2022-442-Minutes for Meeting November 14,2022 Recorded 12/1/2022BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon
(541) 388-6570
Recorded in Deschutes County C.12022-442
Steve Dennison, County Clerk
Commissioners' Journal 12/01/2022 4:34:06 PM
FOR RECORDING STAMP ONLY
BOCC MEETING MINUTES
1:00 PM
MONDAY, November 14, 2022 Barnes Sawyer &
VIRTUAL MEETING PLATFORM
Present were Commissioners Patti Adair, Tony DeBone, and Phil Chang. Also present were Nick Lelack,
County Administrator; Dave Doyle, Legal Counsel; and Brenda Fritsvold, Board Executive Assistant
This meeting was audio and video recorded and can be accessed at the Deschutes County
Meeting Portal website www.deschutes.org/meetings
CALL TO ORDER: Chair Adair called the meeting to order at 1:00 PM.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CITIZEN INPUT:
Chair Adair stated that persons wanting to speak to the proposal for a ground lease with
Mountain View Community Development for the Redmond Safe Parking Program will be
accommodated later in the agenda.
• Ceta Kelley, 65115 Smokey Ridge Road, sought representation for Tumalo.
• Deborah Finck, 65360 Gerking Market Road, objected that Tumalo does not
currently have designated representation on the Planning Commission. She shared
her willingness to volunteer as well as her opposition to fast -tracking development
and growth.
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 1 OF 10
• Justin Hoffman, 63870 Johnson Road, wanted to see representation for Tumalo
since decisions are being made which impact the area.
• Katherine Powell, 64845 Allen Road, felt it was irresponsible that Tumalo does not
have representation on the Planning Commission and said residents lack
information and support.
• Jeannie Fraley, 64790 Bruce Ave., supported having representation on the Planning
Commission specific to Tumalo.
• Dale Peer, 64711 Wood Ave. expressed desire for a representative who is active in
the Tumalo area and familiar with the community and its concerns.
• Larry Loveland, 64750 Cook Ave., supported representation for the Tumalo
community.
• Deborah Sie, 63870 Johnson Road, appreciated knowing that the Tumalo
Community Plan update is on hold pending completion of the sewer analysis. She
questioned why a Tumalo resident was not appointed to the Planning Commission
earlier this year even though the TCP is in the process of being updated.
• Dianne Dunn, 20036 Tumalo Road, did not want any decisions affecting Tumalo
made until it has a representative on the Planning Commission.
• Jim Dunn, 20036 Tumalo Road, explained that residents are concerned about the
sewer feasibility study because zoning and development are linked to whether or
not sewer is available. He said those who live in Tumalo must be apprised of all
potential development implications involving the TCP, ADDS and other initiatives.
Chair Adair noted eight emails received by the Board on this matter, in addition to an email
received from a citizen thanking the Board for supporting rural affordable housing options
to lower the high cost of living in the County.
Further Discussion:
Commissioner Adair said although someone who resigned from the Planning Commission
earlier this year was a resident of Tumalo, that person served in one of the at -large
positions. She agreed it may be time to convert one of the Commission's at -large positions
back to someone who will specifically represent Tumalo.
Commissioner Chang explained that the Planning Commission is not involved in the sewer
feasibility study which is being conducted. He offered to consider converting an at -large
position on the Commission to specifically represent Tumalo when the one of these nears
the end of its term, but it would not be possible to make that change now without
unseating a current member. He agreed it is important for the County to hear from
residents about road and other issues and encouraged citizen input directly to the Board.
Commissioner DeBone cautioned against unnecessarily drawing divisions. Noting that
because Tumalo was platted long ago, sewer is allowed in that area, he said the update of
the Tumalo Community Plan appropriately focuses attention on the important question of
how Tumalo should develop from now until 2040. He emphasized that the Board is full-
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 2 OF 10
time Commissioners who welcome questions and concerns.
Peter Gutowsky, Director of Community Development, described the composition of the
Planning Commission and how terms are staggered. He said while Code acknowledges that
geographic representation should be achieved, this does not constitute a strict
requirement that Tumalo be specifically represented. He concurred that come June, when
two members will term out, the Board can direct staff how to recruit for those positions.
Until then, one option would be for the Board to appoint an ex officio member who could
not vote but who could otherwise participate as a non -voting member.
County Administrator Nick Lelack assured that no action is expected on the Tumalo
Community Plan before July of 2023. Gutowksky added that the TCP is currently on hold
pending completion of the sewer feasibility study.
Lelack summarized that the Planning Commission is not a decision -making body, but
rather is advisory to the Board of Commissioners with respect to land use policies. He
shared that the Board will hear a presentation on the sewer feasibility study in December.
CONSENT AGENDA: Before the Board was Consideration of the Consent Agenda.
CHANG: Move Board approval of Consent Agenda
DEBONE: Second
VOTE: CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: Yes
ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
1. Renew Contract for Humane Society Animal Shelter Services
2. Consideration of Board Signature of Order No. 2022-064, Appointing Health
Services Director's Designees
3. Approve Document No. 2022-854, an Intergovernmental Agreement with the
Oregon Judicial Department for Parental Custody Mediation Funds
4. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter of Thanks to Bill Anderson for service
on the Deschutes County Facility Project Review Committee
5. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter of Thanks to Mark Davis for service
on the Spring River Special Road District
6. Approval of the Minutes of November 2, 2022 BOCC Meeting
ACTION ITEMS:
BOCC MEETING NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 3 OF 10
7. Consideration of Board signature of Central Oregon Intergovernmental
Agreement #2022-782
Janice Garceau, Director of Health Services, explained this agreement would satisfy
the State's requirement that remaining grant funds awarded by OHA be expended
before the end of this year. She reported that grant funds spent thus far have had a
positive effect in helping HS reduce its staff vacancy rate from 17% to 11 %. Although
the remaining funds cannot be used for wages, they can potentially be utilized for
other kinds of incentives such as training, childcare, or reimbursement of tuition or
licensure fees, or to boost recruitment efforts through advertising.
Legal Counsel David Doyle added that OHA has provided written guidance that the
agreement is satisfactory. Commissioner Adair asked for a copy of this
communication.
Commissioner Chang questioned how COIC would pay for the new initiatives.
Garceau responded that the County would incur the expense, submit an invoice and
receive reimbursement.
Commissioner DeBone suggested that the County could instead choose to
relinquish the unspent funds back to the State. Garceau replied that the County had
very little time in which to expend these funds, and offered to share a specific
spending plan when that has been determined.
CHANG: Move approval of Board signature of Document No. 2022-782,
Central Oregon Intergovernmental Agreement up to $866,000
ADAIR: Second
VOTE: CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: No
ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried 2 - 1.
8. Consideration of Document No. 2022-793, a Ground Lease with Mountain
View Community Development for the Redmond Safe Parking Program
Kristie Bollinger, Property Manager, described the proposed lease to utilize County -
owned property for the Redmond Safe Parking Program in conjunction with
Mountain View Community Development (MVCD). The lease would be for an initial
90-day trial period, with continued use beyond that time subject to authorization by
the Board.
Rick Russell, executive director of Mountain View Community Development, said the
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 4 OF 10
organization conducts background checks on persons seeking to enter the program,
and those who are admitted must agree to abide by certain rules. All participants
will receive personalized case management services to assist with transitioning into
permanent housing.
Chair Adair noted emails received from David Welton and Sandy King on this matter.
• Bob Bohac spoke as the lead of the Jericho Road outreach program in
Redmond in support of this location for additional safe parking.
• Mike Moorman, a resident of Redmond, shared his empathy for homeless
persons and said while he does not oppose this program, he did object to
locating it at this particular site. Saying that this area already has the highest
concentration of homeless persons across numerous campsites, he cited
negative effects from campers, said almost all who live or work in the area
oppose this proposal, and asked that the Board vote the will of the
neighborhood and not approve the lease.
• Ron Hagen spoke as an active volunteer in Redmond's Safe Parking program
and a member of the MVCD Board. He stated that participants are screened
before being admitted to the program, and must be willing to follow the
rules. He believed that expanding the program would have positive results.
• Lena Barry, 839 SW Cascade, Redmond, recalled David Savory who froze to
death outside of the RiteAid in Bend in 2020. Saying that lives are at stake,
she advocated for a safe place for people to go and concluded that the safe
parking program has proven successful.
• Steve Curley, director of Redmond Economic Development, Inc., said
homelessness is affecting economic development in Redmond. He
acknowledged the misgivings voiced by some but said the safe parking
program is a great solution for those who are trying to reconnect and get
back on their feet.
• Johanna Johanson -Weinberg from Thrive Central Oregon said the high cost of
housing and lack of shelter space have resulted in families living in their cars.
She said the proposed lease would make four family units available and
provide access to shower and laundry facilities.
• Bonnie Sullens, 354 SE 5th St., Redmond, shared her experience with and
compassion for homeless persons and said attempts to trespass do not
work. She objected to the proposed location and believed it would draw
more people across 9th Street. She suggested moving it to a larger property
such as the Fairgrounds.
• Dana Dennis, 772 Castrol Court, commented on the three families and 13
individuals currently on the waiting list for this program.
Commissioner Chang said the County is continuing to explore having a safe parking
site at the Fairgrounds, but the need for more services and facilities such as
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 5 OF 10
temporary shelters must be addressed everywhere. He agreed that the situation is
worsening and was willing to consider all of the land the County owns in Redmond.
Commissioner DeBone appreciated all who shared their thoughts on this subject.
He spoke to the need of keeping people housed and supported safe parking sites as
a step forward.
Commissioner Adair emphasized that the lease would approve a 90-day pilot
program, which would then be evaluated as to how it's working.
CHANG: Move approval of Document No. 2022-793, a Ground Lease with
Mountain View Community Development for the Redmond Safe
Parking Program
DEBONE: Second
VOTE: CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: Yes
ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
DEBONE: Move to authorize Property Manager Kristie Bollinger to sign and
submit a letter to the City of Redmond to consent the use of certain
County -owned property for safe parking
CHANG: Second
VOTE: CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: Yes
ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
At 2:53 PM, the meeting recessed for a short break.
At 3:00 PM, Chair Adair recovened the meeting.
9. Consideration of American Rescue Plan Act Funding Proposal: Friends of the
Children
Laura Skundrick, Management Analyst, described a request from Friends of the
Children for $100,000 in ARPA funding expand their mentorship program to La Pine.
Rachel Cardwell, Executive Director, said Friends of the Children is committing to a
minimum program term of 12 years. She shared the initial three-year funding plan
for the program, half of which has been raised this year. She emphasized the
financial stability of the organization, said the learning loss during the pandemic was
catastrophic, and noted La Pine's comparatively low graduation rate.
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 6 OF 10
Commssioner DeBone said while he is supportive of this program, ARPA funds are
one-time dollars which he preferred to use for one-time costs.
Commissioner Chang appreciated the program's intensive approach and the
success the organization has had thus far. He thought it most appropriate to
support Friends of the Children as a service partner. Commissioner Adair noted the
County previously awarded Friends of the Children $20,000 in special projects grant
funds.
ADAIR: Move to grant Friends of the Children $30,000 in ARPA funds to
expand its 1:1 mentorship program to La Pine
CHANG: Second
VOTE: CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: Yes
ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
10. First reading of Ordinance No. 2022-011, amending the Comprehensive Plan
and approving a Zone change for property totaling approximately 19.12
acres along Highway 97
This item was moved to the November 21 st BOCC meeting agenda to allow staff time
to make necessary changes.
11. First reading of Ordinance No. 2022-013 amending the Comprehensive Plan
and approving a zone change for property totaling approximately 710 acres
to the west of Terrebonne and north of Highway 126
This item was moved to the November 21' BOCC meeting agenda to allow staff time
to make necessary changes.
12. Senate Bill (SB) 391 Work Session - Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
Legislative Amendments
Kyle Collins, Associate Planner, recapped the process to date to develop regulations
for rural Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Referring to the connection between SB
391 and SB 762, Collins said because the updated wildfire risk map will not be
released until 2023, no permits for rural ADUs can be issued until the additional fire
mitigation standards are known.
Commissioner Chang suggested a presumptive approach—i.e., seeking legislative
action early in the session that would allow ADUs to proceed if they presume a
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 7 OF 10
future designation of high or extreme risk and are constructed with the requisite
fire resistant building materials.
Commissioner DeBone supported advocating for disconnecting the wildfire risk
map from the ADU regulations.
Commissioner Chang requested additional background analysis on not allowing
ADUs in the rural Westside Transect Zone. Collins explained the reasoning behind
feathering density out to the rural areas for wildfire protection and also to preserve
natural open space and wildlife habitat.
Commissioner Chang raised the issue of how short-term rentals can be monitored
and said an ADU which totaled 900 sf including a garage does not seem large
enough. Collins said the County could allow ADUs to be connected to a primary well;
however, even if a second well was drilled, the property would not be allowed to
double the standard capacity of 15,000 gallons/day.
The Board was in consensus to bring this matter back in early 2023.
13. Preparation for Public Hearing - Psilocybin TPM Amendments
Tanya Saltzman, Senior Planner, provided background on this subject in advance of
next week's public hearing. The statewide passage of Ballot Measure 109 in 2020
allows licensed manufacturers to cultivate and process psilocybin-producing
mushrooms and fungi and for licensed service providers to administer psilocybin-
producing mushroom and fungi products to adults 21 and older.
Saltzman described the proposed changes to Code, which would: add new
definitions for terms relating to psilocybin; add psilocybin service centers as a
conditional use with site plan review in various areas; and add psilocybin service
centers to allowable uses in destination resorts. In addition, psilocybin testing
laboratories would be allowed as a conditional use with site plan review in the
Tumalo Industrial zone and areas zoned Rural Industrial. Finally, a new chapter
would be added creating time, place and manner criteria for psilocybin manufacture
as a farm use and as a processing use.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing in September and October. Next
week's public hearing before the Board is needed prior to adopting the
amendments before the program begins accepting applications on January 2na
14. Paid Leave Oregon Implementation
Kathleen Hinman, Human Resources Director, explained that the State of Oregon
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 8 OF 10
has established a paid leave program for employees which takes effect in 2023.
Staff recommends against self -insuring the program at this time and instead
recommends enrolling in the State -offered plan. Hinman estimated the annual cost
to be $649,000 for employee contributions to the program and $433,000 for the
County's employer costs.
