System Plan and serve not only the Senate Bill 1544 lands but also serve under -developed industrial properties to the north, no changes to the original findings or plans are recommended. The impacts of the land exchange on the City's on -going Transportation System Plan efforts are expected to be minimal and were already designed to incorporate the employment lands as originally approved. The proposed land exchange may change the overall transportation improvement priorities to serve the Senate Bill lands, placing a higher emphasis on the NE 9th Street corridor. Based on the evidence attached and herein relied upon, transportation impacts from the exchange are determined to not be significant and therefore the proposal is in compliance with TPR. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 26 Attachment A A. CITY OF REDMOND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS 8.0750 Authorization to Initiate Amendments. An amendment to the text of these standards, or to a zoning or plan map may be initiated by either City Council, or the Planning Commission. A property owner may initiate a request for a map or text amendment by filing an application with the Community Development Director using the form(s) prescribed by Article II of these standards. ➢ Staff Response: The property owner has initiated a request for a UGB reconfiguration along with a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment for the Inclusion Property. In association with these applications, Deschutes County (as the applicant) has filed applications using the appropriate City of Redmond forms, thus has complied with this section. 8.0755 Zone / Plan Map Amendments. The Hearings Body shall, within 45 days after filing of a petition by a property owner for a zone change/plan amendment with the Community Development Director, hold a public hearing in accordance with the provisions of Article 11. Prior to said hearing the Community Development Director shall refer the proposed amendment to the Planning Commission for their review and a recommendation. The recommendation of the Commission shall be made a part of the record at the hearing. ➢ Staff Response: The applicant is filing applications in accordance with the provisions 07 NrIIGIe II UI IIIC Redmond LJCVCIUpIIICIIL Code. I I IC Community II11Ul Illy Development Department will refer the proposal to the Planning Commission as prescribed by this section and their recommendation will be made part of the record. 8.0760 Criteria for Amendments. The burden of proof is upon the applicant. The applicant shall show the proposed change is: 1. In conformity with all applicable State statutes; ➢ Staff Response: As detailed therein, the UGB reconfiguration conforms to all of the applicable statutes. Regarding the Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment for the Inclusion Property, as they relate to Land Use proceedings, State Statutes (Oregon Revised Statutes - ORS) are carried out through rules (Oregon Administrative Rules -OAR) which are developed by the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). Local jurisdictions (including the City of Redmond) develop a land use program based upon the adopted OARs. Local land use programs provide the development and maintenance of a Comprehensive Plan, along with implementing ordinances, such as zoning ordinances, procedures, and land division ordinances, along with Public Facilities plans and other implementing provisions. DLCD reviews all Comprehensive Plans and implementing ordinances, and "acknowledges" those that are found be consistent with the OARs and Statewide Planning Goals. The City of Redmond has an "acknowledged" Comprehensive Plan, along with "acknowledged" implementing ordinances. The Comprehensive Plan Map Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 27 Attachment A Amendment and Zone Change are all being reviewed for compliance with the acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and implementing zoning ordinances; therefore the proposal is in conformity with applicable state statutes. City of Redmond Code standards (sections 8.0750 to 8.0775, Amendment Procedures and Notice Requirements), and, (sections 8.1010 through 8.10355, and 8.1300 through 8.1380, Land Use Procedures), were developed in compliance with the applicable State Statutes regarding noticing and public hearings. Also, applicability of the Statewide Planning Goals has been addressed in detail above. Notice of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map amendments will be provided to DLCD and all required public hearings will be noticed in the local newspaper (public notice) as required by City Code and State Statute. With regard to the Statutory public hearing requirements, the proposal is subject to Sections 8.1100 through 8.1125 of the Redmond Development Code. These sections, which implement the Statutory requirements for Legislative Procedures, are anticipated to be followed by the City. The Planning Commission and (ultimately) City Council's public hearing(s) and review processes will conform to the Statutory requirements for the purpose of the review. 2. In conformity with the State-wide planning goals whenever they are determined to be applicable; ➢ Staff Response: Comprehensive reviews of the Statewide Planning Goals were addressed in Conclusions - State of Oregon above. The goals and responses of that section are incorporated by reference. As detailed in that section, the proposal nnnfnrmG to all annlicahle Statewide Plannina coals and thus with this Citv of Redmond approval criterion. 3. In conformity with the Redmond Comprehensive Plan, land use requirements and policies; and ➢ Staff Response: As described below, the proposed UGB Land Exchange, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment conform to all applicable Comprehensive Plan policies. 4. That there is a change of circumstances or further studies justifying the amendment or mistake in the original zoning. ➢ Staff Response: Since the area of the Exclusion Site (and surrounding properties) was brought into the City of Redmond UGB to accommodate a regional large lot industrial land need, other industrial land in the City of Redmond have continued to develop, extending facilities and service along the eastern boundary of the City Limits. During this time of development, the County (land owner) has attempted to develop and/or market the property. The ongoing property assessment has uncovered the fact that with recent development, the Exclusion property is a greater distance away from developed facilities and services and the Inclusion Site is more readily developable. The recent development pattern provides an adequate change in circumstance, to necessitate the need to revise location of the UGB to accommodate Large Lot Industrial Land. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 28 Attachment A 8.0765 Tentative Approval. Based on the facts presented at the hearing and the recommendation of the Planning Commission, if the Hearings Body determines that the applicant has met all applicable criteria for the proposed change, the Hearings Body shall give tentative approval of the proposed change. Such approval shall include any conditions, stipulations or limitations which the Hearings Body determines to be necessary to meet the criteria. An appeal of the Hearings Body's decision shall be processed and decided in the manner provided for in Article 11 of these standards. Upon completion of hearings process, the council shall, by order, effect the zone reclassification of the property. Provided; however, if the applicant fails to abide by the conditions attached to the rezoning the Council may, at a later date, rezone the affected property to its original zoning by order. ➢ Staff Response: Per their submitted Burden of Proof, the applicant understands the procedural provisions established in this section. 8.0770 Public Hearing on Amendments. If a map change is initiated by the Planning Commission or City Council, or if an amendment to the text of these standards is to be considered, the City Council shall hold a public hearing on the proposed change. Notice of the hearing shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City the week prior to the hearing. Before establishing a map change, the Council shall make findings that the proposed change meets the criteria set forth in Section 8.0760. Any change affected under this section shall be by ordinance. ➢ Staff Response: The current request has been initiated by a landowner (Deschutes County), not the Planning Commission or the City Council; therefore, this section does not apply. 8.0775 Limitations on Re -Applications. No application of a property owner for an amendment to the text of these standards or to the zoning map shall be considered by the Hearings Body within the six month period immediately following a previous denial application; if in the opinion of the Hearings Body, new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it, however, the Hearings Body may permit a new application. ➢ Staff Response: Per their submitted Burden of Proof, the applicant understands the procedural provisions established in this section. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 29 Attachment A B. REDMOND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan has been established as a "guide to the future growth, development and redevelopment of the Redmond urban area within a framework of goals and policies consistent with the physical characteristics, ideas and resources of the community. The Comprehensive Plan has been acknowledged as being in conformance with Oregon's Statewide Land Use Goals by DLCD. The City of Redmond Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map details the type, location and density of land development and redevelopment is permitted and the City of Redmond Development Code is the major implementation tool of the Comprehensive Plan; it controls for uses, design characteristics, infrastructure requirements, signs and land division provisions. The City Redmond recognizes that the Comprehensive Plan (and associated maps) will require occasional updates and revisions; the Introduction Section of the Comprehensive Plan specifically notes, REVIEW AND UPDATING THE PLAN No comprehensive plan or map can remain completely appropriate for twenty years. The attitudes and desires of people change, as well as economics and technology. Redmond's Comprehensive Plan will undergo a major review as required by state law periodically to assure that it remains an up-to-date and workable framework for development. If rapidly changing conditions indicate that reconsideration of the Plan's Goals and Policies is warranted between the required Periodic Review periods, modifications may be initiated by the City Council or Planning Commission at any time. Any citizen or group may request the Council or Commission to initiate a Plan amendment, but formal direction for study may only come from these official bodies. Ultimately changes, such