DEBONE: Move Board approval of participation in the state plan for Paid Leave
Oregon and authorization of the County Administrator's signature on
applicable plan documents
CHANG: Second
VOTE: CHANG: Yes
DEBONE: Yes
ADAIR: Chair votes yes. Motion Carried
15. DSL Property Exchange
Whitney Hale, Deputy County Administrator, distributed a draft letter from the Fair
Board to the Department of State Lands regarding the urgency of finalizing the
transfer of land between the County and the State Land Board as approved by DSL
in August. Geoff Hinds, Fair & Expo Director, said the Fair Board will meet this week
or next week to finalize and issue the letter.
Commissioner Adair agreed the letter must be issued as soon as possible and
shared that she spoke with the Governor about this matter last week.
Chair Adair noted consensus of the Board to support the letter as drafted.
OTHER ITEMS:
• Commissioner Adair reported the upcoming term expiration of Budget Committee
member Judy Trego. The Board concurred in asking whether she is interested to
continue serving in this capacity.
• Commissioner DeBone proposed the Board gather for an informal work session
before the end of the year.
• Commissioner Chang attended a housing policy workshop hosted by the Bend
Chamber.
• Commissioner Chang reported on a housing bond roundtable discussion regarding
the "Housing For All" initiative.
• Commissioner Adair attended a Sunriver Chamber meeting.
• Commissioner Adair reported that the COACT meeting included presentations from
the Redmond and Bend airports.
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 9 OF 10
At 4:50, the Board recessed for a short break.
At 4:52, Chair Adair reconvened the meeting.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
At the time of 4:52 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2)(d)
Labor Negotiations. The Board came out of Executive Session at 5:00 p.m. to direct staff to
proceed as discussed.
At the time of 5:00 p.m. the Board went back into Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2)
(d) Labor Negotiations. The Board came out of Executive Session at 5:23 p.m. to direct staff
to proceed as discussed.
ADJOURN
Being no further business brought before the Commissioners, the meeting was adjourned at
5:23 p.m.
DATED this 01' Day of (%ev2022 for the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners.
ATTEST:
iki-eikat041.4ta
RECORDING SECRETARY
PATTI ADAIR, CHAIR
ANTHONY DEBONE, VICE CHAIR
PHIL CHANG, COMMISSIONER
BOCC MEETING
NOVEMBER 14, 2022 PAGE 10 OF 10
Angie Powers
Do Not Reply; citizeninput
RE: Mitel voice message from CARL SHOEMAKER, +15416402358 for mailbox 1734
Citizen InputVoicemail received on 11/8/2022 at 11:59 AM:
"Hi, this is Carl Shoemaker, 312 NE 5th Street. I live in Bend, I don't have a farm but l want to thank the. County
Commissioners for uh, supporting rural affordable housing options to lower the high cost of living in Deschutes County.
Thank you."
Original Message
From: Do Not Reply <DoNotReply@deschutes.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2022 11:59 AM
To: citizeninput<citizeninput@deschutes.org>
Subject: Mitel voice message from CARL SHOEMAKER, +15416402358 for mailbox 1734
You have received a voice mail message from CARL SHOEMAKER, +15416402358 for mailbox 1734.
Message length is 00:00 25. Message size is 200 KB:
1
Angie Powers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
howard finckfam.com <howard@finckfam.com>
Friday, November 11, 2022 12:59 PM
citizeninput
Tumalo Plan + meeting on the 14th
Iunderstand you are having a meeting on the 14th to discuss (among other items) the plans to develop Tumalo. We (
many residents of the Tumalo area) do not want to see our very busy village and our lifestyle changed in order to create
another Bend suburb, with profits accruing to the developers at the cost of a rural lifestyle. We're pleased with our rural
setting, enabling us (in our case) to raise horses and dogs:
I don't understand why stakeholders (other than developers in adjacent areas) aren't included in the deliberations. It's
our future you'll be deciding. We want inclusion in the deliberations; nobody from Planning has reached out or seemed
interest in local stakeholders' issues. One of the initial issues (a sewer plant) is opposed by many of us as it's seen as the
first step for density development.
Howard Finck, Gerking Market Road, Tumalo (Bend mailing).
1
Angie Powers
From•
Sent•
To:
Subject:
Black Duck <alpine88@mailbox.org>
Friday, November 11, 2022 1:24 PM
citizeninput
Input for Nov 14 Mtg: Tumalo Membership of County Planning Commission
me people who, received this message don t often get emailfrom alp ne88@mailbox org, Learn why this is important
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Dear Deschutes Cty Commissioners,
In advance of the Monday Nov. 14 meeting I would like to have
Right now Tumalo does NOT have representation, yet key projects are moving forward which WILL change
Tumalo. Tumalo needs a representative member in the Planning Commission.
Statewide planning goal 1, (which is state law) requires that the County SHALL include an officially
recognized committee for citizen involvement broadly representative of geographic areas:
CHAPTER 2.52 DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
2.52. 020 Membership; Qualifications
The commission shall be composed of seven members, appointed by the Board of County Commissioners,
who reside within the County.
No more than two members may be engaged in the same kind of occupation, business, trade or profession or
be members, officers or employees of any partnership or corporation that engages principally in the buying,
selling or developing of real estate for profit.
No commission member shall serve more than two full terms or 10 years, whichever is greater, except that
the Board may extend the term of a planning commission member to complete a project which commenced prior
to expiration of the term. In no case shall such extension exceed six months.
The membership of the commission shall, as much as possible, be representative of the various geographic
areas of the County. This should generally consist of the following: One member from the south County area of
La Pine and Sunriver (Townships 19-22); two members from the Bend area (Townships 17 and 18); one
member from the Tumalo area (Townships 16, Ranges 11 or 12); one member from the Sisters area
(Townships 14 or 15, Ranges 9, 10 and 11); one member from the Redmond area (Townships 14 or 15, Ranges
12 or 13); and one member at large. Failure to achieve such geographic representation shall not affect the
validity of any action taken by the planning commission.
This issue has been raised several times by different residents of Tumalo, and their voices have been ignored.
There is a promise to remedy the situation one year from now, but that is obviously conveniently after following
major decisions have been taken :
1. Update to the Tumalo 2030 Community Plan (which has been advanced 7 years to the existing plan's
expiration, another enigma to most of us).
1
2. Tumalo/Hwy 20 Traffic Interchange
3. Tumalo Sewer project
4. Senate Bill 39.1- concerning rural Accessory Dwelling Units
These key planning projects are being pushed down the throat of Tumalo area residences.
We are an unincorporated community with a unique rural character that we want to maintain. We do not
want to grow and we are not under any obligation to grow this unincorporated community. The community
members have provided input that supports the rural character to continue. The staff and county
commissioners are simply not listening to our input and moving ahead on what seems to be a predetermined
course, in the process also allowing a couple of local developers to make a substantial profit.
The current direction for these projects have direct conflicts -of -interest supporting commercial -use,
businesses and outside special interest groups, NOT residences. These changes definitely do not represent a
good, fair and just process.
Thank you for including my statement as input for the Nov. 14 County Planning Commission Meeting.
Sincerely,
Tea Teirlynck
Tumalo Area Resident
2
Angie Powers
From: Deborah Finck <deborah@finckfam.com>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2022 2:56 PM
To: citizeninput
Subject: My Input for Nov. 14th DC Commissioner meeting - Tumalo Resident Inclusion on
County Planning Commission
Some people who received this message on often get email from deborah@finckfam.com. Learn why this is important
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Dear Deschutes County Commissioners (Adair, Chang and DeBone):
In advance of the Monday Nov. 14 meeting I would like to have my input included as public input.
As of now, it is my understanding that Tumalo does NOT have representation, yet key projects are moving
forward which WILL change Tumalo. Tumalo needs a representative member on the Planning Commission
now.
Statewide planning goal #1 (which is state law) requires that the County SHALL include an officially
recognized committee for citizen involvement broadly representative of geographic areas:
CHAPTER 2.52 DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
2.52.020 Membership; Qualifications
The commission shall be composed of seven members, appointed by the Board of County Commissioners,
who reside within the County.
No more than two members may be engaged in the same kind of occupation, business, trade or profession or
be members, officers or employees of any partnership or corporation that engages principally in the buying,
selling or developing of real estate for profit.
No commission member shall serve more than two full terms or 10 years, whichever is greater, except that
the Board may extend the term of a planning commission member to complete a project which commenced prior
to expiration of the term. In no case shall such extension exceed six months.
The membership of the commission shall, as much as possible, be representative of the various geographic
areas of the County. This should generally consist of the following: One member from the south County area of
La Pine and Sunriver (Townships 19-22); two members from the Bend area (Townships 17 and 18); one
member from the Tuinalo area (Townships 16, Ranges 11 or 12); one member from the Sisters area
(Townships 14 or 15, Ranges 9, 10 and 11); one member from the Redmond area (Townships 14 or 15, Ranges
12 or 13); and one member at large. Failure to achieve such geographic representation shall not affect the
validity of any action taken by the planning commission.
This issue has been raised several times by different residents of Tumalo, and their voices have been ignored.
There is a promise to remedy the situation one year from now, that is totally unacceptable.
1. Update to the Tumalo 2030 Community Plan (which has been advanced 7 years to the existing plan's
expiration, another enigma to most of us). Why is the current plan being usurped?
2. Tumalo/Hwy 20 Traffic Interchange
3. Tumalo Sewer project
4. Senate Bill 391 - concerning rural Accessory Dwelling Units
These key planning projects are being pushed down the throat of Tumalo area residents. We did not ask for
these projects and with the exception of the sewer project, not given any opportunity to provide input [srysE_r,We
are an unincorporated community with a unique rural character that we want to maintain. We do not want to
grow and we are not under any obligation to grow this unincorporated community. The community members
have provided input that supports the rural character to continue. The staff and county commissioners are
simply not listening to our input and moving ahead on what seems to be a predetermined course, in the process
also allowing a couple of local developers to make a substantial profit.
The current direction for these projects have direct conflicts -of -interest supporting commercial -use, businesses
and outside special interest groups, NOT residences. These changes definitely do not represent a good, fair and
just process.
Thank you for including my statement as input for the Nov. 14 County. Planning Commission Meeting.
—Deborah Finck
Resident of Tumalo, OR
Deschutes County Tax Payer
2
Angie Powers
From: Tammy. Harty <tammyharty@msn.com>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2022 3:09 PM
To: citizeninput
Cc: Tony DeBone; Phil Chang; Patti Adair
Subject: Commissioner Meeting for November 14 - PLEASE READ THIS AT THE MEETING FOR
THE RECORD
Some people who received this message don't often get email from tammyharty@msn.corn. Learn why this is important`
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
I am not able to attend your meeting on Monday the 14th, but do want to provide comments about my concern from a
lack of a planning commission member from Tumalo. Until this issues gets resolved, the Tumalo community will
continue to advocate for this position to be filled immediately.
I am simply advocating that the County staff and commissioners follow the code. I have heard from staff and a couple of
commissioners that the code doesn't say Tumalo shall be represented. The language is very clear: The Deschutes
County code shays Tumalo SHALL be represented, as much as possible. It is possible and you had 2 fully qualified
applicants apply to the last opening for an "at large" position. I also want to point out that the code only calls for ONE at
large position and the commission currently has TWO at large positions. Again, the code is not being followed.
Statewide planning Goal 1 is also very clear about community input and that AND statewide planning goal 1 requires
that the County SHALL include an officially recognized committee for citizen involvement broadly representative of
geogra
Imagine that if l were coming to the County to do something on my property. I was told that the code said "ABC". I
responded that I will do "ABC" next year and that I wanted my permit. The county's response would be YOU NEED TO
DO THIS NOW as the code says. So, why should you be exempt from following your own code ?? To make excuses is
frankly wrong and sets a very bad precedent. It also creates a double standard and mistrust over something that is so
simple to make right.
I am asking that you do your job and follow the code. Fill the Tumalo position NOW, not a year from now. I have
previously offered several suggestions as how to proceed to get this resolved. I suggested that the planning
commissioners be told of the error/omission/oversight and first ask if someone on the planning commission would be
willing to resign their position so that a Tumalo representative could be appointed. If that were to happen voluntarily,
then this situation could be remedied simply and quickly. I understand you have a planning commissioner that has not
attended sessions regularly and could be interested in resigning early. You could also just make the newly appointed
planning commissioner aware of the oversight and un-appoint the second at large position. He could apply for the
position next year. Then "fix" the issue by recruiting a Tumalo commissioner now — per the code. The time is now when
there is much going on in Tumalo and representation of Tumalo is vital at this time.
To refresh your memory of the exact language in the code relating to the planning commission:
CHAPTER 2.52 DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
2.52.020 Membership; Qualifications
1
The commission shall be composed of seven members, appointed by the Board of County Commissioners, who
reside within the County.
No more than two members may be engaged in the same kind of occupation, business, trade or profession or be
members, officers or employees of any partnership or corporation that engages principally in the buying, selling.
or developing of real estate for profit.
No commission member shall serve more than two full terms or 10 years, whichever is greater, except that the
Board may extend the term of a planning commission member to complete a project which commenced prior to
expiration of the term. In no case shall such extension exceed six months.
4. _ The membership of the commission shall, as much as possible, be representative of the various geographic areas
of the County. This should generally consist of the following: One member from the south County area of La Pine
and Sunriver (Townships 19-22); two members from the Bend area (Townships 17 and 18); one member from
the Tumalo area (Townships 16, Ranges 11 or 12); one member from the Sisters area (Townships 14 or 15,
Ranges 9, 10 and 11); one member from the Redmond area (Townships 14 or 15, Ranges 12 or 13); and one
member at large. Failure to achieve such geographic representation shall not affect the validity of any action
taken by the planning commission.
Thanks for your consideration.
Tammy Harty
541-815-0203
tammyharty@msn.com
Angie Powers
From: Jeannine Fraley <jeanninefraley@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2022 4:23 PM
To: Tammy Harty
Cc: citizeninput; Tony DeBone; Phil Chang; Patti Adair
Subject: Re: Commissioner Meeting for November 14 - PLEASE READ THIS AT THE MEETING
FOR THE RECORD
Some people wreceive
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
is message on' often get email from jeanninefraiey@gmaiLcom Learn why this is important
Thank you Tammy, we will definitely read this on Monday!