as the ones proposed, are not uncommon under Oregon's Statewide Planning Program. The City of Redmond's Comprehensive Plan and Planning Program have been implemented in a way to allow for changes. The sections below will identify applicable Chapters, Goals and/or Policies of the Redmond Comprehensive Plan and follow with responses of consistency. Note — Only applicable policies are addressed by staff in the findings and gaps in numbering of policies is intentional. Chapter 1 Citizen Involvement GOAL To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. ➢ Staff Response: The submitted applications will be processed in accordance with the City of Redmond Legislative Review Procedures that are established in Sections 8.1100- 8.1125 of the Redmond Development Code, which include public hearings before the City of Redmond Planning Commission and the Redmond City Council. Reviewing the applications in accordance with the adopted legislative review provisions will ensure consistency with this Comprehensive Plan goal. None of the policies of this chapter directly apply to the applications under review; therefore, the policies of this section do Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 30 Attachment A not directly apply to this proposal. Chapter 2 LAND USE PLANNING Statewide Planning Goal 2, Land Use Planning requires that city, county, state and federal agency and special district plans and actions related to land use are consistent with the comprehensive plans of cities and counties and regional plans adopted under ORS Chapter 268. GOAL To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. ➢ Staff Response: The application will be reviewed in accordance with the planning processes and policy framework that have been established in the adopted Redmond Development Code (an acknowledged local land use regulation). Because the proposed UGB Land Exchange, Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment will follow the established local planning process and will neither alter the process for administration of the Development Code, nor the acknowledged procedural requirements (which ensure a factual base for all decisions), the proposal is consistent with this Comprehensive Plan Goal. While the policies of this section do not directly apply to this proposal, policies that warrant discussion are addressed below. POLICIES 1. All land use plans shall include identification of issues and problems, inventories and other factual information for each applicable statewide planning goal, evaluation of alternative courses of action and ultimate policy choices, taking into consideration social, economic, energy and environmental needs. The required information shall be contained in the plan document or in supporting documents. ➢ Staff Response: As documented throughout this narrative, the issue that this application packet is intended to address, is the ability to provide readily developable large lot industrial land in an improved orderly, efficient, and timely manner; to more effectively achieve Redmond's Large Lot Industrial Land needs obligation. The submittal packet includes a land assessment, and an alternatives analysis, which considered all applicable social, economic, energy and environmental needs; ultimately determining that the Inclusion Lands are the preferred alternative. The elements that are referenced and required by this policy are included in the application packet, documenting consistency with this policy. 4. Opportunities shall be provided for review and comment by citizens and affected governmental units during preparation, review and revisions of plans and implementing ordinances. ➢ Staff Response: The applications will be reviewed in conformance with the City of Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 31 Attachment A Redmond adopted development review procedures, which includes a review and comment opportunity that has been established by the City and determined to be appropriate for the application types that are submitted. Following the applicable Development Code review procedures will ensure consistency with this policy. 5. To provide a sound basis for orderly and efficient urbanization by establishing proper relationships between residential, commercial, industrial, public and open land uses, and transportation uses. 6. To provide for a close correlation between the provision of urban services and urban development in order to bring about a more orderly and efficient development pattern, and thereby avoid unnecessary tax burdens and excessive utility costs normally associated with scattered, unrelated development. 7. To provide a safe, coordinated, efficient and effective transportation system to bring about the best relationship between places where people live, work, shop and play. ➢ Staff Response: The Inclusion Lands are currently located within the Redmond Urban Reserve Area. As part of the City of Redmond Eastside Framework Plan, the Inclusion Land area is planned for employment and industrial land uses and is directly abutted by other lands that are planned for industrial development, to the west. The Inclusion Land area can be more efficiently served with public services, facilities and transportation systems than the Exclusion Land. This proposal will allow for an improved (more orderly and efficient) urbanization pattern, it will improve the efficiency of urban service extensions, and it is therefore consistent with these policies. 10. The following purpose statements describe the predominant land uses de_ sianated on the Redmond Urban Area Comprehensive Plan Map. i. Industrial (1) — areas designated "I" on the plan map are intended primarily for industrial and employment uses. Commercial uses may be permitted when they are of a type and scale that is designed to support surrounding industrial and employment uses. Industrial areas may not be used for commercial development that serves a regional retail function, such as large merchandize retailers, home improvement centers, and mini -mall developments. The Redmond Development Code may establish more than one zoning district for the "I" designation to address local conditions and the need for different development review criteria to serve different types of industrial uses, such as heavy industrial, light industrial, and campus industrial uses. ➢ Staff Response: As proposed 156 acres (111 acres of M-1 and 45 acres of M-2) of industrial zoned Inclusion Land will replace the 156 acres (111 acres of M-1 and 45 acres of M-2) of industrial zoned Exclusion Land, ensuring that the City will continue to provide adequate land to achieve the intent of this policy. Chapter 3 AGRICULTURAL LAND Statewide Planning Goal 3 requires the preservation and maintenance of agricultural lands for farm use, consistent with existing and future needs for agricultural products, forests and open space. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 32 Attachment A GOAL To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. POLICIES 1. Conversion of rural agricultural land to urbanizable land shall be based on the following factors: a) Environmental, energy, social and economic consequences; b) Demonstrated need consistent with LCDC goals; c) Unavailability of an alternative suitable location for the requested use; d) Compatibility of the proposed use with related agricultural land; and e) The retention of Class I, 11, III, IV soils in farm use. ➢ Staff Response: The proposal does not impact any agricultural lands within the City of Redmond. Furthermore, as demonstrated throughout this proposal, the UGB Land Exchange results in no change to the amount of agricultural lands in Deschutes County. Chapter 4 FOREST LAND (N/A) Chapter 5 OPEN SPACES, SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS, AND NATURAL RESOURCES ➢ Staff Response: No forest land, or designated open spaces, scenic and historic areas or natural resource land, will be impacted by this proposal; therefore these chapters are not relevant. r•�n/�11nnc 1111A1 ITV Chapter 6 AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCE Q%UALI T OVERVIEW Statewide Planning Goal 6 requires cities and counties to maintain and improve the quality of air, water and land resources in the Redmond urban area. GOAL To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the City. POLICIES As a means of maintaining the highest water quality possible, no development shall be permitted without public or community water service, unless plans are approved for individual service with the applicable state agency. The applicable state and federal water quality standards shall be used to implement this policy and reference may also be made to the State Water Quality Management Plan. ➢ Staff Response: The proposal will maintain and improve the air, water and land resources as all development in the City of Redmond is required to connect to public water service. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 33 Attachment A Chapter 7 NATURAL HAZARDS Statewide Planning Goal 7 states that developments subject to damage or that could result in loss of life shall not be planned nor located in known areas of natural disasters and hazards without appropriate safeguards. Plans shall be based on an inventory of known areas of natural disasters and hazards. Areas of natural disasters and hazards are areas that are subject to natural events that are known to result in death or endanger the works of man, such as stream flooding, ocean flooding, ground water, erosion and deposition, landslides, earthquakes, weak foundation soils and other hazards unique to local or regional areas. GOAL 1. To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards. ➢ Staff Response: Goal 7 requires local governments to adopt comprehensive plans intended to reduce the risk to people and property from natural hazards, including floods, landslides, earthquakes, wildfires, and erosion. Like most jurisdictions throughout Oregon, the City of Redmond has adopted policies to protect against natural hazards. Given that the Inclusion Property and the Exclusion property have similar exposure to potential natural hazards, the adopted regulations of the City will ensure consistency with Goal 7 and this chapter. Chapter 8 RECREATIONAL NEEDS Statewide Planning Goal 8 requires that Redmond show that its plan is consistent with these goals. The Parks and Recreation describes goals and policies that will guide the City in providing services related to the provision of parks, open spaces and recreational services. The policies reflect the importance of parks and recreational facilities in the urban area and offer measures to ensure that as the Redmond urban area population continues to grow, and the landscape is affected by human settlement, natural resources are protected and citizens are provided appropriate recreational opportunities and facilities close to where they live GOALS The Redmond Urban Growth Boundary park system should enhance the livability in the Redmond UGB by: 1. Providing quality green spaces, natural areas, and recreation sites for passive and active recreation through public and private park land throughout the community. 