Jeannie
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 11, 2022, at 3:09 PM, Tammy Harty <tammyharty@msn.com> wrote:
I am not to attend your meeting on Monday the 14th, but do want to provide comments about my
concern from a lack of a planning commission member from Tumalo. Until this issues gets resolved, the
Tumalo community will continue to advocate for this position to be filled immediately.
I am simply advocating that the County staff and commissioners follow the code. I have heard from staff
and a couple of commissioners that the code doesn't say Tumalo shall be represented. The language is
very clear: The Deschutes County code shays Tumalo SHALL be represented, as much as possible. It is
possible and you had 2 fully qualified applicants apply to the last opening for an "at large" position. I
also want to point out that the code only calls for ONE at large position and the commission currently
has TWO at large positions. Again, the code is not being followed.
Statewide planning Goal 1 is also very clear about community input and that AND statewide planning
goal 1 requires that the County SHALL include an officially recognized committee for citizen involvement
broadly representative of geographic` areas..;.:.:
Imagine that if I were coming to the County to do something on my property. I was told that the code
said "ABC". I responded that 1 will do "ABC" next year and that I wanted my permit. The county's
response would be YOU NEED TO DO THIS NOW as the code says. So, why should you be exempt from
following your own code ?? To make excuses is frankly wrong and sets a very bad precedent. It also
creates a double standard and mistrust over something that is so simple to make right.
I am asking that you do your job and follow the code. Fill the Tumalo position NOW, not a year from
now. I have previously offered several suggestions as how to proceed to get this resolved. I suggested
that the planning commissioners be told of the error/omission/oversight and first ask if someone on the
planning commission would be willing to resign their position so that a Tumalo representative could be
appointed. If that were to happen voluntarily, then this situation could be remedied simply and
1
quickly. I understand you have a planning commissioner that has not attended sessions regularly and
could be interested in resigning early. You could also just make the newly appointed planning
commissioner aware of the oversight and un-appoint the second at large position. He could apply for
the position next year. Then"fix" the issue by recruiting a Tumalo commissioner now — per the
code. The time is now when there is much going on in Tumalo and representation of Tumalo is vital at
this time.
To refresh your memory of the exact language in the code relating to the planning commission:
CHAPTER 2.52 DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
2.52.020 Membership; Qualifications
. The commission shall be composed of seven members, appointed by the Board of County
Commissioners, who reside within the County.
No more than two members may be engaged in the same kind of occupation, business, trade or
profession or be members, officers or employees of any partnership or corporation that engages
principally in the buying, selling or developing of real estate for profit.
No commission member shall serve more than two full terms or 10 years, whichever is greater,
except that the Board may extend the term of a planning commission member to complete a
project which commenced prior to expiration of the term. In no case shall such extension
exceed six months.
. The membership of the commission shall, as much as possible, be representative of the various
geographic areas of the County. This should generally consist of the following: One member
from the south County area of La Pine and Sunriver (Townships 19-22); two members from the
Bend area (Townships 17 and 18); one member from the Tumalo area (Townships 16, Ranges 11
or 12); one member from the Sisters area (Townships 14 or 15, Ranges 9, 10 and 11); one
member from the Redmond area (Townships 14 or 15, Ranges 12 or 13); and one member at
large. Failure to achieve such geographic representation shall not affect the validity of any
action taken by the planning commission.
Thanks for your consideration.
Tammy Harty
541-815-0203
tammyharty@msn.com
2
Angie Powers
From: Jim Dunn <jdunn115@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2022 9:55 AM
To: citizeninput
Subject Tumalo
Some people` who,: received th
[EXTERNAL LMAIL]
is: message don enget email firom jdunn115@gmail.com. Learn why this is important
I am a citizen of the rural community of Tumalo and I am concerned that Deschutes County Commissioners are
moving forward with plans that are not consistent with the needs and wants of our community. My biggest
concern is the overt noncompliance of their own code, specifically not including representation from Tumalo in
the future of our community.
Tumalo has several key initiatives that are being driven by the County, including;
- Bus Stop
- Sewer
- 2040 Plan
The implications are HUGE, including:
- Sewer is not needed except for a few commercial property owners and the COST is exorbitant to us residents
high density (contradicts the wants of Tumalo residents)
- traffic overload (Cook Street can't handle more traffic, especially with Thornbugh's 1,000 units plus a
destination for locals)
transient implications (When asked the CET Transportation Specialists what the projected ridership is, she
said "I don't know". WHY would we have a stop in Tumalo when NO ONE will use it? Why would their
initial location of the stop be on School Grounds???
1
Angie Powers
From: boyd clan <boydclan@bendbroadband.com>
Sent Sunday, November 13, 2022 5:14 PM
To: citizeninput
Subject Tumalo Sewer Plan
Some people who receive
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
is message dont often get email from boydclan@bendbroadband,com. Learn why this is important
As residents of Tumalo we wish to reiterate to the County Commissioners our opposition to the Tumalo Sewer Plan.
I am not quite sure of the purpose of Monday's hearing, but I do not believe it is proper for the Commissioners to give
approval on this project.
1. I believe the majority of Tumalo residents are apposed.
2: It will lead to more development in the area which is supposed to be rural.
3 More development puts stress on our ground water and aquafers. We are already experiencing problems with
wells.
4 Most homeowners in the area already have septic systems approved by the County. Why should we be forced to
pay a yet undetermined but excessive cost for a system we don't need? This is all for the benefit of wealthy
developers.
5. 1 am open to a sewer system for the businesses along Cook Avenue, but not if it opens the "door" for extension
into the rest of the community.
Sincerely,
Charles and Bonnie Boyd
20160 Tumalo Rd
Bend, OR 97703
Sent from Mail for Windows
1
AngiePowers
From: D C <kalikwanyin@pm.me>
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2022 9:17 PM
To: citizeninput
Subject: November 14 Board of County Commissioners Meeting
Soul'eff eople who 'receive
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
s message on often get email from kalikwanyin@pm.me. Learn why this is important
Dear County Commissioners,
I would like my comments to be included in the November 14th1 meeting.
I am very disappointed and dismayed at the lack of representation we have as residence in Tumalo,
as major projects and planning is underway specifically in the Tumalo area. Your own planning
regulations state that the County shall include various geographic areas, including one member
from Tumalo. We even had a very competent resident who was willing to give of her time to serve
the community (and would be a great representative) apply for this position when one was open.
Unfortunately and outrageously, she was rudely dismissed without reason.
We need representation now, not in June. Your negligence in not putting a Tumalo resident
representative in while you create the update to the Tumalo 2030 Community Plan, create a Tumalo
Sewer Project, create Tumalo/Hwy 20 Traffic Exchange and the Senate Bill 391 concerning rural
Accessory Dwelling Units seems to be intentional, unjust, corrupt and serving special interest and
not the community. You are not following your own code.
As you are looking at the "feasibility" of a sewer project, you are at the same time, allowing
businesses to, garner permits with the expectation of the sewer project going forward. Where is the
due process in this? It seems like you have already made your decisions and the guise of asking
residents whit they want is merely a formality. We are tired of corruption and special interest being
pushed forward with total disregard to the citizens. We are tired of Commissioners saying we will
get representation "next year" when it will be too late. Do you think we are ignorant of your
shenanigans? We are fed up with rhetoric and superficial appeasement. We are fed up with hidden
agendas. We are tired and fed up with conflicts of interest interfering with what is good, fair and
just.
Your duty is to represent us, you are failing in this. We do not want to pay for projects that will be
burdensome ;end unwanted to the residents. We do not want to support unscrupulous developers.
We would like you to immediately call for a motion to revise the composition of the Planning
Commission to include a Tumalo resident today. Do the right thing and fix this situation and
follow your code.
i
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Deborah Sie, IMD
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
2
TES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSMEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony:
** Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above)
Name
Address
\,„,0,-/V1/4.17\ Date:
649 .3 / 'N S171/VL-6t(tr—R(
Phone #s
E-mail address
it
(9--0
I LF
R-Z)
co itt-1
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
Yes
ES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK`
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony: O
30
Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
.Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above)
Name C Date: / /' '
Address C'l; ..-...
Pc
Tidiz
Phone #s
E-mail address
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
Yes
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony:
/0
R9,-Afe5z4
** Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above)
Name
Address
U$11
C %G 1)45cy Atl
Date: qA�
Phone #s 5"-06 / 7.
E-mail address )Y' 51►1
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
Yes [0 No
lIu\AAA\
1`VES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSMEETING.
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony: IL <44
Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
,Yes (please : ee descr' tion of Citizen Input above) No
Name' c! Date: 11
Address
Phone #s 3kVa
E-mail address c5c;) aid° A:2"'
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
Yes
(\ALI
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
• Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
• Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony:
Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above
TIIIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
av�
conA�� PATh'taevi "v\ he/w,
c:s6u,ye-Ar-- -,LL r \a
V6LA-9-ef 5-h/L-C4'
C,ttc),CUCCAJI
e_A-e.7- .&„74\-A 4-1.)
J
_\,,NA./.--e/ At- k 0 4% _..
11901y yv° W,
YWKIAA-
0)-a
hminivNA
is
\220 aq_
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSMEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony:
_6415-1-
Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above)No.
Name
Address toy rT t ( koO 1-=-
Date:
ifto-teA
Phone#s
E-mail address
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
Yes
p puh(vt,o6L1
F
02x0 0._,c‘ Coo -LEAN\--
C_ 4--7/ln A '-- C V
�v� -._.
1)/\.e OA_ Pv-y--
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony: Iij �tr? i �t a)14
Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above) No
0l idDate: l)% '.
1Vame LH'� �/
Address C do ,
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record
Yes
USES
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING.
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony: 1A ►/ - G+ /0 e, ? �
Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above) No
Name d yr c i e Date:
Address ( 3 0 \�?il (4- 61A 1
keyao - 57703
Phone #s CZ'
E-mail address a z) - -@ /3-14
1-671 % I/ , c 0'
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the recpr .1
�5"Lib
-/
ES.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony: T(AYCt16 ,V'\-171
Is this topic an item on toddy's agenda?
gYes (please see description of Citizen Input above) No
p
NameD'1-cG1 PIA n
Address Vv1o1 U I i
le:40-dt,Q crf1c 2.
Phone#s 1- 0C)-161
E-mail address J'cl lA;i'li7 f yait c-6)
Date:
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
• Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
• Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony: / 4 tir,
A-JP-766
c000l cti
** Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above)
Phone #s 5 L I 69'6) 2-t-12--V"
E-mail address P UM 1 / �L C. ''
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
4,-1)UT.
Angie Powers
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
David Welton <davidnwelton@gmail.com>
Sunday, November 13, 2022 7:55 AM
citizeninput
In favor of Safe Parking on county land
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from davidnwelton@gmail.com. Learn why this is
important at https://akams/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Commissioners Adair, Chang and DeBone,
Regarding the hearing on Monday, November 14th, I wanted to write in, as a resident of Deschutes. County, and voice
my support for the proposed "safe parking" program on county land: I would have liked to attend to support the project
in person, but I am unable to do so because of work commitments.
We need to act on homelessness. We need to do more of this kind of managed program which provides help and.
oversight, and do it faster.
There's always going to be someone saying 'no', but what happens when we only listen to them and don't enact viable
solutions? We have all seen what has happened in Portland as they kicked the can down the road, rather than quickly
implementing programs with a good track record.
Thank you,
David N. Welton
0\e
ct
60" ,,,cc
Ro
)c\p9P.Nie
,1\3'
ash
\ov
VA/
,k\\''' al
etv
NW
Angie Powers
From: Sandy King <sandysueking@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2022 8:32 PM
To: citizeninput
Subject: Safe parking program
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from sandysueking@gmail.com. Learn why this is.
important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification
[EXTERNAL EMAIL]
Dear Commissioners:
1 am writing in support of he safe parking program that is proposed on county land. I am a Deschutes County resident
and want to voice the opinion that we desperately need to provide sheltered care and safe parking for those who are
less fortunate and who cannot obtain housing in our neighborhoods.
Please allow this program to proceed and help get our homeless Bend family a small amount of security while they
attempt to gain some semblance of a normal life in our community.
I'm an older Bend resident and cannot attend the meeting tomorrow due to a disability.
Thank you for your attention to this huge problem.
Sandy King
1
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony:
** Is this topic, an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above)
Date:
Phone #s
E-mail address
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
Yes F'No
1ZotA
Lc -
CaAe, ` ,a -
yy\.,
))^-6t.-AA--e91
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSMEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
• Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony:
** Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
,,Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above)
Name
Address
1 �e, floot-ri,411
3Sq S 64./
5‘?2,5-,‘
Phone #sl
,5
Date: h fir/2
E-mail address /47 1 cA2(C /1 vv r--1i, A r yAio
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record
nikAAte.
80- 6Qt
VV0+ -V--(-4,-x•Si---/ 'hAi 6--)--r751,--etA,,_
1 I ----) tA 0v-et G(.,
'f"66)L w-- c,r44.
YYL4/1"16 I
6t-Oa,c---\-- -),AR, 5 4)_. ,--
rrA-
1-61-4K \ ayL-S--
VI de& -3-- M. (AAA.- CAAA-i)---"--ek-
671t, 1,6U ib 12<t-e-/L--e-r-- LAN'
vhvtAi-
C (D-,_ A,re olo r)--A:,)--47
b'y. e
0e)usuofb
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSMEETING'
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is. NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony:
Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above)
Name
Address
B' ! Date: / l'
Phone #s 1 r 3,
E-mail address
ce9z)
2-1 2—Z —
oz�
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
klAk. I
riVAAA-1)-(Ar (ft oaje}c(8-
Ok
0A-WA--ky
CuLA
r0 1-,4171A-
gp rprokr
S h ,Y
yo--et
\IA(/
R artAA---
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or. Testimony:
** Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above
Name; C')('C Date: 1 \ J`22-
Address 83° S CQ c e
- ckv\t C 1
Phone #s 510 (40(2, 2 o
E-mail address \()�_ , f
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
Yes L i No
\1/4./bV,lic t./0 Gcc,,sc�l -----
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS' MEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony: `-'
�� C1
** Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above
Name t1i ile/ii _5 Date: /
Address 5'4 5 S S . (, L-n C)
Q 7/��
Phone #s —Vga- %49
E-mail addres
eiris
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony?
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
Yes No
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERSMEETING
REQUEST TO SPEAK
Citizen Input can be given regarding any topic that is NOT on the agenda
Public Testimony can be given during Public Hearings only
Topic of Input or Testimony:,,
** Is this topic an item on today's agenda?
Yes (please see description of Citizen Input above
Date:
Phone #s
E-mail address
THIS FORM IS TURNED IN TO RECORDING SECRETARY
BEFORE MEETING BEGINS
Are you submitting written documents as part of testimony? Yes ` rNo
If so, please give a copy to the Recording Secretary for the record.
1r
-3)(
W
ice, rJ
cam- G
CV�-VA.
t,7 c��-370
V-ea-k( )r-A
e-).Q
Fro )/v---i/tit--
l
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 14, 2022
SUBJECT: Consideration of American Rescue Plan Act Funding Proposal: Friends of the
Children
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
In FY21, Deschutes County was awarded approximately $38.4 million in American Rescue
Plan Act (ARPA) funds. Deschutes County has $442,217 remaining in unallocated ARPA
funds.
During the November 2 meeting, the Board of Commissioners discussed a funding
proposal from Friends of the Children for $100,000 and requested to continue the
discussion at a later date. Staff is returning to the November 14 meeting as requested for
continued discussion of the funding proposal.
ATTENDANCE:
Dan Emerson, Budget Manager
Laura Skundrick, Management Analyst
FR E N DSofthe
CH LDREN
Central Oregon
August 8, 2023
Dear Deschutes County Administrators and Board of Commissioners:
Friends of the Children Central Oregon respectfully requests $100,000 in funding from Deschutes County's American
Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funds, under the Equity -Focused Services funding area, to support the expansion of our 1:1
mentorship program to La Pine, Oregon. The requested funds would enable our organization to work with La Pine youth
facing the greatest obstacles, confronting systematic disparities and promoting healthy environments for these children
and their families.
Friends of the Children Central Oregon was founded in 2017, joining the now 25-site national network that impacts
generational change by providing youth who are facing the greatest obstacles with long-term relationships with
professional mentors —12+ years, no matter what. Using a rigorous, research -informed child selection process, we
intentionally enroll children from low-income households who are facing systemic obstacles and who have experienced
multiple Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs). Once enrolled between ages 4-6, each child is paired with a professional
mentor ("Friend") who provides an intentional, stable relationship and 1:1 support for 3-4 hours per week — every week,
every month, every year, for 12+ years.
The data emerging from the pandemic is clear: more children, especially children of color and those living in poverty,
have fallen further behind academically and are experiencing increased behavioral and mental health challenges than
prior to 2020. Rural communities, which already faced significant disparities compared to urban settings, experienced
additional challenges through virtual learning such as more limited technology access and availability of caregiver
support, combined with recent increases in housing expenses and skyrocketing inflation. In response, we have been
working with the Bend -La Pine School District and local community leaders to prepare for service expansion to La Pine,
where the need for our services is vast and local schools, partners and families have expressed a desire for our services.
The requested grant would enable the launch of this expansion by hiring two full-time professional mentors, called
"Friends,". Each Friend will work closely with 8 youth, who are identified in kindergarten through our highly
collaborative selection process. Friends will spend four hours of one-on-one time with each of 16 youth living in La Pine
every week, integrating at least 30 minutes of academic support into their ongoing activities with each child. Friends and
youth will spend time together in the classroom, at our Ranch, and out in the community. Interactions will be flexible
and informal, but never random. Friends join youth in their classrooms, supporting school success and positive peer
relationships; in their homes, strengthening family relationships and promoting positive identity development; and in
their communities, supporting youth in discovering their talents and passions, or what we call "sparks."
We believe that any child, in any situation, can succeed, even those facing the most obstacles. Our program creates
equity in education through youth empowerment and granting youth agency in their academic experience, both of
which lend to improved academic and social -emotional outcomes. We appreciate your time and consideration and
look forward to speaking with you in more detail about this initiative. Together, we can make generational change.
Respectfully submitted,
Rachel Cardwell
Executive Director
rcardwell@friendscentraloregon.org
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 14, 2022
SUBJECT: Senate Bill (SB) 391 Work Session - Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
Legislative Amendments
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Board of County Commissioners (Board) will conduct a work session concerning local
provisions for rural accessory dwelling units (ADUs) as identified in Senate Bill (SB) 391. The
first of two required public hearings on this matter was held with the Deschutes County
Planning Commission on September 22, 2022. In anticipation of a future public hearing,
staff will provide an overview of the proposed amendments, public comments received on
the proposal to date, and recommendations from the Commission.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
None
ATTENDANCE:
Kyle Collins, Associate Planner
Will Groves, Planning Manager
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Kyle Collins, Associate Planner
Will Groves, Planning Manager
DATE: November 9, 2022
SUBJECT: Senate Bill (SB) 391 Work Session - Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Legislative
Amendments
I. OVERVIEW
The Board of County Commissioners (Board) will conduct a work session on November 14, 2022
concerning local provisions for rural ADUs as identified in Senate Bill (SB) 3911 (file no. 247-22-000671 -
TA). Staff submitted a 35-day Post -Acknowledgement Plan Amendment (PAPA) notice to the
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) on August 17, 2022. A public hearing
was held with the Deschutes County Planning Commission (Commission) on September 22, 20222.
The Commission held deliberations on October 27, 20223 and the recommendations from that
meeting are discussed herein.
Attached to this memorandum are the proposed text amendments, a staff report summarizing the
changes, and a matrix illustrating the proposed recommendations from the Commission. Within the
proposed amendments, added language is shown underlined and deleted shown as strikethrough.
The proposed amendments currently reflect the recommendations from the Commission.
Board Decision Matrix
A summary review and discussion of the primary issue areas, themes, and decision options is
provided in the associated Board Decision Matrix, prepared in conjunction with this work session
memorandum. Staff notes that the recommendations from the Commission on primary issue areas
are highlighted within this matrix.
1 https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2021R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB0391/A-Engrossed
2 See Deschutes County Planning Commission September 22, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-17
3 See Deschutes County Planning Commission October 27, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-21
II. WRITTEN RECORD
The full record is available for inspection at the Planning Division and at the following website:
https://www.deschutes.org/adu.
III. STATE REGULATIONS
SB 391 contains several provisions related to properties eligible for rural ADUs which cannot be
amended by counties. Those criteria and restrictions are highlighted in the table below:
Table 1 - SB 391 - Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit Standards
Eligibility
Restrictions
1. Rural Residential Exception
Areas, Minimum Lot Size,
and Dwelling Requirements
•
•
•
Applies to Rural Residential (RR10), Multiple Use Agricultural (MUA10), Urban Area
Reserve (UAR-10), Suburban Residential (SR 2.5), and Westside Transect (WTZ) zones.
Lot or parcel must be at least two (2) acres in size.
One (1) single-family dwelling must be sited on the lot or parcel.
2. Existing Dwelling Nuisance
•
The existing single-family dwelling is not subject to an order declaring it a nuisance
or pending action under ORS 105.550 to 105.600,
3. ADU Sanitation
Requirements
•
The ADU must comply with all applicable laws and regulations relating to
sanitization and wastewater disposal and treatment.
4. ADU Square Footage
Requirements
•
The ADU cannot include more than 900 square feet of useable floor area.
5. ADU Distance
Requirements
•
The ADU is required to be located no farther than 100 feet from the existing single -
family dwelling.
6. ADU Water Supply
Requirements
•
If the ADU is relying on a domestic well, no portion of the lot or parcel can be within
new or existing ground water uses restricted by the Water Resource Commission.
7. ADU Water Supply Source
Option
•
A county may require that an ADU be served by the same water supply source or
water supply system as the existing single-family dwelling, provided such is allowed
by an existing water right or a use under ORS 537.545 (exempt uses).4
8. ADU / Metolius Area of
Critical State Concern /
Limitations
•
No portion of a lot or parcel can be within a designated area of critical state concern.
9. ADU Setback Requirements
•
The ADU is required to have adequate setbacks from adjacent lands zoned Exclusive
Farm Use (EFU) or Forest Use.
10. ADU / wildland-Urban
Interface Requirements
•
The lot or parcel must comply with the rules of the State Board of Forestry under
ORS 477.015 to 477.061.
11. ADU / Outside Wildland-
Urban Interface (WUI) Area
Requirements
•
If the ADU is not subject to ORS 477.015 to 477.061 (i.e. outside of the newly -defined
wildland-urban interface), it must have defensible space and fuel break standards as
developed in consultation with local fire protection service providers.
4 https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_537.545
Page 2 of 10
Eligibility
Restrictions
12. ADU / Statewide Wildfire
Map Requirements
•
•
Applies to properties identified as high or extreme risk and located within a
designated WUI on the statewide wildfire risk maps established per SB 762,
ADUs are then required to comply with the Oregon residential specialty code
relating to wildfire hazard mitigation for the mapped area'(R327.4).
13. ADU Adequate Access and
Evacuation for Firefighting
Requirements
•
Local regulations must ensure the ADU has adequate access for firefighting
equipment, safe evacuation and staged evacuation areas
14. ADU Occupancy
Requirements
•
ADUs cannot be allowed for vacation occupancy, as defined in ORS 90.100.
15. ADU Land Division
Requirements
•
If an eligible property with an ADU is divided, the single family dwelling and ADU
cannot be situated on a different lot or parcel.
16. ADU / Additional Units
•
A second ADU is not allowed.
IV. DESCHUTES COUNTY INTERPRETATIONS
Numerous portions of the SB 391 language were not defined during the legislative process and thus
were left open to interpretation by local jurisdictions that elect to allow rural ADUs. Specifically, the
following items were not explicitly defined:
• "Useable Floor Area" as related to the 900-square-foot size limitation for rural ADUs.
• The specific standards of the 100-foot site distance requirements for rural ADUs.
• Adequate access for firefighting equipment, safe evacuation, and staged evacuation areas.
As summarized in Table 2, staff drafted the proposed amendments to address these areas in the
following manner:
Table 2 - Draft Interpretations
Undefined SB 391 Standard
Draft County Interpretation
Useable Floor Area
• Means the area of the accessory dwelling unit included within the surrounding
exterior walls, including garages and other accessory components.
100-Foot Siting Distance
• A unit must be located no farther than 100 feet from the existing single family
dwelling, measured from a wall of the single-family dwelling to the nearest part of
the "useable floor area" of the accessory dwelling unit.
Page 3 of 10
Undefined SB 391 Standard
Draft County Interpretation
Adequate Access and
Evacuation for Firefighting
Requirements
• "Safe evacuation plan" means an identifiable route from the rural accessory dwelling
unit to the staged evacuation area.
• "Staged evacuation area" means a public or private location that occupants of the
rural accessory dwelling unit may evacuate to reorganize.
• Adequate access for firefighting equipment, safe evacuation and staged evacuation
areas are met by providing:
o Written certification from the applicable fire district, on a form prepared by
Deschutes County, that access to the property meets minimum fire district
requirements to provide emergency services to the property;
o A safe evacuation plan; and
o Written authorization from the owner of the staged evacuation area that the
occupants of the rural accessory dwelling unit may evacuate to the staged
evacuation area.
Groundwater Protection
Due to vulnerable groundwater characteristics in southern Deschutes County, the Onsite Wastewater
Division recommends increasing the minimum lot or parcel size for rural ADUs to be at least five (5)
acres in size. The draft amendments as presented include this provision. Additionally, in consultation
with the Onsite Wastewater Division, staff has explored the possibility of requiring advanced
wastewater treatment systems for ADU development in southern Deschutes County. Further details
are included as part of the attached recommendation matrix.
V. SB 762 WILDFIRE STANDARDS & TIMING
Certain properties in Deschutes County will be subject to new wildfire mitigation measures as
approved under SB 762.5 One of the primary pieces of SB 762 is the creation of a comprehensive
State Wildfire Risk Map to guide new wildfire regulations for development. The initial risk map was
made available on June 30, 2022.6 However, based on significant concern from citizens and interest
groups through the state, ODF withdrew the initial risk map to provide more time for additional public
outreach and refinement of risk classification methodologies. ODF anticipates new risk maps will be
finalized by late fall or early winter 2023.
Due to the current unavailability of fire risk maps, staff cannot provide specific estimates on the
number of properties which may be subject to additional wildfire mitigation standards. Additionally,
as staff cannot currently determine which properties may be subject to additional standards, no
properties in Deschutes County will be eligible for rural ADUs, despite any adoption of County
standards which approve said use within the County Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances,
until such time as anew iteration of a Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk is formally released by ODF.
5 SB 762 (2021)
6 https://oregonexplorer.info/tools
Page 4 of 10
Once these risk maps are finalized, properties included in both a designated Wildland Urban
Interface (WUI) boundary and classified as either high or extreme risk within the State Wildfire Risk
Map will be subject to additional development regulations. Properties meeting both of these
standards will be subject to:
1) Home hardening building codes as described in section R327 of the 2021 Oregon Residential
Specialty Code
The earliest date that the R327 building code standards may become effective is October 1, 2022, and
they will become mandatory on April 1, 2023.
2) Defensible space standards as determined by the Oregon State Fire Marshal.
At present, the State Fire Marshal has yet to develop final statewide defensible space requirements.
SB 762 requires these standards to be developed on or before December 31, 2022.
VI. WRITTEN TESTIMONY AND DISCUSSION
To date, a total of sixteen (16) comments from members of the public have been received by staff
concerning the proposed amendments.
Seven (7) of the submitted comments generally expressed support for the proposed ADU
amendments, citing the following items:
• Opportunities for a general increase in housing supply, particular given ongoing housing
shortages and burdensome rental costs in Central Oregon.
• Increased opportunities for intergenerational living as many aging parents and family
members pursue housing with other family members on existing developed properties.
• Increased economic activity from rural ADU development.
• In conjunction with the initially proposed County standards, the existing requirements in SB
391 will serve to limit the effects of increased development in rural areas of the county.
Alternatively, nine (9) of the submitted comments expressed general disapproval of the proposed
ADU amendments, citing the following items:
• Negative impacts from increased traffic.