2. Neighborhood park, or park site, should be provided within one-half mile of every home. 3. Establishing a system of trails that are interconnected. 4. Coordinating the development of future park sites with school sites to serve the expanding urban area population. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 34 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: Parks and recreational space has been planned into the Eastside Framework Plan which guides future growth on this property and those surrounding it located partially in the City boundaries and partially in the Urban Reserve Area, although no land within the boundaries of either the Inclusion or Exclusion Lands are identified on the Eastside Framework Plan as being planned for (or otherwise intended to supply) future parks or recreational facilities of the City. Chapter 9 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The City of Redmond is experiencing a period of economic growth unparalleled in its history. The light industrial and service sectors have expanded significantly, with the bulk of new jobs since 1990 coming from small businesses. Factors which contributed to the development of these new businesses and jobs include a considerable inventory of vacant and competitively priced commercial and industrial lands; the location of Central Oregon's only commercial airport, Roberts Field, in Redmond; the availability of the State sponsored Enterprise Zone; the livability of the Central Oregon area, and the marketing of the community by the Redmond Economic Development Corporation and Economic Development for Central Oregon. The following goal statements describe Redmond's future economic hopes. These goals provide the foundation for the economic policies in this chapter. GOALS 1. Expand, improve and diversify the economy of the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary area while maintaining Redmond's quality of life. 2. Provide family wage employment opportunities for area residents. (Goals 3-7 are not applicable to this proposal) 8. Protect IngUSirlal lands from being convert eu W GVIIIIIIC1 GIdl UAGD, W1111G allowing limited service commercial uses that directly support industrial area 9. Provide, maintain, and promote the enhancement of state of the art infrastructure, including, but not limited to, transportation systems, sewer, water, natural gas, power, telecommunications and air service to support the commercial and industrial needs of the community. 10. The City and County shall continue to work cooperatively with the State and Federal government and economic development agencies to implement economic development within the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary. 11. Maintain Redmond's favorable employment to housing ratio by taking affirmative steps to ensure that economic development and employment growth keeps pace with population growth, especially for industrial employment. 12. To build a strong and thriving regional economy by coordinating public investments, policies and regulations to support regional and state economic development objectives in Central Oregon as determined through the Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 35 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: The goals identified in this Chapter address the need for the City to provide for industrial lands within its Urban Growth Boundary, which will allow for a diverse economy, jobs, and state of the art infrastructure. Furthermore, these Goals ensure that land availability is consistent with County, State and Federal agency requirements, accommodate a desired housing ratio, and that the UGB supports the Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Land Need. As detailed in Section IV - Findings of Fact, the Inclusion Land is located closer to existing development and public infrastructure (than the Exclusion Land), which will allow for it to better (more orderly and efficient) accommodate urban industrial development. Exchanging the Inclusion Lands for the Exclusion Lands would therefore better achieve the goals of this chapter. POLICIES (INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT - Lands) 1. Sufficient vacant industrial lands with a diversity of sizes, types, and service levels for future industrial development shall be designated on the comprehensive plan/zoning map. ➢ Staff Response: The proposal does not modify the amount of industrial land that is available and vacant within the Redmond UGB, rather it relocates industrial lands to a more readily developable location. When no change in the amount of land is planned/proposed, a jurisdiction can rely upon an adopted and acknowledged Land Needs Analysis. The sizes, types and services levels of the Inclusion and Exclusion Lands are substantially equivalent; therefore, the proposed UGB Land Exchange, and Map Amendments are consistent with this policy. 2. Publicly owned lands shall not be given a competitive advantage over private ownership through governmental land use regulations. ➢ Staff Response: While the proposal includes the exchange of County -owned land for County -owned Land, the Inclusion Land was not selected without consideration of other lands that meet the site characteristics that have been established for the Central Oregon large lot industrial land need, including lands in private ownership. The UGB Land exchange is intended to better (and more timely, orderly and efficiently) achieve the intent of the Large Lot Land Need in the City of Redmond. Land size, type and location have been identified, established and considered; an Alternative Site Analysis considered all land (public and private) which meet the established site characteristics and the lands that are proposed for the exchange are the preferred alternative. As documented in the Alternatives Analysis, publicly owned lands have not been given a competitive advantage over lands in private ownership; therefore, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 3. Industrial areas should be set aside primarily for industrial activities. Other supporting uses, including some retail uses, may be allowed if limited to sizes and locations intended to serve the primary uses and the needs of people working or living in the immediate industrial areas. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 36 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: The Exclusion Lands are zoned primarily for industrial uses (111 acres of M-1 zoned land and 45 acres of M-2 zoned land). The Inclusion Lands (which are planned for industrial uses on the Eastside Framework Plan) will replace the industrially zoned Exclusion Land and will be set aside for industrial activities, as required by this policy. Infrastructure 9. The City should give a high priority to extending and improving the infrastructure needed for economic development. ➢ Staff Response: This policy establishes that the City of Redmond should give high priority to extending and improving infrastructure needed to accommodate economic development. Large Lot Industrial Land is needed for economic development, thus pursuant to this policy, high priority should be given to extending and improving infrastructure to these lands. The Exclusion Lands are located a significant distance from existing urban development and available infrastructure, whereas the Inclusion Lands are located nearer to existing urban development and available infrastructure. Therefore, the Inclusion Lands could more timely, efficiently, and cost effectively be served with infrastructure. Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Need Analysis Background During the 1990s, the Central Oregon region experienced a dramatic transformation from an economy concentrated largely on wood products into a service -based economy serving a growing and diverse tourism and household base. Accelerated in -migration and tourism growth gave way to rapid economic expansion, escalation in home prices, and a systematic shift in the local economy from goods producing activities to service oriented industries. While initially representing a diversification of the local economy, this shift led to an over -reliance upon these types of industries. During the recent recession, the regional economy's vulnerabilities became apparent. Suitable land for today's industrial development forms emerged as one of Oregon's most severe development challenges. In 2010, 2011, and 2012, Deschutes, Crook and Jefferson counties and their respective cities, undertook an unprecedented regional evaluation of the economic opportunities and constraints associated with users of large industrial parcels in the Central Oregon region. The purpose of this evaluation was to aid in providing a more diversified economic base for the region that would accommodate industrial uses with a need for larger lots than possibly may be currently available in any of the Central Oregon cities. As part of that evaluation, Deschutes County hired a consultant to draft an analysis of Central Oregon's opportunities, competitiveness, ability and willingness to attract more basic industries. The analysis focused specifically on industries that require large lots. The result was a document called the Central Oregon Regional Opportunity Analysis, and was the basis for adopting Deschutes County Ordinance 2011-017, dated May 31, 2011. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 37 Attachment A Ordinance 2011-017 was appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals by 1,000 Friends of Oregon ("1,000 Friends"). The appeal was stayed in early 2012 to allow Deschutes County, the Governor's Office, and 1,000 Friends to explore a settlement, which was ultimately reached in April, 2012. The settlement consisted of policy concepts focusing entirely on Central Oregon's short-term need for large -lot industrial sites as well as a commitment from the Department of Land Conservation and Development ("DLCD") to initiate rule -making that summer. The three counties, their respective cities, 1,000 Friends, and DLCD staff then engaged in drafting a proposed rule. In August, the final draft of the rule was then sent to the Oregon Land Conservation and Development commission ("LCDC"). As a result, in November, the LCDC adopted Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-024-0040 and 660-024-0045. That rule provides that the large lot industrial land need analysis agreed upon by all of the parties, once adopted by each of the participating governmental entities, would be sufficient to demonstrate a need for up to nine large industrial sites in Central Oregon. Six of the sites will be made available initially. Three more sites may be added under the rule as the original sites are occupied. After the adoption of the new OARS, Deschutes County (as the initiating entity for the REOA and the subsequent settle agreement and Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis), voluntarily repealed Ordinance 2011-017 and adopted a new ordinance, Ordinance 2013-002, in accordance with the OARs (which added the Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis and corresponding policies into their Comprehensive Plan). Following the lead of Deschutes County and under the direction of the settlement agreement and new Administrative Rules, the City of Redmond is adopting the Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis and corresponding policies in order to be considered for large lot industrial sites. An additional necessary component is an intergovernmental agreement ("IGA") between the region's jurisdictions and the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council ("COIC"). Through IGA, COIC will provide oversight of the short-term land supply of large -lot industrial sites to enable the region to become competitive in industrial recruitment. Once each of the three counties and their respective cities adopt similar ordinances and enter into an IGA with COIC, the large lot sites will enable industrial recruitment opportunities to attract potential industrial users to consider the region that may not have otherwise without the availability of these large lots. Participating local governments will review the program after all nine sites have been occupied or after ten years, whichever comes first. The following are applicable policies under Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Analysis (which starts at number 45): 45. The City supports a multi jurisdictional cooperative effort to pursue a regional approach to establish a short-term supply of sites particularly designed to address out -of -region industries that may locate in Central Oregon. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 38 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: The proposal will not modify the amount of land available to accommodate the regional large lot industrial land need; improving the location of readily available lands will not alter consistency with this policy. 46. The City recognizes the importance of maintaining a large -lot industrial land supply that is readily developable in Central Oregon. ➢ Staff Response: The City recognizes the importance of maintaining a large -lot industrial land supply that is readily developable in Central Oregon and has taken steps to increase the supply by supporting an expansion of the City's Urban Growth Boundary to accommodate the Department of State Lands land and in support of this request to swap one area of industrial land for another that is more readily developable, which is consistent with this policy. 47. The Central Oregon Regional Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis ("Analysis", dated November 20, 2012), adopted by Ordinance 2013-15 is incorporated by reference herein. ➢ Staff Response: The Regional Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis provides necessary site characteristics but does not include specific sites. The proposal is consistent with the adopted Ordinance, which is incorporated into the Redmond Comprehensive Plan by this policy. 48. Within 6 months of the adoption of Ordinance 2013-15, in coordination with the participating local governments in Central Oregon, the City of Redmond will participate in an intergovernmental agreement ("IGA") with the Central Oregon III LGIgVVe11111Ie 11 LQI %lVulllr 11 % vV1v I Lit L jpecIII LIN process VI allocation of large lot industrial sites among the participating local governments. ➢ Staff Response: The referenced Intergovernmental Agreement, along with a summary of compliance therewith and letter of support from COIC is included the applicant's proposal as Exhibits W and X. 49. The City supports Economic Development of Central Oregon ("EDCO"), a non- profit organization facilitating new job creation and capital investment to monitor and advocate for the region's efforts of maintaining an inventory of appropriate sized and located industrial lots available to the market. ➢ Response: EDCO has provided a letter of support for this proposal, noting that the proposed UGB Land Exchange and associated Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change will more effectively facilitate job creation and capital investment, consistent with this policy. 50. The City will continue to collaborate with regional public and private representatives to engage the Oregon Legislature and state agencies and their commissions to address public facility, transportation and urbanization issues that hinder economic development opportunities in Central Oregon. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 39 Attachment A ➢ Response: As detailed in the submittal materials, the applicant has coordinated with state, City and County representative, along with EDCO and COIC representatives. All of the regional representatives support the proposal and agree that it will improve the availability of readily developable industrial lands in Central Oregon and the City of Redmond. Chapter 10 - Housing ➢ Staff Response: This Inclusion Land location does not abut any existing housing and the proposal entails neither a reduction nor an increase to the amount of residential land in the City and County; therefore the proposal has no effect on housing or residential land throughout the City. This Chapter is therefore not applicable. Chapter 11 -Public Facilities and Services Overview Public facilities are those improvements which provide various government services to the residents. These include domestic water, sanitary sewer, storm drains, transportation services, parks, schools, fire and police. Additional recognized public facilities in the Redmond area include the fairgrounds and the airport. Transportation and Parks are individual chapters in the Redmond Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. This chapter describes existing public and private facilities and services, and known present and future needs based on projected growth. It does not present specific public improvements which may be needed. That information is in the City's adopted Public Facilitv Plan. a support document to the comprehensive plan, which describes in detail the water, sewer, transportation, and park facilities needed to accommodate the development anticipated in the comprehensive plan and includes rough cost estimates of facility improvements. GOALS 1. To provide for a close correlation between the provisions of urban services and urban development in order to bring about a more orderly and efficient development pattern, and thereby avoid unnecessary tax burdens and excessive utility costs normally associated with scattered, unrelated development. 2. To achieve a balance of public costs vs. benefits/revenues in the provision of public facilities and services. 3. To provide public and private utility systems - water, sanitary and storm sewer, energy, communications, garbage and recycling - at levels necessary and suitable for existing and proposed uses. 6. Public facilities shall be available or under construction prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 6. The level of community facilities and services that can be provided shall be a principal factor in planning for various development densities. 7. Capital improvements programming and budgeting should be utilized by the City and Deschutes County to achieve full urban services levels of public facilities and services within the UGB. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 40 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: The Goals of this Chapter address the location and timing of public facilities within the City of Redmond Urban Growth Boundary. The Goals direct orderly and efficient development patterns and suggest avoiding excessive infrastructure projects that serve only a limited area. The Inclusion Land is nearer to existing infrastructure and can better (and more orderly, efficiently, and cost effectively) accommodate urban industrial development than the Exclusion Land. Exchanging the Inclusion Lands for the Exclusion Lands would therefore better achieve the Goals of this chapter. POLICIES (Development) 4. Development within the Redmond UGB shall be subsequent to or concurrent with the provision of an adequate level of public facilities and services. 5. All developments shall comply with utility and facility plans intended to serve the area. Sewer and Water 6. All sewer and water line extensions shall be extended the full width of the property being served, so as to provide for further connection of adjoining properties. 7. The City of Redmond shall plan to be the eventual provider of community sewer and domestic water services within the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary. n The �+-a., shall .... ro all future dnyelnmment within the city limits. to be served by the City's sewer system. 13. Sewer or water service will not be extended to any land for development outside city limits unless such areas are annexed to the City or a Consent to Annex form signed by the owners to receive those services, except as may be agreed by the City and Deschutes County. Natural Gas 26. The City shall encourage Natural Gas providers to provide service throughout the UGB area. ➢ Staff Response: The policies of these sections address the location and timing of public facilities within the Urban Growth Boundary and are intended to ensure an orderly and efficient development pattern, while avoiding excessive infrastructure programs that serve only a limited area. The Inclusion Land is nearer to existing infrastructure and can better (and more timely orderly and efficiently) accommodate urban industrial development. Exchanging the Inclusion Lands for the Exclusion Lands would therefore be more consistent with these policies. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit 6 — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 41 Attachment A Chapter 12 TRANSPORTATION Overview Traffic volumes on most roads in Redmond have risen over the years as the population has increased, neighborhoods have been built farther from services, and employment and household sizes have changed. In general, the existing street system will be unable to accommodate the growth in traffic projected for the year 2015. The increasing congestion and delays throughout the city would conflict with both local plans and state- wide planning goals. One of the principal concerns of both residents and businesses is the congestion during peak periods as both long-distance highway and local traffic volumes continue to grow. These increasing volumes, which include a high percentage of trucks and other large vehicles, are changing the atmosphere of the downtown commercial district and causing an unsafe and unattractive environment for pedestrians and bicyclists. GOALS Within the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary an urban area transportation system will be developed which enhances the livability of Redmond and accommodates growth and development through careful planning and management of existing and future transportation facilities. 