• Additional risk from adding residential development in high wildfire risk areas.
• Impacts to pre-existing water resources from adding additional exempt, private residential
wells in the rural county.
• Loss of open space and rural quality of life expected from increased rural density.
• Impacts to wildlife populations and habitat related to increased development density.
• General skepticism around the impact that rural ADUs would have on housing availability and
affordability in the region.
• Concerns that certain restrictions, such as the limitation of utilizing rural ADUs for short term
vacation rental purposes, can be accurately tracked and enforced by county staff.
Page 5 of 10
Among those comments expressing general disapproval, not all requested a full denial of the
proposed amendments. Certain commenters suggested additional actions or details that should
accompany any ADU program if ultimately approved by county decision makers:
• Delaying the amendment process until final versions of the State Wildfire Risk Map required
by Senate Bill (SB) 762 has been released by the Oregon Department of Forestry.
• Prohibit ADUs in all Goal 5 inventories captured by Deschutes County, including the Wildlife
Area Combining Zone, Greater Sage -Grouse Area Combining Zone, and the Flood Plain Zone.
• Prohibit ADUs in the Westside Transect Zone
• Delay the amendment process until the County's proposed Goal 5 inventory update is
completed.
VII. PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING TESTIMONY AND DISCUSSION
During the public hearing before the Commission, nine (9) individuals provided testimony. Some
testimony expressed dissatisfaction regarding the proposed text amendments in general. These
comments focused primarily on the following items:
• Negative impacts to wildlife populations.
• Negative impacts on ground water supplies.
• Potential code compliance issues, specifically related to the required prohibition on vacation
rentals.
• Additional wildfire risk from increased development in the rural county.
• A lack of compatibility between the proposed amendments, the statewide land use goals, and
the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan.
Some testimony expressed support for the proposed text amendments in general. These comments
focused primarily on the following items:
• Opportunities for a general increase in housing supply, particular given ongoing housing
shortages and burdensome rental costs in Central Oregon.
• Increased opportunities for intergenerational living as many aging parents and family
members pursue housing with other family members on existing developed properties.
• Increased economic activity from rural ADU development.
VIII. AGENCY COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION
As part of the record, seven (7) comments have been included from several state and local agencies
with an interest in the proposed ADU amendments. Staff will attempt to highlight some of those
specific comments that are relevant to the deliberation discussion:
Page 6 of 10
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) has requested certain mitigation standards for
any ADUs that may be developed within the Wildlife Area (WA) Combining Zone. Specifically, ODFW
has requested the following:
1. The siting and fencing standards of Deschutes County Code (DCC)18.88' be maintained for all
rural ADU development in the WA Combining Zone.
2. A specific size limitation be instituted for all accessory components (i.e. - garages, storage
structures, etc.) of any developed ADU not included in the 900 square -foot "useable floor area"
required by SB 391.
3. Access to properties should utilize existing roads and driveways for all rural ADU
development.
Staff believes that the siting and fencing standards of DCC 18.88 would apply to all rural ADU
development, regardless of specific language included in the proposed text amendments. To
maintain clarity, should rural ADUs be allowed within the Wildlife Area Combining Zone, staff will
modify the proposed amendment language to explicitly state the referenced standards from DCC
18.88 will apply to any future ADU development.
Options for specific size limitations have been proposed and discussed by the Commission regarding
accessory components of an ADU. As discussed below and within the attached recommendation
matrix, the Commission recommends limiting the definition of "useable floor area" to encompass
both living areas and accessory components of an ADU. As recommended, the total footprint of any
proposed ADU, including components such as garages or storage areas, would be limited to 900
square feet.
Finally, staff notes that construction of new roads is typically reviewed through a subdivision or
partition process against the standards of DCC Title 17. These proposals are generally distinct from
specific physical development on an individual property, such as the construction of an ADU.
Additionally, driveway permits are issued and reviewed through the Road Department primarily for
compliance with clear sighting and other safety requirements. If driveway access to rural ADUs is
required to be consolidated to existing access points, it is unclear how this specific standard would
be reviewed or enforced over time.
IX. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEDATIONS
As discussed previously, a public hearing was held with the Commission on September 22, 2022. The
Commission held deliberations on October 27, 2022 and made recommendations concerning the
proposed amendments as follows:
https://deschutescounty.municipalcodeonline.com/book?type=ordinances#name=CHAPTER 18.88 WILDLIFE AREA COMB
INING ZONE; WA
Page 7 of 10
• Recommendation #1 (approved 4 to 2): The Commission recommended adoption of the
proposed amendments, with substantial changes to the initial proposal as discussed herein.
• Recommendation #2 (approved 5 to 1): "Useable floor area" is undefined within SB 391 and
the administering statutes. The Commission recommends "Useable Floor Area" be defined as
"the area of the accessory dwelling unit included within the surrounding exterior walls,
including garages and other accessory components." To clarify, the 900 square -foot size
limitation for rural ADUs would apply to the entire ADU structure, including garages and
accessory components
• Recommendation #3: A unit must be located no farther than 100 feet from the existing single
family dwelling, measured from a wall of the single-family dwelling to the nearest part of the
"useable floor area" of the accessory dwelling unit. This recommendation was unchanged by
the Commission from staff's initial proposal and thus no approval vote was taken.
• Recommendation #4: Due to vulnerable groundwater characteristics in southern Deschutes
County, the Commission recommends the minimum lot or parcel size for rural ADUs to be at
least five (5) acres in size. The boundaries of this recommendation were defined by the upper
Deschutes watershed area studied during the La Pine Demonstration Project, US Geological
Survey report 2007-5237, USGS Fact Sheet 2007-3103. This recommendation was unchanged
by the Commission from staff's initial proposal and thus no approval vote was taken.
• Recommendation #5 (approved 5 to 1): The Commission recommends prohibiting rural ADU
development in designated Goal 5 resource areas (i.e. - Wildlife Area Combining Zone, Greater
Sage -Grouse Area Combining Zone, and the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining
Zone)
• Recommendation #6 (approved 6 to 0): Pursuant to SB 762, the Commission recommends
delaying the adoption of any local rural ADU legislation until such time as the final State
Wildfire Risk Map has been released by the Oregon Department of Forestry.
• Recommendation #7 (approved 6 to 0): The Commission recommends prohibiting rural ADU
development the Westside Transect Zone (WTZ) Zone.
• Recommendation #8 (approved 6 to 0): The Commission recommends prohibiting both the
existing single-family dwelling and the ADU for vacation occupancy use, as defined in DCC
18.116.370(A)(8) and consistent with ORS 90.100.
Outside of the explicit recommendations above, the Commission engaged in numerous discussion
points relevant to the proposed amendments. A number of Commissioners expressed concern that
the rural ADU amendments were being presented prior to completion of other ongoing long range
planning initiatives which may have significant bearing on the proposal. Specifically, some
Commissioners highlighted the importance of the ongoing state wildfire mitigation efforts and SB
762, the ongoing Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan update (Deschutes 2040), and the ongoing
Goal 5 habitat inventory update for mule deer (Wildlife Inventory Update). Of these items, only the
Page 8 of 10
SB 762 mapping and wildfire mitigation efforts received a majority vote recommending delay of the
proposed amendments. As discussed above, should the Board elect to follow the Commission's
recommendation to delay adoption of local ADU amendments until release of the final Statewide
Map of Wildfire Risk by ODF, staff anticipates that these maps will be available by late fall or early
winter 2023.
Staff has edited the proposed amendments, staff report, and ESEE analysis for Goal 5 resources to
account for the Commission's recommendations. If the Board desires to change the amendments
outside of the initial recommendations, alterations to supporting documents will need to be made
prior to adoption of any final implementing ordinance.
X. ANTICIPATED PROPERTY ELIGBILITY
This proposal amends Deschutes County Code (DCC), Titles 18 and 19 to allow Rural ADUs consistent
with SB 391 in the Multiple Use Agricultural (MUA-10), Rural Residential (RR-10), Suburban Low
Density Residential (SR 2.5), and Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10) Zones. Eligibility criteria will be
incorporated in DCC Chapters 18.116, Supplementary Provisions and 19.92, Interpretations and
Exceptions. Based on initial review of the qualifying characteristics, approximately 8,660 tax lots in
Deschutes County could potentially qualify for a rural ADU. This includes properties which do not
currently have a single-family dwelling onsite, but otherwise meet the qualifying standards.
Additionally, this includes parcels which the Commission has recommended be prohibited from rural
ADU development. However, staff notes the following limitations and revisions to that initial estimate:
• The estimate is only based on general requirements from SB 391 and does not evaluate
properties on an individual level. Specific properties may have unique lot boundaries,
geographic features, onsite wastewater limitations, or other characteristics which make the
establishment of a rural ADU more challenging or impossible.
• Property owners may encounter additional costs and challenges when constructing a rural
ADU above and beyond specific land use standards. It is likely that numerous properties will
need to incorporate significant upgrades to onsite wastewater treatment systems prior to
establishment of rural ADUs.
• This estimate includes 765 potentially eligible tax lots in the Wildlife Area Combining Zone
(includes Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat). There are
no potentially eligible tax lots within the Greater Sage Grouse Area Combining Zone.
o As noted previously, the Commission recommends that all properties within the
Wildlife Area Combining Zone be prohibited from qualifying for an ADU
• This estimate includes 120 potentially eligible parcels in the Westside Transect Zone.
o As noted previously, the Commission recommends that all properties within the
Wildlife Area Combining Zone be prohibited from qualifying for an ADU
• This estimate is based on a 5-acre minimum parcel size in southern Deschutes County. There
are approximately 319 potentially eligible tax lots in southern Deschutes County based on a
Page 9 of 10
5-acre minimum parcel size. There are approximately 1,129 potentially eligible tax lots in this
area based on a 2-acre minimum parcel size.
o As noted previously, the Commission recommends a 5-acre minimum parcel size in
southern Deschutes County for ADU development.
XI. NEXT STEPS
At the conclusion of the meeting, the Board can:
• Set a date for a future public hearing;
• Delay a public hearing of the proposed amendments until additional information is available;
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Recommendation Matrix
2. Map of Potentially Eligible Properties
3. Staff Report & Proposed Text Amendments
Page 10 of 10
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION MATRIX
Possible Alternatives
1. Prohibit rural ADU development in Deschutes
County.
1. Exclude items such as garages and accessory
components from the 900 square -foot "useable
floor area" definition.
2. Set a maximum size limit to accessory components
of ADUs such as garages.
3. Additional requirements for permitting standards on
habitable versus non -habitable space (i.e. — Group
R-3 building permits for habitable space and Group
U permits for non -habitable space).
1. Requiring the entire footprint of an ADU to be
located within 100 feet of the existing single-family
dwelling.
Planning Commission Recommendation
• Allows an owner of a lot or parcel within an area zoned for rural
residential use to construct one accessory dwelling unit on the lot
or parcel subject to additional local standards and restrictions.
Applies to Rural Residential (RR10), Multiple Use Agricultural
(MUA10), Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10), and Suburban Residential
(SR 2.5) zones.
• Recommended by Planning Commission 5 to 1
• "Useable floor area" is undefined within SB 391 and the
administering statutes.
• The 900 square -foot limit to applies to the entire ADU structure,
including garages and accessory components
• Recommended by Planning Commission 5 to 1
1
• A unit must be located no farther than 100 feet from the existing
single family dwelling, measured from a wall of the single-family
dwelling to the nearest part of the "useable floor area" of the
accessory dwelling unit.
• Unchanged by the Planning Commission from staff' s initial
recommendation
SB 391 Criterion
a)
c
o
Z
I,
Qj an
E ,.7
cu ,,_
-o o
+(I')
•S ,°_'
0 1—
C (:,
C D
co CT ,
U in ni
D 2 2
0 ;5-', , a
a
The accessory dwelling unit will
be located no farther than 100
feet from the existing single-
family dwelling.
Issue Area
Should rural ADUs be
allowed with
additional standards
or prohibited?
9,
_a
co
3)
.
R a)
- aa
in CU
0 0 v,
. ,..7_ -.
o a.,
o u
...c .., o
.° C P.. 1'3
cO c.7) ,- CL ....
. 0 . -,_
. u. c.. .-
1
,-,
N
M
247-22-000671-TA PC Recommendation Matrix
N
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION MATRIX
Possible Alternatives
1. Prohibit all rural ADU development in the identified
southern Deschutes County boundaries.
2. Maintain 5-acre minimum parcel size for rural ADU
development and require advanced nitrogen
reducing systems for wastewater treatment for both
existing single-family dwellings and proposed ADUs.
3. Set a larger minimum parcel size requirement for all
southern Deschutes County properties to qualify for
rural ADU development.
4. Remove the minimum size requirements for all
southern Deschutes County properties to qualify for
rural ADU development.
1. Allow rural ADU development in designated Goal 5
areas such as the Wildlife Area Combining Zone,
subject to existing standards and requirements. Any
development within Goal 5 sites such as the Flood
Plain Zone or jurisdiction wetlands requires a
Conditional Use Permit and review by local, state,
and federal agencies to ensure compliance with
environmental and natural hazard mitigation
regulations.
2. Prohibit rural ADU development in some, but not all,
designated Goal 5 resource areas.
3. Develop additional restrictions in coordination with
the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW)
for rural ADU development in designated Goal 5
resources areas such as minimum parcel sizes,
driveway access consolidation, etc.
4. Delay the adoption of rural ADU legislation until
such time as the proposed Deschutes County Goal 5
inventory update is complete.
Planning Commission Recommendation
• Due to vulnerable groundwater characteristics in southern
Deschutes County, the minimum lotor parcel size for rural ADUs
to be at least five (5) acres in size. The boundaries of this
recommendation were defined by the upper Deschutes watershed
area studied during the La Pine Demonstration Project, US
Geological Survey report 2007-5237, USGS Fact Sheet 2007-3103.