3. Identify roadway system needs to serve undeveloped areas so that steps can be taken to preserve rights -of -ways and maintain adequate traffic circulation. Objectives: a) Integrate new arterial and collector routes into the existing city grid system. 4. Increase the use of alternative travel modes through improved safety and service. Objectives: a) Provide additional sidewalks and improve existing sidewalk pavement for pedestrian safety and access. Provide additional bicycle routes and plan regular maintenance of existing routes for bicyclist safety and access (per Redmond Bicycle Master Plan). b) Provide pedestrian and bicycle access, especially when direct motor vehicle access is not possible. c) Identify opportunities to expand transit service in conjunction with a Deschutes County Transit Study. d) Address linkages with the Deschutes County car pool program. ➢ Staff Response: The Inclusion Land is nearer to existing transportation infrastructure and can better (more timely, orderly and efficiently) accommodate urban industrial development. Furthermore, there is an established transportation system and street grid pattern in the area of the Inclusion Land, which includes streets and sidewalks. Exchanging the Inclusion Lands for the Exclusion Lands allows for the extension of the transportation system in an area that is nearer to existing development, community amenities and housing, and which more effectively accommodates multiple modes of transportation; better achieving the Goals of this chapter. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 42 Attachment A POLICIES The following transportation policies are designed to implement the Redmond Urban Area Transportation Plan. Transportation System Management 1. Plan or ordinance amendments which significantly affect a transportation facility shall assure that allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and level of service of the facility. This shall be accomplished by either: ➢ Staff Response: The application packet is supported by a Traffic Report and Transportation Planning Rule Assessment, completed by Transight Consulting, LLC, which documents that the proposal will not significantly affect a transportation facility. 2. The City and County shall adopt land use regulations to limit the location and number of driveways and access points, and other access management strategies on all major collector and arterial streets. ➢ Staff Response: OR Hwy 126 (which is located to the south of the Exclusion Land) is a major arterial. This policy and the City of Redmond adopted implementing ordinances, limit the number of access points that can be permitted onto this facility. A limited number of access points restricts the develop -ability of the Exclusion Land and/or requires added infrastructure costs (frontages roads or added internal streets) to make a property developable. The Inclusion Site does not directly abut a collector street or arterial street and therefore development on the Inclusion Land is not limited or restricted by this policy and the associated implementing ordinances. Pedestrian and Bicycle Systems 7. The City and County shall develop safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian circulation to major activity centers, including the downtown, schools, shopping areas, community centers, parks, open space and other public gathering spots. 8. Bikeways shall be included on all new arterial and major collector streets, except limited access roads, or where equivalent alternative pedestrian circulation is provided within the Urban Growth Boundary. Retrofitting existing arterial and major collector streets with bike lanes shall proceed on a prioritized schedule. 9. Sidewalks shall be included on all new streets except limited access roads or where equivalent alternative pedestrian circulation is provided in the Urban Growth Boundary. Retrofitting existing streets with sidewalks shall proceed on a prioritized schedule. 10. Bicycle parking facilities shall be provided at all new residential multi -family (four units or more), commercial, industrial, recreational and institutional facilities. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 43 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: The Exclusion Site is located over 1/4 mile from any developed sidewalks and/or bicycle lanes. Given the distance, the cost and ability to extend complete bicycle and/or sidewalk systems to the Exclusion Site would be much more excessive than extending the systems to serve the Inclusion Site (because the Inclusion Site directly abuts existing systems). Extending bicycle and pedestrian systems to the Inclusion Site, could be provided more easily and cost effectively, thus the Inclusion Property (and proposal) is better suited to be consistent with these policies. State Highways 20. Wherever practical, access to the highway will be provided via frontage roads, alternative local roads, or other means, rather than direct access to the highway. 21. Signalized intersections on state highways should be spaced at a minimum distance of one-half mile. Consequently, when local road intersections with the highway meet signal warrants and are less than one-half mile to the nearest other planned signal location, or when operational or safety issues develop, solutions other than signalization will be implemented wherever possible. This will include consideration of turn restrictions, median closure, or other means. 23. A non -traversable median (motorized vehicles) should be installed on the highway when operational or safety issues warrant installation. Directional breaks in the median will be provided as needed to provide safe traffic operation. 24. The City of Redmond shall coordinate with the Department of Transportation (ODOT) to design for additional capacity improvements for the Yew Avenue interchange. This design shall include consideration for an additional north bound off -ramp that would allow for traffic access onto Airport Way to the Redmond Municipal Airport and the Deschutes County Fairgrounds. 25. Medians installed in the state highways should provide bicycle and pedestrian crossings at least every 1/4 mile. ➢ Staff Response: OR Hwy 126 (which is located to the south of the Exclusion Land) is a State Facility. This policy and the City of Redmond adopted implementing ordinances, limit the number of access points that can be permitted onto this facility. A limited number of access points restricts the develop -ability of the Exclusion Land and/or requires added infrastructure costs (frontages roads or added internal streets) to make a property developable. The Inclusion Site does not directly abut a state facility; therefore, development on the Inclusion Land is not limited or restricted by this policy and the associated implementing ordinances. Rights of Way 25. Local transportation systems within the Urban Growth Boundary should be planned to utilize existing facilities and rights of way, where practical. ➢ Staff Response: The Inclusion Site is closer to existing transportation facilities and abuts a greater portion of an accessible transportation system. The Inclusion Site is better able to utilize existing facilities than the Exclusion Site; therefore, incorporating the Inclusion Site, instead of the Exclusion Site is more consistent with this policy. Exhibit A -- Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 44 Attachment A 27. The City of Redmond shall encourage master planning of the Redmond Urban Reserve Area to identify the location of arterial and collector streets and future transportation corridors. 28. The City of Redmond will cooperate with Deschutes County to master plan the County owned property located east of Redmond. The master plan shall include, but is not limited to, the proposed transportation system, public utilities and services, land uses and open space and recreation. The jurisdictions shall consider the possible routes for future transportation corridors and will coordinate with the Oregon Department of Transportation, the Bureau of Land Management and any other property owner or agency that indicates an interest in the planning process. ➢ Staff Response: Both the Inclusion Site and the Exclusion Site are identified in the City of Redmond Eastside Framework Plan, a master plan for this area. The Eastside Framework Plan identifies the locations of arterials and collector streets. The proposal is consistent with the adopted Eastside Framework Plan, thus consistent with these policies. Chapter 13 ENERGY Statewide Planning Goal 13 requires land and uses developed on the land to be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principals. GOAL To conserve energy. POLICIES 1. City of Redmond, Deschutes County and the Department of Transportation shall work together in providing an efficient and adequate transportation network for the Redmond Urban Area. ➢ Staff Response: This chapter, including the Goals and Policies, is achieved by the establishment of land use patterns that provide logical transitions of high -density to low - density development which takes advantages of the existing transportation network and underdeveloped properties whenever possible. Given that the Inclusion Property and the Exclusion Property are located in the same general vicinity and planned through the Eastside Framework Plan, efficiencies can be achieved by utilizing the existing transportation system and utility infrastructure, rather than requiring the costly and energy -intensive extension of public and private utilities (to the Exclusion Site). Additionally, locating industrial land closer to improved local streets that have water, sewer, and utilities developed therein will further increasing energy efficiency. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 45 Attachment A Chapter 14 URBANIZATION ELEMENT Overview The purpose of this chapter is to identify the goals and policies that the City of Redmond, in cooperation with Deschutes County, has adopted to comply with Statewide Planning Goal 14, Urbanization. Goal 14. Urbanization - To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. To comply with Statewide Goal 14, the City of Redmond and Deschutes County have adopted: 1. An Urban Growth Boundary (UGB); 2. Policies concerning the regulation and management of land within the Urban Growth Boundary; and 3. An intergovernmental agreement that describes criteria and procedures for amending the UGB. GOALS 1. To direct development within the Redmond UGB at urban level densities in a phased and orderly manner, and with the provision of an adequate level of urban services, including but not limited to public water, sewer and urban streets. 2. To establish and maintain an Urban Growth Boundary that provides adequate land to accommodate projected population and employment growth during the 20-year planning period. 