• Unchanged by the Planning Commission from staffs initial
recommendation
• Prohibit rural ADU development in designated Goal 5 resource
areas (i.e. — Wildlife Area Combining Zone, Greater Sage -Grouse
Area Combining Zone, and the Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat
Combining Zone)
• Recommended by Planning Commission 5 to 1
SB 391 Criterion
c
z
c
z
Issue Area
C
° W
6
°
i.
rc v
o
a 3v°iva
c y v.
cWa
0 mw f°u
it)Y3
73
-o_
m
oY
co�
vul
247-22-000671-TA PC Recommendation Matrix
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION MATRIX
LAJ
0
z'
w
2
1—
X;
w
1—i
I'1
0
Q :
Z �1
(.
z
J i
J N
w N'
0' Ni
>-
cc z;
0 �,
w
Vi N
U,
Q
<cc
Cp
Possible Alternatives
L a'
S a c o `—° v n.0
a
o YO .0 N 0 h J
N ++ O- E 'p 0. a' O
� C O jC G C
9 L O.
N O. E>l Q N 2 In
a
p v 0 °C v a'
(` N -6 ate+ - -p N
=
` ap'-O §
oN a.2
3 C G
0. Oc .� o 0i° c oE oc"a C aI,- o a' v 3 u ;
oni'a' O o O
Oa O yO C a C 2C V
al a, "--
O f`o 0 �o co ` io O
Yw Y a< 0 Y -c d
i N a O- 0 C
O m p N 'ti ao N i1
C m a' O'> H' E-
- V) N ha aJ O O
a) 0) E G C 0) N 3
U v O 2 ,.2.v 5v
.-1 N
Planning Commission Recommendation
a'
L
H C
O O
m N
O
s
u
c v 0
7 N O
C N ++
'0 - I,o
N C
T w H
D ,� E
o L 0
a
To m
a)w v a
o
o'v o
p - o N
0 C c
TN m E
N Q
o a it
• •
SB 391 Criterion
a
y C -O -p0
E -Q O -0p a,
Y 2 Y h9 Q N O-
C `1 V t0
O ..?
` � tin � v E
v m- y
a 6,.. v a -a
33 .+L� ro '3 0
d c a 3 0 Q c
3 o .v 0 oa 7'
ar a m ..
is 0 cu' E :',•,' v a'
iii L N V E to
•
a' E8 .
•C �aa, ' O• ` Q C N
' w m�
a0 0 bA O - -Q N 2 c N N O
C Y a C C
- U _ 9n b9 N Y O O 0_
� c v a' E ;g 3 � u -p � Q. u
3 0 3 V Q� ...a p m > y u
v 0 oo o -o v > ° a' w .3 '>
a' v ? v o• c o a' ° si
o c= O v= m u w c
0 —° = oca o o v 8 0 o c
u a c u ti -o E' 'o 'o N o• c o o_
.o a' 8' 'a N o n v au'
s �v •-`o- w s m °' >> o Y 3 a. 3 o'
H L fa 1- L :.- a' al .- "O U O.
• • •
Issue Area
��
N C O
0 .—
++ '0 N 0
CS 0 a ba
' O ) n 2
u E m a'
a, -0 - m._
w o' io
O E 0 a
247-22-000671-TA PC Recommendation Ma
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION MATRIX
V)
W
aC
J'
Possible Alternatives
1. Allow rural ADU development in the WTZ. All
existing requirements related to development
within the WTZ including subdivision and property
scale fuel treatments, wildfire mitigation building
code standards, and maintenance of designated
open space corridors would be unaffected by the
proposed amendments.
2. Develop additional restrictions for rural ADU
development in the WTZ such as siting standards,
etc.
1. Allow the existing single-family dwelling to be
utilized for vacation occupancy use. The applicant
shall be required to sign and record with the County
Clerk, prior to the issuance of a building permit, a
restrictive covenant stating an accessory dwelling
unit allowed under this section cannot be used for
vacation occupancy, as defined in DCC
18.116.370(A)(8) and consistent with ORS 90.100
Planning Commission Recommendation
• Prohibit rural ADU development in the WTZ Rural ADUs would be
allowed on properties within the Westside Transect Zone (WTZ)
• Recommended by Planning Commission 5 to 1
• Prohibit both the existing single-family dwelling and the ADU for
vacation occupancy use, as defined in DCC18.116.370(A)(8) and
consistent with ORS 90.100
• ' Recommended by Planning Commission 6 to 0
SB 391 Criterion
a,
c
0
Z
A county may not allow an accessory
dwelling unit allowed under this
section to be used for vacation
occupancy, as defined in ORS 90.100.
Issue Area
;
a, Ha)
.c c
iL ro
C c
Q v a
'a a) .N M1.
0 O a) c
N la 0
Should Vacation
Occupancy be
prohibited in the
existing residence, as
well as the ADU?
f--
co
247-22-000671-TA PC Recommendation Matrix
Parcels Meeting Initial Criteria for Rural ADUs per SB 391
5 Mile
Parcel Meeting Criteria for Rural ADU per SB 391
Approximately 8,660 Parcels
• Zone must be RR10, MUA10, SR2.5, UAR10 or WTZ
• Parcel size must be 2 Acres or larger
• In South Deschutes County, parcel size must be 5 Acres or larger
• Outside of Metolius Area of Critical State Concern
N.\Cuslore\County \CDD\Planning\KyleCollms\SB391_RuraIADU September 27, 2022
1-ES
COMMUNITY DEVELOP ENT
STAFF REPORT
FILE NUMBER: 247-22-000671-TA
APPLICANT: Deschutes County Community Development
117 NW Lafayette Avenue
Bend, Oregon 97703
PROPERTY
OWNER: N/A
REQUEST: Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 391, Text Amendments to allow an owner of a lot
or parcel within a rural residential exception area to construct one accessory
dwelling unit (ADU) subject to certain restrictions and limitations.
STAFF CONTACT: Kyle Collins, Associate Planner
I. APPLICABLE CRITERIA:
Deschutes County lacks specific criteria in DCC Titles 18, 19, 22, or 23 for reviewing a legislative text
amendment. Nonetheless, since Deschutes County is initiating a legislative text amendment, the
County bears the responsibility for justifying that the amendments are consistent with Statewide
Planning Goals and its existing Comprehensive Plan
II. BASIC FINDINGS:
A. Senate Bill 391
On June 23, 2021, the Oregon Legislature adopted Senate BiII (SB) 391, which authorizes counties to
allow an owner of a lot or parcel within a rural residential exception area to construct one accessory
dwelling unit (ADU) subject to certain restrictions and limitations.' SB 391 does not obligate a county
to allow ADUs, nor does it prohibit a county from imposing any additional restrictions beyond what
is mandated in state law.
Rural residential exception areas and their corresponding zones exist throughout Oregon. By
definition, rural residential zones exist outside urban growth boundaries (UGBs), but are excluded
1 https://olis oregonleislature gov/liz/2021 R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB391
117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 I P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005
t (541) 388-6575 @cdd@deschutes.org 3 www.deschutes.org/cd
from the state's resource land (farm and forest zone) protections. While the protections afforded to
resource lands allow residential uses only in conjunction with a farm or forest use, rural residential
zones allow a dwelling as a primary use of the land. Prior to the adoption of SB 391, state law allowed
counties to permit an additional dwelling on a property containing a house built prior to 1945.2
However, unlike urban zones, rural residential zones did not have other by -right accessory dwelling
options, making inter -generational and alternative housing options difficult to achieve.
SB 391 only authorizes ADUs on lands zoned for rural residential use. Areas zoned for rural
residential use are defined by ORS 215.501 to mean "land that is not located inside a UGB as defined
in ORS 195.060 (Definitions) and that is subject to an acknowledged exception to a statewide land
use planning goal relating to farmland or forestland and planned and zoned by the county to allow
residential use as a primary use." The applicable zoning designations in Deschutes County for these
lands are Multiple Use Agricultural (MUA-10), Rural Residential (RR-10), Suburban Low Density
Residential (SR 2.5), Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10), and Westside Transect Zone (WTZ).
B. Deschutes County Rural ADU Ordinance
in addition to only applying to lands recognized as rural residential exception areas, SB 391 also
contains minimum criteria that must be met for a lot or parcel to qualify for an ADU. Many of those
criteria are general in nature and therefore require counties to provide their own interpretations or
definitions. At the same time, SB 391 contains several provisions related to wildfire hazard
mitigation, which relied on and referred to actions at the state level as directed by the passage of
SB 762, a comprehensive wildfire hazard mitigation bill.3 While wildfire requirements were being
created at the state level, staff worked with the Board of County Commissioners to "translate" the
language of SB 391 into the local code presented in these amendments.
III. PROPOSAL:
This is a legislative text amendment to Deschutes County Code (DCC), Title 18, County Zoning, and
Title 19, Bend Urban Growth Boundary Zoning Ordinance. The primary purpose of the amendments
is to allow rural ADUs per the adoption of SB 391. The proposal creates two new subsections
(effectively the same but pertaining to different zones in Titles 18 and 19) that govern the criteria
for rural ADUs. Table 1 provides a summary of each provision of the amendments.
Table 1 - SB 391 Requirements
Topic
SB 391 Requirements
Comment
Single Family Dwelling
SB 391 Section 2(2)(c) requires one single-family
dwelling to be located on the lot or parcel.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(1) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(1) are consistent with
SB 391.
2 House Bill 3012 (2017).
3 SB 1533 (2022) corrected broken links in SB 762 related to wildfire mapping.
247-22-000671-TA
Page 2 of 43
Topic
SB 391 Requirements
Comment
Urban Reserve Area
SB 391 Section 2(b) requires that the lot or parcel
is not located within an area designated as an
urban reserve as defined in ORS 195.137. In
Deschutes County, the Redmond Urban Reserve
Area is the only urban reserve that meets this
definition.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(2) is consistent
with SB 391.=Redmond's Urban
Reserve Areas is not near lands
zoned in Tie 19' therefore it is not
cited in DCCd19.92.160.
Nonresource Lands
SB 391 Section 2(1)(b) requires that "Area zoned
for rural residential use" has the meaning given
that term in ORS 215.501.
ORS 215.501(1)(b), "Area zoned for rural
residential use" means land that is not located
inside an urban growth boundary as defined in
ORS 195.060 (Definitions) and that is subject to an
acknowledged exception to a statewide land use
planning goal relating to farmland or forestland
and planned and zoned by the county to allow
residential use as a primary use.
Pursuant to DLCD, Acknowledged
nonresource plan amendments
and zone changes from Exclusive
Farm Use (EFU) to RR-10 or MUA-
10 are eligible for an ADU.
Areas of Critical State
Concern
SB 391 Section 2(2)(i) requires that no portion of
the lot or parcel is within a designated area of
critical state concern. Areas of critical state
concern are generally defined in ORS 197.405 and
apply to the Metolius Area of Critical State
Concern in ORS 197.416.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(3) is consistent
with SB 391. The Metolius Area of
Critical State Concern is not near
lands zoned in Title 19, therefore it
is not cited in DCC 19.92.160.
Minimum Lot Size
SB 391 Section 2(2)(b) requires the subject lot or
parcel be at least two acres in size.
DCC 18.116.370(6)(4) and DCC
19.92.160(6)(2) are consistent with
SB 391.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(4) requires a
minimum lot or parcel to be at
least 5 acres in size south of
Sunriver due to groundwater
protection.
Setbacks
SB 391 Section 2(2)(m)(A) requires that the ADU
has adequate setbacks from adjacent lands
zoned for resource use.
DCC 18.116.370(6)(5) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(3)aye consistent with
SB 391. Both require a minimum
setback of 100 feet between the
ADU and adjacent EFU and Forest
Use zoned (F-1, F-2) properties.
ADU Size
SB 391 Section 2(2)(f) limits the size of the ADU to
900 square feet of useable floor area.
DCC 18.116.370(6)(6) and DCC
19.92.160(6)(4) are consistent with
SB 391.
Usable floor area is defined as,
"the area of the accessory dwelling
unit included within the
surrounding exterior walls,
including garages and other
accessory components."
247-22-000671-TA
Page 3 of 43
Topic
SB 391 Requirements
Comment
Distance from Dwelling
SB 391 Section 2(2)(g) requires the ADU to be
located no farther than 100 feet from the single
family dwelling 4
DCC 18.116.370(6)(7) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(5) are consistent with
SB391.
Both require the ADU be located
no farther than 100 feet from the
existing single family dwelling,
measured from a wall of the
single-family dwelling to the
nearest part of the useable floor
area of the ADU.
Sanitation and
Wastewater
SB 391 Section 2(2)(e) requires the ADU to comply
with applicable sanitation and wastewater
regulations.
DCC 18.116.370(6)(9) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(6) are consistent with
SB 391.
Fire Protection District
Service
SB 391 Section 2(2)(j) requires the lot or parcel be
served by a fire protection service provider with
professionals who have received training or
certification described in ORS 181A.410.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(10)and DCC
19.92.160(B)(7)are consistent with
SB 391.
Access and Evacuation
SB 391 Section 2(2)(m)(B) requires that the ADU
has adequate access for firefighting equipment
and safe evacuation and staged evacuation areas.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(11) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(8) are consistent with
SB 391.
Both require certification of access
by the applicable fire protection
district and that there are
evacuation plan and authorized
staged evacuation areas.
Wildland Urban Interface
(WUI) Defensible Space
Requirements
SB 1533 Section 5(2)(k) requires that if the lot or
parcel is in an area identified on the statewide
map of wildfire risk described in ORS 477.490, as
within a WUI with a high to extreme risk
classification, the lot or parcel must comply with
any applicable minimum defensible space
requirement for wildfire risk reduction
established by the State Fire Marshal under ORS
476.392.
DCC 18.116.370(6)(12) and (13)
and DCC 19.92.160(6)(9) and (10)
are consistent with SB 391.
As required in SB 762, no property
can apply for an ADU until release
of the final Statewide Map of
Wildfire Risk by the Oregon
Department of Forestry. The map
will be released sometime in
winter 2023.
Wildland Urban Interface
(WUI) Fire Hardening
SB 762 Section 12 requires that if the lot or parcel
is in an area identified on the statewide map of
wildfire risk described in ORS 477.490, as within a
WUI with a high to extreme risk classification, the
ADU must comply with R327 (fire hardening
standards) in the Oregon Residential Specialty
Code.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(12) and (13)
and DCC 19.92.160(B)(9) and (10)
are consistent with SB 391.
As required in SB 762, no property
can apply for an ADU until release
of the final Statewide Map of
Wildfire Risk by the Oregon
Department of Forestry. The map
will be released sometime in
winter 2023.
4 The bill language and legislative history are unclear if the entire ADU must be entirely within 100 feet of the dwelling or
just a portion. Local governments are therefore granted deference to interpret this provision.
247-22-000671-TA
Page 4 of 43
Topic
SB 391 Requirements
Comment
Nuisance
SB 391 Section 2(2)(d) requires that existing
single-family dwelling property on the lot or
parcel is not subject to an order declaring it a
nuisance or subject to any pending action under
ORS'105.550 to 105600.
DCC 18,116.370(B)(14) and DCC
19..92,160(B)(11) are consistent
with SB 391.
Subdivision and Other
Accessory Dwelling
Unit Limitations
SB 391 Section 2(4)(a) and (b) preclude a
subdivision, partition or other division of the lot
or parcel so that the existing single-family
dwelling is situated on a different lot or parcel
than the ADU; and precludes construction of an
additional ADU on the same lot or parcel.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(15) and DCC
19.92.160(6)(12) are consistent
with SB 391.
Water Supply
SB 391 Section 2(5) allows a county to require that
the ADU be served by the same water source or
water supply system as the existing single-family
dwelling. If the ADU is served by a well, the
construction of the ADU shall maintain all
setbacks from the well required by the Water
Resources Commission or Water Resources
Department.
DCC 18.116.370(6)(16) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(13) are consistent
with SB 391.
While not requiring the same
water source, DCC
18.116.370(B)(16) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(15) require setbacks
from the well to be maintained
from an ADU.
Water Right Exempt Use
SB 391 Section 2(6) recognizes that a single family
dwelling and an ADU are considered a single unit
and therefore do not require a groundwater
permit from the Oregon Water Resources
Department.5
DCC 18.116.370(6)(17) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(14) are consistent
with SB 391.
Vacation Occupancy
SB 391 Section 2(3) prevents an ADU from being
used for vacation occupancy as defined in ORS
90.100.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(18) and DCC
19..92.160(B)(15) are consistent
with SB 391.
Both require a restrictive covenant
be recorded to ensure compliance.
IV. FINDINGS:
CHAPTER 22.12, LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES
Section 22.12.010.
Hearing Required
FINDING: This criterion will be met because a public hearing was held before the Deschutes
County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners.
5 Deschutes County does not contain any critical groundwater areas as defined by the Water Resources Commission.
247-22-000671-TA
Page 5 of 43
Section 22.12.020, Notice
Notice
A. Published Notice
1. Notice of a legislative change shall be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the county at least 10 days prior to each public hearing.
2. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing and contain a statement
describing the general subject matter of the ordinance under consideration.
FINDING: This criterion will be met as notice was published in the Bend Bulletin newspaper for the
Planning Commission public hearing, and the Board of County Commissioners' public hearing.
B. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted at the discretion of the Planning Director and
where necessary to comply with ORS 203.045.
FINDING: Posted notice was determined by the Planning Director not to be necessary.
C. Individual notice. Individual notice to property owners, as defined in DCC
22.08.010(A), shall be provided at the discretion of the Planning Director, except as
required by ORS 215.503.
FINDING: Given the proposed legislative amendments do not apply to any specific property, no
individual notices were sent.
D. Media notice. Copies of the notice of hearing shall be transmitted to other
newspapers published in Deschutes County.
FINDING: Notice was provided to the County public information official for wider media
distribution. This criterion is met.
Section 22.12.030 Initiation of Legislative Changes.
A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of
required fees as well as by the Board of County Commissioners.
FINDING: The application was initiated by the Deschutes County Planning Division at the direction
of the Board of County Commissioners, and has received a fee waiver. This criterion is met.
Section 22.12.040. Hearings Body
A. The following shall serve as hearings or review body for legislative changes in this
order:
1. The Planning Commission.
2. The Board of County Commissioners.
247-22-000671-TA Page 6 of 43
B. Any legislative change initiated by the Board of County Commissioners shall be
reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to action being taken by the Board of
Commissioners.
FINDING: The Deschutes County Planning Commission held the initial public hearing on September
22, 2022. The Board then held a public hearing on [TBD]. These criteria are met.
Section 22.12.050 Final Decision
All legislative changes shall be adopted by ordinance
FINDING: The proposed legislative changes will be implemented by Ordinance No. [number TBD]
upon approval and adoption by the Board of County Commissioners. This criterion will be met.
B. Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines
Goal 1: Citizen Involvement: The amendments do not propose to change the structure of the
County's citizen involvement program. Notice of the proposed amendments was provided to the
Bulletin for the Board public hearing.
Goal 2: Land Use Planning: This goal is met because ORS 197.610 allows local governments to initiate
post acknowledgments plan amendments (PAPA). An Oregon Land Conservation and Development
Department 35-day notice was initiated on August 17, 2022. The Planning Commission held a public
hearing on September 22, 2022 and the Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing
on [TBD]. The Findings document provides the adequate factual basis for the amendments.
Goal 3: Agricultural Lands: No changes related to agricultural lands are proposed as part of the text
amendments. This goal does not apply.
Goal 4: Forest Lands: No changes related to forest lands are proposed as part of the text
amendments. This goal does not apply.
Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources: By adopting SB 391 in 2021,
the Oregon Legislature added a new use, ADU, to rural residential exception areas. Local
governments can choose to allow this use by: 1) amending their zoning codes and complying with
SB 391's development standards. Goal 5 does not apply.
However, to the extent that it does, local governments apply Goal 5 to a PAPA when the amendment
allows a new use and the new use "could be" a conflicting use with a particular Goal 5 resource site
on an acknowledged resource list. Certain areas in rural Deschutes County, zoned MUA-10 and RR-
10 contain Goal 5 resources because they are overlaid with a Wildlife Area Combining Zone. Two
zoning codes are being amended to allow Rural ADUs and are therefore subject to an ESEE Analysis.
No other changes to the code warrant specific ESEE Analysis as they are not adding new uses that
conflict with Goal 5 resources. The ESEE analysis is included in AppendixA which is attached to this
document.
247-22-000671-TA Page 7 of 43
Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality: The proposed text amendments do not propose
changes to the County's Comprehensive Plan policies or implementing regulations for compliance
with Goal 6, and therefore are in compliance. However, it is worth noting that the amendments
preclude citing an ADU south of Sunriver on lots or parcels that are between 2 and 4.99 acres. The
eligible lot or parcel size in this area of the County is 5 acres. In the RR-10 zone south of Sunriver,
there are 1,129 tax lots 2 acres or larger and 319 tax lots 5 acres or larger.
Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: The proposed text amendments do not
propose to changes the County's Comprehensive Plan or implementing regulations regarding
natural disasters and hazards; therefore, they are in compliance. Eligible properties subject to SB
762, effective April 1, 2023, will be required to comply with Oregon Residential Specialty Code (R327)
to fire harden the ADU and coordinate with the Oregon State Fire Marshal to ensure the property
has defensible space.
Goal 8: Recreational Needs: Accessory Dwelling Units are not a recreational use or need. This goal
does not apply.
Goal 9: Economic Development: Accessory Dwelling Units are not primarily economic in nature. This
goal does not apply.
Goal 10: Housing: This goal is not applicable because unlike municipalities, unincorporated areas
are not obligated to fulfill certain housing requirements.
Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services: Accessory Dwelling Units in the rural county typically rely on
domestic wells and onsite wastewater treatment systems. A Goal 11 exception would be required
for a centralized sewer system and would need to be applied on a property specific, needs related
basis. This goal does not apply.
Goal 12: Transportation: By adopting SB 391 in 2021, the Oregon Legislature added a new use, ADU,
to rural residential exception areas. Local governments can choose to allow this use by: 1) amending
their zoning codes and complying with SB 391's development standards. ADUs will still be subject
to Transportation System Development Charges (SDCs) prior to the issuance of a building permit.
To the extent that the Transportation Planning Rule at OAR 660-012-0060 does apply, staff notes
the following comments from the County's Senior Transportation Planner:
The Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) at OAR 660-012-0060 requires a determination if a
new land use regulation will significantly affect a transportation facility. Approximately 9,831
lots could be eligible for a rural accessory dwelling unit (ADU) based on zoning and size of
the tax lot with roughly 3,000 tax lots being eligible immediately. The remaining roughly
6,000 tax lots' eligibility will need to be determined based on the wildfire rules and
requirements in development based on Senate Bill (SB) 762.
The potential lots for a rural ADU are geographically spread out:
• Bend area: 3,876 lots
247-22-000671-TA Page 8 of 43
• Redmond area: 2,886 lots
• Sisters area: 1,576 lots
• South County: 1,123 lots
The County is currently updating its 2010-2030 Transportation System Plan (TSP) to 2020-
2040. The analysis of future traffic volumes only indicated a few intersections that would not
meet County performance standards. Both were tied to the Deschutes Junction interchange
at US 97/Deschutes Market Road-Tumalo. The TSP has planned improvements to mitigate
the deficiencies at those intersections.
The geographic distribution of the lots, the adequate reserve capacity on the County system,
the low trip generation of each home, an average of nine daily trips, including one p.m. peak
hour trip, and the fact the lots will develop over years and years, means the road system is
adequate to handle the traffic volumes generated by rural ADUs.
The rural ADUs do not result in any changes to the County's functional classifications or
access management policies. The County collects transportation system development
charges (SDCs) for all new developments, including single-family homes. The SDC rate is
indexed to construction costs and resets every July 1. As a rural ADU is essentially a second
home on the property, the County would collect SDCs as each rural ADU develops. The
current SDC rate for a single-family home is $4,115. If the SDC rate remained unchanged,
which is highly unlikely, the 9,831 lots would generate $38.6 million dollars in SDCs.
The addition of a second rural ADU on approximately 9,381 lots will not create a significant
nor adverse effect to the County transportation system and thus complies with the TPR.
Goal 13: Energy Conservation: Any future site -specific application for an ADU will be required to
incorporate energy conservation measures through the Oregon Building Code. This goal does not
apply.
Goal 14: Urbanization: The purpose of Goal 14 is to direct urban uses to areas inside UGBs. As the
proposed amendments do not seek to allow urban uses on rural land, nor do they seek to expand
an existing urban growth boundary, this goal does not apply.
Goals 15 through 19: Deschutes County does not contain any of the relevant land types included in
Goals 15-19. Therefore these goals do not apply.
C. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 3, Rural Growth
Section 3.3, Rural Housing
247-22-000671-TA Page 9 of 43
3.3.5 Maintain the rural character of the County while ensuring a diversity of housing opportunities,
including initiating discussions to amend State Statute and/or Oregon Administrative Rules to
permit accessory dwelling units in Exclusive Farm Use, Forest and Rural Residential zones.
FINDING: Implementing SB 391, which allows ADUs to be sited in rural residential exception areas,
is consistent with Policy 3.3.5.
V. CONCLUSION:
Based on the information provided herein, the staff recommends the Board of County
Commissioners approve the proposed text amendments that make minor changes necessary to
clarify existing standards and procedural requirements, incorporate changes to state and federal
law, and to correct errors.
247-22-000671-TA Page 10 of 43
I
i
t
Appendix A: ESEE Analysis Document to
File No. 247-22-000671-TA
Deschutes County Community Development
November 9, 2022
247-22-000671-TA Page 11 of 43
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Overview of Goal 5 and ESEE Analyses 11
Chapter 2: Deschutes County Goal 5 Inventory and Methodology 14
Chapter 3: Conflicting Use Analysis 16
Chapter 4: Impact Areas 19
Chapter 5: ESEE Analysis 20
Chapter 6: ESEE Decision 27
Chapter 7: Program to Achieve Goal 5 28
References
Attachment 1 - Deschutes County Goal 5 Inventory Summary Table
Attachment 2 - Inventory Site Maps
247-22-000671-TA Page 12 of 43
Chapter 1: Overview of Goal 5 and ESEE Analyses
Introduction
This appendix report was prepared to supplement the findings document associated with File No.
247-22-000671-TA. Deschutes County is amending Deschutes County Code (DCC), Titles 18 and 19
to allow Rural Accessory Dwelling units (ADUs) consistent with Senate Bill (SB) 391 (2021) in Multiple
Use Agricultural (MUA-10), Rural Residential (RR-10), Suburban Low Density Residential (SR 2.5), and
Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10) Zones. DCC Chapter 18.88 is the Wildlife Area (WA) Combining Zone,
which recognizes four Goal 5 inventories: Antelope Range, Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter
Range, and Significant Elk Habitat. Certain areas in rural Deschutes County, zoned MUA-10 and RR-
10, are overlaid with a Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and/or Significant Elk Habitat.
In addition, there are some areas zoned MUA-10 and RR-10 that contain Goal 5 riparian resources
and their associated fish, furbearer, waterfowl, and upland game bird habitat. Recognizing that an
ADU is a new conflicting use in the WA Combining Zone, Deschutes County is applying Goal 5 in
consideration of this Post Acknowledgment Plan Amendment (PAPA). The full findings document
provides additional detail and background information regarding the intent of the amendments and
compliance with other applicable local and state regulations outside of Statewide Land Use Planning
Goal 5 - Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces.
Deschutes County Goal 5 Program
The purpose of Goal 5 is "to protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and
open spaces." Local governments, as part of the Comprehensive Planning process, are required to
inventory the extent, location, quality, and quantity of significant natural resources within their
jurisdictional boundaries. Following this inventory, local governments then conduct an economic,
social, environmental, and energy (ESEE) analysis to determine the extent to which land uses should
be limited in order to adequately protect significant resources. Following an ESEE analysis,
governments then establish a program to protect significant natural resources. Deschutes County
established its initial Goal 5 natural resource inventory, ESEE analyses, and protection programs
between the years of 1988-1994, as part of periodic review.
In reviewing this document, it is important to acknowledge there are six policies and development
standards within the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and DCC that were established
through ESEEs over time that could still limit the development of ADUs near inventoried Goal 5
resources. Deschutes County finds the proposed amendments do not alter the following existing
protections.
1. Setback Protections: 100-foot structural setback from the ordinary high water mark
(OHWM) of rivers and streams.
2. Scenic Protections: Development near rivers in the Landscape Management
Combining Zone must be reviewed for aesthetic compatibility.
247-22-000671-TA Page 13 of 43
3. Wetland Protections: Prohibition of fill or removal of any material or wetland
vegetation, regardless of the amount, within the bed and banks of any stream or
river or in any wetland unless approved as a conditional use.