3. To cooperatively designate Urban Reserve Areas with Deschutes County to identify priority lands to include within the Redmond UGB on a phased basis to meet documented needs for additional urban land. The Urban Reserve Areas are intended to provide a longer -term (30 to 50-year) tool to direct and manage urban growth in the Redmond area while the Urban Growth Boundary provides a 20-year land supply. ➢ Staff Response: As noted in this section, the City of Redmond has established a planning program that includes a UGB that provides residential and employment lands for 20 years, and a URA that provides residential and employment lands for 30 years. This section notes that the comprehensive planning program, which includes both the UGB and URA, is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 14. POLICIES (Urban Growth Boundary and Urban Reserve Areas) 1. The establishment and change of the Urban Growth Boundary shall be a cooperative process between the City of Redmond and Deschutes County. ➢ Staff Response: The proposal has been initiated by Deschutes County and the City of Redmond and will modify the location of the Redmond UGB. The applications are being processed through both the adopted City of Redmond Development Code Procedures and the Deschutes County Code Development Review Procedures; consistent with this policy. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 46 Attachment A 2. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County will coordinate the development and adoption of population and employment forecasts to use as the basis for 20-year planning. The following population and employment forecasts have been adopted for City of Redmond in the year 2025: Population: 45,724 Employment: 22,070 ➢ Staff Response: The proposal reconfigures the City of Redmond UGB, but retains an identified 156 acres of Industrial Land, including 111 acres of M-1 zoned land and 45 acres of M-2 zoned land. Maintaining an equivalent amount of industrial land is consistent with the adopted and acknowledged economic land need. Statutory requirements allow for UGB reconfigurations to occur without completing new Economic Opportunity Analysis or land need analysis. Given that the proposal results in no net change in the amount of industrial land within the Redmond UGB, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 3. In anticipation of the need to expand the UGB to accommodate population and employment forecasts for the year 2025 and beyond, the City of Redmond and Deschutes County have jointly agreed to establish an Urban Reserve Area (URA) consistent with state law. Designating an urban reserve area achieves the following objectives: b. It identifies appropriate lands to be reserved for eventual inclusion in the UGB. c. It arotects urban reserve area lands from development patterns that would impede long-term urbanization. This will be accomplished through Deschutes County adoption of policies and regulations for the Redmond Urban Reserve Area. d. It provides more certainty for jurisdictions, service districts and property owners to undertake longer -term planning for public facilities and services such as transportation, sewer and water, schools and parks. ➢ Staff Response: The Inclusion Lands are located within the Redmond Urban Reserve Area. While (for a UGB Land Exchange) a new land need is not required to be documented, these policies establish that the URA lands should be the first to be considered. Furthermore, to ensure that no net change to the amount of industrial land is available to accommodate the 30 year land need, the application packet includes replacing URA land, via the exchange. The 156 acre Exclusion Land will become part of the Redmond URA, in place of the Inclusion Land that is being removed. The proposal retains an equivalent amount of URA land, thus remains consistent with this policy. 7. Property owners have the opportunity to request that land within a designated Urban Reserve Area be included within the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary, based on consideration of the following factors outlined in Statewide Goal 14: Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 47 Attachment A e. Demonstrated need to accommodate urban population growth requirements; f. Need for housing, employment opportunities and livability; g. Orderly and economic provision of public facilities of services; h. Maximum efficiency of land uses; i. Retention of agricultural land; j. Compatibility of urban uses with nearby agricultural activities; and k. Environmental, energy, economic and social consequences. ➢ Staff Response: A comprehensive Review of Statewide Planning Goal 14, including all applicable statutory requirement and Administrative Rules was addressed in above. As detailed in that section the proposal complies with all applicable provisions of Statewide Planning Goal 14, including the elements reiterated by this policy. As documented throughout this narrative, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 8. The City and County will favor UGB additions that are of sufficient size and scale to be integrated into the urban area as complete neighborhoods or other community elements rather than isolated individual parcels. Privately initiated requests for UGB amendments should include a minimum of 160 acres and shall be based on demonstrated land needs to maintain a 20 year supply of urbanizable land within the UGB. ➢ Staff Response: While not a UGB addition, the exchange is of 156 acres of industrial land is in excess of 150 acres and consistent with the intent of this policy. ^7. Y IL- 'an' is brought Irlto the I.lGB, it shall ha riosignatetl I IRRAN H01__DING AREA (UHA) on the comprehensive plan map. Land that is inside the City may be zoned Urban Holding-10. 10. The Urban Holding Area-10 (UH-10) plan designation may be changed when the land is annexed and approved for urban zoning through a Master Plan approval process or, in limited cases, through a site planning and development review process (see below). ➢ Staff Response: In association with this application packet the applicant will be submitting an annexation application. In the event that the UGB reconfiguration is approved prior to the annexation being complete, the applicant understands that land could temporarily be designated UHA, until the annexation is complete. Redmond Framework Plan and Urban Character Guidelines 18. The City will adopt an Urban Framework Plan for future urban areas in the Urban Growth Boundary and Urban Reserve Area. The Redmond Urban Framework Plan will be used as a conceptual guide for future urban land uses in urban reserve areas and areas within the UGB. The Framework Plan is not parcel -specific and is intended to provide general guidance as to community form and design, and to be used as the basis for preparation of Area Plans. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 48 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: As shown on the application materials, the Inclusion Land adds 156 acres of land (111 acres of M-1 zoned land and 45 acres of M-2 zoned land), which is generally consistent with the Eastside Framework Plan. Given that the proposal results in no net change to the amount of industrial land in the City of Redmond, it is generally consistent with the Eastside Framework Plan, and thus the applications are consistent with this policy. Urbanization Element 27. The City of Redmond and Deschutes County will work cooperatively to ensure that interim development in Urban Reserve Areas does not interfere with the future extension of urban services. This is accomplished by identifying future urban transportation and utility corridors and regulating uses adjacent to those corridors to prevent encroachment by interim development. 28. Urban development that occurs adjacent to designated Urban Reserve Areas shall be planned with the adjacent land's future urban use in mind. Urban development should be sensitive to adjacent rural uses but the development pattern should not be altered to the point it fails to achieve desired urban characteristics or interferes with future urban expansion. 29. Urban development on the edge of the urban growth boundary that is adjacent to land planned for long-term rural use should buffer urban uses with open spaces, when feasible, or lower density residential development, or other appropriate transitional uses. ➢ Staff Response: As detailed throughout this narrative and within the application materials, both the Inclusion Site and the Exclusion Site are located within the Eastside Framework Plan area. The Eastside Framework Plan identifies appropriate zoning, buffers and transportation corridors in the area. The Framework Plan has considered surrounding development and development patterns and provides sufficient separation, buffers and transition of uses between uses (given City housing and employment land needs). Given that the proposal is generally consistent with the Eastside Framework Plan (which is consistent with these policies), this proposal too is consistent with these policies. Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis 30. The Central Oregon Regional Large Lot Industrial Need Analysis ("Analysis", dated November 20, 2012), adopted by Ordinance 2013-15 is incorporated by reference herein.) ➢ Staff Response: As detailed in Ordinance 2013-15, the UGB Land Exchange in addition to the associated Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zone Change are consistent with the referenced Ordinance. 31. The City of Redmond will amend its Comprehensive Plan and land use regulations, including the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), in order to designate a site in accordance with the requirements of OAR 660-024-0046 and the intergovernmental agreement. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 49 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: Through prior actions, the City of Redmond has amended its UGB to include the Exclusion Site (in addition to other property) into the City of Redmond UGB to accommodate a Regional Large Lot Industrial Land need. The current proposal will maintain the amount of land needed by be the Regional Large Lot Industrial Land program, in the same general vicinity, however it will modify and improve the location of 156 acres. As documented above the UGB Land Exchange is consistent with both OAR 660-024-0045 (Regional Large Lot Industrial Land Program) and the proposal is consistent with the COIC Intergovernmental Agreement; therefore the proposal is consistent with this policy. Chapter 15 LIVABILITY ELEMENT Overview The purpose of this chapter is to identify the "Livability" goals and policies that the City of Redmond will use to guide and manage growth. It is important to define livability and set specific goals and policies so that community aspirations can be met over the life of the plan. LIVABILITY DEFINITION Livability is a term used to describe the variety of surroundings and human experiences that shape Redmond and convey an image of a future that is enduring, vibrant, responsible, and offers a desirable quality of life. Community livability also refers to actions that improve the City's ability to respond to changing social, economic, or environmental events. LIVABILITY GOAL Tie City of Rcdm^vnd shall create and maintain livability1. ThP_ city of Redmond shall guide development and support community identity and pride by implementing policies that improve livability and are innovative creating a high quality of life, ample family wage jobs, and a safe environment in which to raise and educate families. ➢ Staff Response: In the City of Redmond livability is generally implemented through the Development Code, including the standards and criteria that apply to new development. Relevant policies are discussed below. LIVABILITY POLICIES 1. Redmond shall plan and invest in the community to provide a high quality of life for both current generations of residents and businesses and future generations of residents and businesses. ➢ Staff Response: The City of Redmond has established the Eastside Framework Plan to provide a high quality of life and business, as required intended by this policy. As noted throughout the findings, the proposal is generally consistent with the Eastside Framework Plan; therefore, the proposal is consistent with this policy. 8. Redmond shall plan for a variety of transportation choices. 10. Redmond shall develop safe, reliable, and economical transportation choices to decrease household transportation costs, improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote public health. Exhibit A — Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B — Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C — Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 60 Attachment A ➢ Staff Response: The Inclusion Site is in closer proximity to existing facilities and urban industrial development than the Exclusion Site. Given the closer location, the potential to extend bicycle lanes, pedestrian facilities and locate transit options is improved at the Inclusion Site, increasing the potential for a variety of transportation choices, consistent with these policies. 11. The City of Redmond shall develop and maintain the environment that promotes and supports a strong, healthy, and diverse economic base. 12. Redmond shall promote economic competitiveness through sustainable choices for housing, transportation, education, cultural diversity and enrichment, and recreational opportunities as well improve reliable and timely access to employment centers, educational opportunities, services, and other basic needs by workers. 14. Redmond shall help to create and foster new businesses of all types. 15. Redmond shall provide well planned and maintain high -quality infrastructure to provide a competitive advantage for business and community growth. 20. Redmond shall develop strategies that improve diversity of systems and reduce the potential negative impact to the whole city of the failure of any on particular system. Increasing the diversity of systems means that Redmond should maximize the diversity of different business types, institutions, sources of food, and industries, etc. ➢ Staff Response: The Inclusion Land is located nearer to existing facilties (including water, sewer, transportation and private utilities). Including industrial land at the Inch minn Rita lonntinn as opposed to the Exclusion Site location, allows for the possibility of more timely, orderly and efficient development, which would carry out the intent of these policies. Exhibit A - Decision and Conditions of Approval Exhibit B - Conclusionary Findings Exhibit C - Exhibits to Findings Report (available by email or printed by request) Exhibit D - Letter of Support from Redmond Economic Development Inc. Page 51 DING BUSINESS FORWARD EDMOND NOMIC DEVELOPMENT INC. August 21, 2019 Deschutes County Property Management James Lewis, Property Manager P.O. Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 RE: Application support to City of Redmond and Deschutes County to Adjust the Redmond UGB Dear James: I write today in support of Deschutes County's applications to amend the City of Redmond Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) for the purpose of providing additional readily developable employment lands in Redmond and Deschutes County. This adjustment, which includes the removal of 156 acres of encumbered land from the Redmond UGB and the inclusion of the same acreage without such encumbrances in a different location, will help keep Redmond a highly competitive place, in terms of land value and inventory for growing and new business opportunities. The adjustment will provide additional acres that have the better connectivity to public infrastructure significantly more proximate the new property. Conversely, the land that will be removed from the UGB does not have such essential amenities and is encumbered with a former shooting range and dump —which are obstacles to near term development. The adjustment will also help facilitate a land exchange between Deschutes County and the Department of State Lands that will result in Deschutes County acquiring an additional 140 acres immediately south of the County Fair and Expo Center (Fairgrounds). Such acquisition will enhance the long-term viability of the Fairgrounds and maintain the Fairgrounds status as an economic driver in Redmond, Deschutes County and all Central Oregon. Redmond Economic Development, Inc. (REDI), has been involved in business, workforce and community development in Central Oregon for more than 30 years. In addition to our traded sector business recruitment efforts, REDI has provided technical support and resources to many of Redmond's existing employers that account for a large percentage of the community's family wage jobs and taxable investment. Sincerely, Jon Stark Sr. Director Redmond Economic Development, Inc. Mailing Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, February 5, 2020, at 10:00 A.M., in the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners Hearing Room at 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, to take testimony on the following item: FILE NUMBERS: 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC' PROPOSAL: The applicant requests a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The applicant also requests a Zone Change for each area of reconfigured and exchanged land. The land being added to the UGB will change from Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) to a combination of Light Industrial (M-1) and Heavy Industrial (M-2). The land being removed from the UGB will change from a combination of M-1 and M-2 to EFU, specifically. There will be no change in the amount of industrial zoned land in the City of Redmond nor there a change in the amount of agricultural land in Deschutes County. APPLICANT/OWNER: Deschutes County, Property & Facilities LOCATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 1002 NE 17th Street, Redmond, and is identified on County Assessor's tax map 15-13 (index map) as tax lot 103. Refer to maps below. STAFF CONTACT: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner, Cynthia.Smidt@deschutes.org, (541) 317-3150 DOCUMENTS: Can be viewed and downloaded from www.buildingpermits.oregon.gov and http://dial.deschutes.org. ' The applicant submitted a concurrent request to the City of Redmond. The associated file number for the City of Redmond is 711-19-000163-PA. 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 STANDARDS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA: Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance Chapter 18.16. Exclusive Farm Use Zone Chapter 18.24. Redmond Urban Reserve Area Combining Zone Chapter 18.52. Surface Mining Zone Chapter 18.56. Surface Mining Impact Area Combining Zone Chapter 18.80. Airport Safety Combining Zone Chapter 18.84. Landscape Management Combining Zone Chapter 18.136. Amendments Title 20, Redmond Urban Reserve Area Chapter 20.36. Amendments Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2, Resource Management Chapter 3, Rural Growth Management Chapter 5, Supplemental Sections Appendix C, Transportation System Plan Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660 All documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant, and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost at Deschutes County Community Development Department (CDD) located at 117 NW Lafayette Avenue. Seven (7) days prior to the public hearing, a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at no cost at CDD. Copies of all documents, evidence and the staff report can be purchased at CDD for (25) cents a page. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS MAY APPEAR, BE HEARD, BE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, OR SEND WRITTEN SIGNED TESTIMONY. ANY PARTY TO THE APPLICATION IS ENTITLED TO A CONTINUANCE OF THE INITIAL EVIDENTIARY HEARING OR TO HAVE THE RECORD LEFT OPEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 22.24.140 OF THE DESCHUTES COUNTY CODE. Failure to raise an issue in person at a hearing or in writing precludes appeal by that person to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), and that failure to provide statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to LUBA based on that issue. 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 the ADA Coordinator at (541) 617-4747. 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 2 of 5 DOCUMENT SUBMISSION Any person may submit written comments on a proposed land use action. Documents may be submitted to our office in person, U.S. mail, or email as identified below. In Person U.S. Mail We accept all printed documents. Deschutes County Community Development Planning Division, Cynthia Smidt P.O. Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 Email Email submittals must comply with the following guidelines: • Submission is 20 pages or less • Documents can be printed in black and white only • Documents can be printed on 8.5" x 11" paper Any email submittal that exceeds the guidelines provided above must be submitted as a paper copy. Limitations • Deschutes County does not take responsibility for retrieving information from a website link or a personal cloud storage service. It is the submitter's responsibility to provide the specific information they wish to enter into the record. We will print the email, which includes the link(s); however, we will not retrieve any information on behalf of the submitter. Deschutes County makes an effort to scan all submittals as soon as possible. Recognizing staff availability and workload, there is often a delay between the submittal of a document to the record, and when it is scanned and uploaded to Accela Citizen Access (ACA) and Deschutes County Property Information (DIAL). For this reason, the official record is the file that resides in the Community Development office. The electronic record in ACA and DIAL is not a substitute for the official record. • To ensure your submission is entered into the correct land use record, please specify the land use file number(s). PLEASE SUBMIT WRITTEN TESTIMONY WITHIN TEN (10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF MAILING. • IF YOU WISH TO BE NOTIFIED OF ANY DECISION OR PUBLIC HEARING RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION, YOU MUST PROVIDE A MAILING ADDRESS. NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: ORS CHAPTER 215 REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT MUST PROMPTLY BE FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. This Notice was mailed pursuant to Deschutes County Code Chapters 22.20 and 22.24. 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 3 of 5 s Subject IA Property (highlighted): f � � RE MOK'l . A E D, O � � «�% C 4 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 4 of 5 f i � 1N {� 5_r K @ b 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 5 of 5 u u u u v u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 01 6 O1 6 O1 01 C1l O1 Q1 6 6 6 6 6 1 O1 O1 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 m m m m Ol m all m m m m 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 CT v a v cr a c v c a v a a v v¢ a v v v v v a v a v c a v v a v c v v v v a v a v v v c* - a a a to to W W to W W W W tD a W W tD to W W W to W tD to W� W W a W W W a W W W W W W W W W W W S W W u�o d-le -le adddd-le daddddddddddddd'ddddddddadddddddddadada a a a a a a m LL LL m LL a m LL a LL m LL a a a m m a a a LL m LL a m m m m m a m m a m m a a m a a a ❑ 00 00 00 00 o0 00 00 o0 o0 o0 00 o0 00 o0 o0 -❑�mrv�v�a�N v��aaD<�ra��vv�v, o0 o0 o0, o0 o0 00 00 o0 o0 o0 o0 0o0 00o0 0o0 oa0 a0 0v0va0 c0 a0 0 vv'rvat zozo k?k9L?�� D��T� ❑ o, m an m an o, an m o, m d, an 0h m di o, an m m M m d, an m m o, m of o, an of o, m an an m m o, an m di m m ah of m u �r , m x x x= m x x x x x x x x m x x x= x m x x x x x x x x x x v m am m m am am am a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F- Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z m "' O o w tD o N D D D D ^� D D o n D D D D C, to w U) O tD to to w tD tD In to tl1 00 N L N Ln � N N vl m N O N to vl N to to N O to L/1 to Ifl V1 ti V1 n r n n n n^ n r, n n r n r n n r t` lD N n n n n n O r n r n O n n n a) ^ O^1 of an m m n n r Ol r- O 0 Om O r l Ol Ol al Ol p f� N O^1 N N N O O K p Z W Ol Ol 01 D7 N o0 K K K� m m O 2 m w cc m x o m o , N i- a' 0 0 0 0 N o= o 0 0 r' I, 0 0 0 Z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ^ 0 0 0 0 n� r, 0 0 0 0 0 n � O n n O O 0 0 O m rn rn a' O rn rn rn m O1 Dt p p °i o I- o o O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 a 6 a m m m cc 0� a a a a a a a s a m z z z O z Z Z Z J Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Y .� Q o 0 0 O 0 0 c 0 c c a O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O Z Q 0 0 0 w O m 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 a E E-o E -a owe E E E E Eo dE do doo��o� �J2i2i2 2Ln21E2o�� >. ` a a c v c Z J Z a a a a a Z t c a c c c Z Z o❑ Z o = a❑ O o Z o o❑ O Z O O❑ o v ai a)m v w Q w a� ai ai v v w o w w w w ai w w w w w w Q O w w w R w w w w w w w w W U a w a' m to m m to m 2 a' a' C< m a m w m m m m m m OC m m LL �-- K w a m x w w m o' m LL' m m O H W F- m n N O O W Z w a -I � rl N w w > to c)❑ W ci > } W ¢ o ¢ ¢ a N 3 a > c w m ❑ m ai ❑O r Z Z Q 00 w mxt N ❑ Z r w w 0 O> 2i N -c+ is O a> (7 F- w r cn > F w ¢ v~i Ln > v~i a ? w L c� o is z Ln vai W v~i C7 O w 0 x x a x° Y" J u o u u 3 ~i w ND C7 w Q_ Y Y z w a a 0 Q m N x w w Q w d n o m F- oo a W O z w Z Z x x ?� Q w r, o N u i s v U Y w U J o m F > > ❑ o o D N o w w x a O x O O Z v~i w w x X in -+ a- J C7 w W to N .-� Oi w tD I. w n �+ Z o 3 v�i Q O N N 0 0 >i W vF o w w Z Z Z X x X z z w x x x X ?� O 00 t!1 ,-� U U m U U v`ni O Z N m m Z in to ,,., n to m m Z m n O to 0 m m `n r1 0 n m m m m Z - aoo�oomwo W ��o°N-4 ,tr�mLnc)) o0)'anomvkD00 OOO i�~vmrn0000mOOOma fa M a 0 0 to w a w W W m m N a a M oo N .--I a-1 '-I tD n �--� N N �-I a a a v n d' � N N m a a a M a to uu ai w � w c w a1 E m w o z g v c w r z wG N2 r: ❑ J ~ < o F- (7 06 a dS w a¢ Z ❑ Z J `o ns � Z o6 j w o ¢ ❑ Q x r - 0 a o v o 0 �o U_ u ¢ LL Fr- _ Z J x w 3 U a w p X u x a V W F_ ., y o Elf u u u a u E g o u t Q w w O Q U Y H m Y m ( aj a Q �U a Q Q m x I- w Z m Q f- Y u O > ❑ z � Z C7 Z W Q ~i ❑ F- (7 f- Z K w a n w U ozi F Z) J r F- Fes- t~il Q w w w ~ Z 0 o J U>> ❑ O ~> 2 Z w w (�7 Q °" l; Q~~ Z w Z U ❑ J Z u 0❑❑ a Z u J O a' co o > Z J m V1 w❑ a Q 0 w z Z F o2 Z � U O U < w a O j Q Z l¢j Z oc��m� w❑¢zax nzu cr m0� m ❑ orOO F- O N vwi w a O Z> l7 K Z w 0 v~i u an > 0 Q w O m U 5 r x w> 7 to U Z Z to O a ¢¢ J I- a a' J m W U m w U¢ ~ J a W F- V� J ❑ U Z O O a d Oa' Imn d LL oz o a .6 U❑ W }} Z Z Z m J W Z Z Z W VI Z Z a$� 0 J 0 u u a 0 w m w a lJ Z J 0 o 0 0 w 0 0 0 O 0� Q o, m � `n J u w o 0 0 0 0 0 Z F- w �_ m �_ O w Y c Q U w_ w w w a> 0 m¢ 0 0 Y o j w Z Z u U U u O w 3¢ Q U LL a N v� C7 >, o" m 0 J Z¢ cc F- J '„ ❑❑❑ Y w a m U vF U 0 a J Q LL Z a Z Z Z Z Z of O x @ a al Ln W¢ W¢¢ Q W¢ O LL 0 to ❑ Z¢ F- m Z a 0 0 0 u u V I- "_ F .� Y o a s �Q m x Y t- t- f- vi O O O Y z 5 O u m❑ m¢ c Z Z a a of an O w Q❑ O o Q@ u al @ cEo ❑ J O W w W x x 2 Fr- Fr- I}- x 2 Q Q w w m 0 0 3 J w w w w w w w w o o m u u o o❑❑❑❑ 0 0 D. m m x= w w m m m u¢¢ a m u u u u v u v v u v u o❑❑❑ 0❑ 0 w U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm v v v v v c v v a a v c w w w v w c a w w a w w a v w w w a w w a w w w w w w w w w w a w v v a � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �n � iD iD �D �D �D iD �D �o �D d¢dddaddadddddda¢ddddd'¢d-¢e-e dddadddddddddadadd D_ CL a a CL a a a o_ a CL a D_ D_ a D. LL a D. m D_ d a m a a n. m o_ a D_ D_ m a m a o0 o0 oa 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 o0 00 00 o0 o0 o0 00 00 00 06 o0 00 00 00 00 vavvvvav<t<rvavvvavv<raavvvavaaa t W vvvavv<tvvaa�tvavaa m m m m d l d, m d, d, m d l d i d, d, d) m a, m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m d l 6 m m m m m m m m m m a) d, S S x x S x x S x x S S x x S x x S x S S x x S x x x S x x x S x x S S x= x S S S S x S S S a a a CL a a a a a a a a a a a o_ a CL o_ a D_ D_ a s o_ o. a D_ o_ a a a a a a D_ a a a a o_ a a a m a n. D_ a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 z Z z Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z Z z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z z Z Z Z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z Z z Z Z m 'n In I o n o W lD lD lD tD lD lD Onj lD lD lD lD lD lD lD <0 l0 lD ^ lD l0 (" tD w lD lD lD w W w w W lD W LD LD N l0 <0Lf) <D l0 Lo m m In to I.!) t./l w w w Ln to to m to In ill N In In Ili Ln to to Ln W Ln to In In In In m In In m In In In n n n to n N. n n m n n n n n n n n n n� n n 0 n n n n n n n n n n n n n n� n n n n n n rn rn rn fn m rn rn m N O rn rn rn m rn rn m rn m rn p rn rn i rn rn m rn m N m rn m rn rn rn rn rn rn N, rn rn m rn m rn m m m o m m m m z o w m m m m cc m m m m m m m 0_ m m m cc m o m m m m m 0c m m m Lr of O O O p O 0 0 0 F~- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O Z O O m 0 0 0 0 0 � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ at F- O ❑ ❑ ❑ m ❑ O ❑ ❑ O O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Z O O a w ❑ ❑ ❑ O ❑ O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ O O ❑ ❑ Z O ❑ ❑ ❑ O z Z Z m m Z Z Z Z m J Z z z z z Z Z Z Z Z O Z Z O LL Z Z Z Z Z Z z Z Z Z z z z Z z z J z Z Z O a O 0 wo o o 0 o 0 J O o o o o 0 o o 0 o m O o y x oz 0 oz oz 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 F- 0 0> 0 0 0 z o z o 0 0 0 a 0 a a 0 0 0❑ 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0< 0 0 0 ❑ C) 0 ❑ Oo Z 3 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Z 3 ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ O ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ O O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ O Q ❑ ❑ Z ❑ ❑ w w w w w w w w w w O w w w w w w w w w w w w w Q w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w O w w w w w m m m m Z m m m m m o_ m m m m m m m wm m F- ofm vl Z m m m m oc m m m m m m m m m m F- m m a m m m m m 0 0 � r+ m } } ❑ W Q❑ w w Q w O Q Q vl Q Q w 3 Q w w >03u� 3��rnm�F >xi ¢� Q Q z O (7 = a J J F- �_ E- F- F- Q Z C) 2 w m❑ z Q h z F- F- Q H} K S Q ut Z a J w w n _' n .-� n an Ln �- Q m Q n Q Oi O io °- rn .� n Q .� .-+ rn Q- F- Q N O Z S �-I N ci w N e-1 N N O> m > > N O Q N N m> N w u1 0 U w w w U w w w X 3 w 3 w w w w w w w w X w w= J 3 w w- w w w w w w w 3 w w X z z z u w z z z o 3 n z n Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z O Z Z w Z Z Z z z 3 z z z z z w n z z X � oo Z 'D w m L, 0 m c 0 w c o m ;T W m m r ' o m o io m^ n o o n z r o a co M M lD n V1 w O n In O1 ci 00 T n w N w LD n N O O1 O d' O to d' n V1 c-I O O1 00 m to 00 lD N lD lD N O Ol N w N M m 7 to n N m O m m � x m ti M In ti m n� C m N In w .-� N O d' M M lD m N N m m m m m m N c-I m c-1 D. `i M ti F- It N M M M lD M .-I M M .--I N .-1 D. } x w O w a U) o a a m U a rj m m O ❑ m w ❑ o w W Z w X X Z Z N Z O O N n -1 Mp m m N m - mm d O Q U u 7 Q Q f w w a r vl w Z w Q F-w m U S w w w w n r 3 a z ❑ U w ❑ 3 a }a :D X z z o > w w ~ o w a z 3 z a 3 o z Q o a } W x w U J w J F h J Q V Q Q w F- z z Q a w x Q O U w Z Z F- J z O ❑~ U O J VI J V1 Q W J W F- y N Z O F- �cwr! O N H J w W > 0Ti w z Q Z❑ cF Q w Q w ❑ ❑ J cQ U } w O w}❑= Y Q W C J J cc.c ❑= J_ Z Vl W OY1 Vl w W G D6 z Q Z G J t J K V J L) N w H O w w z w m Z J Q 3 K> Q U co 2 z Q g J o6 J ER Q w W W J Q J} F- w J K W Q S G_ } m J ❑ OYJ ~ c� w D_' VI J~ F- fl O� Z Q Vn W O d•' a J Q J 3 } FW_� J m Z w J J a Y Q W Q 62 0} Q G Z VI � 0 Z W Q O J Z Q Q a Z Z W U Q� w p J Q U M 0 z m to o m X QZ F- m O Q O Q U Z z Z O w U m O Y vl -' O Z 0 O O Z Z a ax. -p, _' w LL Q' N a `Z V ac m LL a g U (7 J p Q w Q Z N Z QQQd Q m z O O � Z a m Z O w G G Z H Z U F- z W w :7 Q J S S 0 � O 0_. 11-- n Xw Z Z> D' U Q n1 3 Y 0 0 0 W Q z Vl F- Q� Z w Q vl w O w Q w In Z U J U U Q Z m w ~ J Z Wi w Q w❑ o= U>>>>} w= x > w Z c x Q J O J O F- W z O Vl i.7 W W V Y J to }❑ w W d F- Co Q= w Z O O O 3 w D_ F- F- J m W > O ¢¢ w » a w Q~ m Q Q Q Q U J Y 0 0 m m x S o p ❑w w U O� Q w w w= J 0 F- u u u u N N N N m0)mm CT v v v d a a n. 9- 00 00 00 00 v a a v m m m m x x x x a a m a O O O O z z z z ko W W Ln vi Ln n n rn rn m m n = 0t 0< n O O O rn O d a p z z z w 2 :� 2 0 0 o a w w w Q K D' GC J W Q 0 Q O� Z W 00 Y Z N w w X Z Z o O Co Ln U1 00 O r N d ��' I r-P 0 G —A m own= m z 0 IA QO I --In n O o 3 N �_ ° ° -i CD n � n � r-f LA _. CD rD f�D, � � Q CU 3 3 rr, ° o ° rD c y 3 C� o ca- 0- C rD Q -M o u, -� J. rD a, O o Q C p aj 0 n N Qj Op E Q LA Q. O p rD N.) e-t Oq rD �. CO � C Gl 0 n 0 3 N 0 orq T m 3 0 rD Ln D Ln a) r) N (D (A 0 h 0- 0 r-� ZT (D cz G) co U-1 (A 0 ,h ET Q --h I 0 3 c G) m r) 0 l< n 0 3 N 0 cu ova s V) L/) rn cu CD o O cu n r 11 Cu r-r _ Q Q- CD D ..h O � O CD -1 Q. m Q <_ CD M rt r* O (D E 3 Q Qun CU Ln •-•• O- � O � < LP 3 QJ fD 0- aj LA � fD O < n• un G) r-F Q O rI rD 0- Q CD U (D n 3 rD � � O O -� 3 w O Q O• � • O � v Q r-t 3 c— O �D 0- Q �_ < cu O :3 - Q Q m cu �D un CD 0 . 0' n (D N LA O w 0 N I ivv I fM�•. "'3