4. Mitigation Protections: Impacts to any wetland or riverbank impacts to be fully
mitigated, as evaluated by Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW).
5. Flood Plain Protections: All new construction, expansion or substantial improvement
of an existing dwelling, an agricultural related structure, a commercial, industrial or
other non-residential structure, or an accessory building in a designated Flood Plain
must obtain a conditional use permit.
6. Combining Zone Requirements: Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, Elk
Habitat, and Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat have site specific requirements
including development setbacks and/or seasonal construction requirements to
prevent impacts to sensitive species and habitat.
Required Steps and Discretionary Review
Local governments are required to comply with Goal 5 when a PAPA allows a new use and the new
use "could be" a conflicting use with a particular Goal 5 resource site on an acknowledged resource
list.6 Deschutes County is amending the MUA-1 0, RR-10, SR 2.5, and UAR-10 zoning chapters to allow
ADUs consistent with SB 391 (2021).
ADUs have the potential to generate a certain level of noise and habitat alteration. As this new use
could potentially impact Goal 5 resources, Deschutes County is conducting an ESEE Analysis to
identify potential consequences and protections related to the amendments. ADUs will be added
as a new permitted use in the MUA-10, RR-10, SR 2.5, and UAR-10 zones. As shown below, only two
of those zones, MUA-10 and RR-10 contain Goal 5 resources and are being reviewed as part of this
ESEE analysis.
Table 2: Zones Containing Goal 5 Resources
• DCC Chapter 18.32, Multiple Use Agricultural
Zone
• DCC Chapter 18.60, Rural Residential Zone
• DCC Chapter 19.12, Urban Area Reserve Zone
• DCC Chapter 19.20, Suburban Low Density
Residential Zone
ESEEs are meant to be analytical tools. The content of the ESEE is discretionary and is intended to
be conducted by planning staff using existing information. An ESEE is not meant to focus exclusively
6 OAR 660-023-0250(3)(b)
247-22-000671-TA
Page 14 of 43
on environmental impacts such as an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Additionally, Goal 5 explains "the ESEE analysis need not be lengthy
or complex, but should enable reviewers to gain a clear understanding of the conflicts and the
consequences to be expected."' In utilizing this analytical tool, there are a few steps jurisdictions
must include and address in accordance with OAR 660-023 - Procedures and Requirements for
Complying with Goal 5:
1. Identify Conflicting Uses - Does the land use or activity negatively impact natural resources?
2. Determine Impact Area - What is the geographic extent to which land uses or activities
adjacent to natural resources could negatively impact those resources?
3. Analyze ESEE Consequences - What are the positive and negative consequences (both for
development and natural resources) of a decision to fully protect natural resources, fully
allow conflicting uses, or limit conflicting uses?
4. Develop a program - How and to what extent will the natural resources be protected based
on the ESEE analysis?
A response to each of these steps is included throughout this report. The relevant page and chapter
can be found in the table of contents.
7 OAR 660-023-0040(1)
247-22-000671-TA Page 15 of 43
Chapter 2: Deschutes County Goal 5 Inventory and Methodology
660-23-0030 - Inventory Goal 5 Resources
Stemming from periodic review, Deschutes County adopted inventories for a variety of Goal 5
natural resources (Attachment 1). Some of these resources have mapped geographic boundaries
such as Deer Winter Range, whereas others are described as being located in general areas - such
as furbearer habitat in riparian corridors. The inventories were produced at a countywide scale,
with additional detail for the Deschutes River and its tributaries through the Deschutes County/City
of Bend River Study. County staff digitized these habitat boundaries into Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) shape files in the 2000s for public awareness. The shape files were created from hard
copy maps and descriptions found in the ordinances establishing the County's Goal 5 program, in
consultation with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW).
Maps provided in this document include inventoried habitat that spatially overlaps with the MUA-
10 and RR-10 zones impacted by the proposed text amendments (Attachment 2). The habitat areas
include: deer migration corridor, deer winter range, elk habitat, flood plain, and wetlands. Staff
utilized the County's WA Combining Zone layers to determine the general extent of habitat for big
game species as the Combining Zone was designed to cover a larger area than the habitat itself
(Ordinance 92-046). Inventoried streams and rivers are shown on the map, as well as wetlands and
flood plains. Goal 5 Riparian areas (flood plain, wetlands and 100 feet measured from ordinary high
water mark) associated with these water bodies is also the habitat area for fish, furbearers,
waterfowl, and upland game birds (Ordinance 92-041, 94-007). As the proposed text amendments
are legislative and do not impact any specific properties, staff did not review Goal 5 impacts on an
individual parcel level basis. Instead staff identified the following potential resource sites in which
the allowance of ADUs could potentially intersect with Goal 5 resources:
Riverine Resources: Some properties in the MUA-10 and RR-10 zones are located in relative
proximity to the Deschutes River, Little Deschutes River, Paulina Creek, and Whychus Creek and its
associated Goal 5 Riparian Area.' Ordinance 92-041 stated the following additional Goal 5 resources
depend on riparian corridors for habitat: furbearer, waterfowl, and upland game bird habitat. As
the extent of the habitat locations for these species are not detailed in a boundary description or
on a map, staff assumes the species habitat is found entirely inside the Riparian Area boundary
shown in Attachment 2.
Wildlife Area Combining Zone: The WA Combining Zone was adopted as a protection measure for
antelope, deer, and elk in Deschutes County. As an overlay zone, the mapped area conservatively
identified typical habitat and migration areas and provided additional development requirements
to ensure impacts to wildlife are properly mitigated alongside the underlying base zone regulations.
The zone encompasses the previously inventoried area for Antelope Range, Deer Migration
8 There are 386 RR-10 tax lots, two acres or greater that abut the Little Deschutes River or Deschutes River and 505 tax
lots that are split -zoned RR-10 or MUA-10 with the Flood Plain Zone. The Flood Plain Zone is not recognized as a rural
residential exception area. RR-10 and MUA-10 split zoned properties will be required to contain the minimum lot or parcel
area to qualify for an ADU.
247-22-000671-TA Page 16 of 43
Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat. The proposed amendments add a
conflicting use, ADUs which affect three habitat ranges in MUA-10 and RR-10: Deer Migration
Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat. These habitat ranges are shown in
Attachment 2. The maps include federal land. However, these properties are not subject to
Deschutes County land use regulations.
The Deschutes County Goal 5 inventory also includes scenic and open space sites such as Landscape
Management Rivers and Streams, State Scenic Waterways and Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers, and
Ecologically and Scientifically Significant Natural Areas - Little Deschutes River / Deschutes
Confluence (Attachment 1). As these are resources associated with mitigating visual impacts and do
not impact development potential, they are not impacted by the proposed amendments and
therefore are not reviewed in this document.
247-22-000671-TA Page 17 of 43
Chapter 3: Conflicting Use Analysis
660-023-0040(2): Identify conflicting uses. Local governments shall identify conflicting uses that
exist, or could occur, with regard to significant Goal 5 resource sites. To identify these uses, local
governments shall examine land uses allowed outright or conditionally within the zones applied
to the resource site and in its impact area. Local governments are not required to consider allowed
uses that would be unlikely to occur in the impact area because existing permanent uses occupy
the site.
Deschutes County is proposing to add ADUs in the MUA-1 0 and RR-10 zones in the WA Combining
Zone. ADUs could be a conflicting use to significant Goal 5 resources as they generate vehicle trips,
buildable footprints, and noise. Other uses that are allowed in the two zones are shown below.
Table 3: Allowed Uses
Zoning
Outright Uses
Conditional Uses
Public use
Semipublic use
Dude ranch
Kennel and/or veterinary clinic
Guest house
Manufactured home as a secondary accessory
farm dwelling
Exploration for minerals
Private parks
Agricultural uses
Personal use airstrip
Golf course
Single family dwelling or
manufactured home
Type 2 or 3 Home occupation
Harvesting a forest product
Destination resorts
Class I and II road or street projects
Planned developments
Cluster developments
subject to land division standards
Landfills
MUA-10
Class III road or street project
Timeshare
Noncommercial horse stables
Hydroelectric facility
Horse events
Storage, crushing and processing of minerals
Operation, maintenance and piping of
Bed and breakfast inn
canals
Excavation, grading and fill
Type I Home occupation
Religious institutions
Historic accessory dwelling units
Private or public schools
Utility facility
Cemetery
Commercial horse stables
Horse events
Manufactured home park or RV park
Wireless telecommunication facilities
Guest lodge
Surface mining in conjunction with operation and
maintenance of irrigation system
247-22-000671-TA
Page 18 of 43
Zoning
Outright Uses
Conditional Uses
Public park
Dude ranch
Personal use airstrip
Planned developments
Single family dwelling or
Cluster developments
manufactured home
Recreation -oriented facility
Utility facility
Landfills
Community center
Cemetery
Agricultural use
Timeshare
Class I and II road or street projects
Hydroelectric facility
RR-10
subject to land division standards
Class III road or street project
Bed and breakfast inn
Golf course
Noncommercial horse stables
Excavation, grading and fill
Horse events
Religious institutions
Operation, maintenance and piping of
Public use
canals
Semipublic use
Type I Home occupation
Commercial horse stables
Historic accessory dwelling units
Private or public schools
Manufactured home park or RV park
Wireless telecommunication facilities
Surface mining in conjunction with operation and
maintenance of irrigation system
General Impacts of Conflicting Uses
The proposed amendments would allow ADUs in inventoried Goal 5 resources. As part of the ESEE
review "a local government may conduct a single analysis for two or more resource sites that are
within the same area or that are similarly situated and subject to the same zoning".9 In reviewing
the proposed amendments, Deschutes County finds that the impacts from ADUs in the MUA-10 and
RR-10 zones as they relate to Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk
Habitat are of such a similar nature that the impacts for these areas may be reviewed together via
the general impacts described below.
• Noise and Light
ADUs as a secondary dwelling may distress inventoried wildlife, as they seek to avoid noise
and light.
• Habitat Removal
ADUs would likely require removal of upland vegetation, grading, and soil compaction that
could alter drainage and runoff patterns. This could increase peak runoff, cause bank
erosion, flooding, or increase the flow of sediment into water bodies. The removal of upland
vegetation could also reduce tree canopy and understory vegetation which could be utilized
by wildlife, outside of their primary habitat.
9 OAR 660-023-0040(4)
247-22-000671-TA Page 19 of 43
• Introduction of Invasive, Nonnative Plants
ADUs may contribute to the spread of invasive, nonnative plants which could replace and
degrade native vegetation of which many species depend.
• Habitat Fragmentation
Additional human development may result in fences, roads, traffic and other barriers to the
movement of terrestrial wildlife that is critical to their survival.
Greater detail on these potential conflicts and their consequences are provided below.
247-22-000671-TA Page 20 of 43
Chapter 4: Impact Areas
660-023-0040(3): Determine the impact area. Local governments shall determine an impact area
for each significant resource site. The impact area shall be drawn to include only the area in which
allowed uses could adversely affect the identified resource. The impact area defines the
geographic limits within which to conduct an ESEE analysis for the identified significant resource
site.
This step is discretionary and allows for the local jurisdiction to define which areas are the most
vulnerable and/or most likely to be affected by the proposed amendments. The impact area for this
ESEE analysis are properties that are within the Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and
Significant Elk Habitat in the MUA-10 and RR-10 zones. As this ESEE is not for any specific property,
but instead reflects changes to the code generally, there is no individual property specific data.
Properties in this impact area can be found in Attachment 2 - Impact Area Maps
Impact Area Methodology
To understand the impact of the proposed amendments, an estimate of the number of parcels is
shown in Table 4 below. This estimate excludes unsewered areas smaller than 5 acres between
Sunriver and the Klamath County border; defined as those unincorporated portions of Deschutes
County contained in Townships 19S, 20S, 21 S, and 22S and Ranges 9E, 10E and 11 E. As addressed
in the proposed amendments, given concerns surrounding groundwater impacts from wastewater
disposal systems, unsewered properties between Sunriver and the Klamath County border must be
5 acres or larger to qualify for a rural ADU.
Table 4: Number of Affected Non -Federal Properties in Impact Area 10
Zone
Deer Migration
Deer Winter
Elk
Multiple Use Agricultural Zone
0
9
0
Rural Residential Zone
314
441
8
Total
314
450
8
10 See footnote #8.
247-22-000671-TA
Page 21 of 43
Chapter 5: ESEE Analysis
660-023-0040(4): Analyze the ESEE consequences. Local governments shall analyze the ESEE
consequences that could result from decisions to allow, limit, or prohibit a conflicting use. The
analysis may address each of the identified conflicting uses, or it may address a group of similar
conflicting uses. A local government may conduct a single analysis for two or more resource sites
that are within the same area or that are similarly situated and subject to the same zoning. The
local government may establish a matrix of commonly occurring conflicting uses and apply the
matrix to particular resource sites in order to facilitate the analysis. A local government may
conduct a single analysis for a site containing more than one significant Goal 5 resource. The ESEE
analysis must consider any applicable statewide goal or acknowledged plan requirements,
including the requirements of Goal 5. The analyses of the ESEE consequences shall be adopted
either as part of the plan or as a land use regulation.
Background
Deschutes County is choosing to conduct a single analysis for all resource sites as the impacts from
ADUs could have very similar impacts to both riparian areas and fish and wildlife that depend on
the riparian for their habitat, and for big game including deer and elk.
As described above, the potential impacts fall into four general areas:
• Noise and Light
ADUs as a secondary dwelling may distress inventoried wildlife, as they seek to avoid noise
and light.
• Habitat Removal
ADUs would likely require removal of upland vegetation, grading, and soil compaction that
could alter drainage and runoff patterns. This could increase peak runoff, cause bank
erosion, flooding, or increase the flow of sediment into water bodies. The removal of upland
vegetation could also reduce tree canopy and understory vegetation which could be utilized
by wildlife, outside of their primary habitat.
• Introduction of Invasive, Nonnative Plants
ADUs may the spread of invasive, nonnative plants which could replace and degrade native
vegetation of which many species depend.
• Habitat Fragmentation
Additional human development may result in fences, roads, traffic and other barriers to the
movement of terrestrial wildlife that is critical to their survival.
247-22-000671-TA Page 22 of 43
This step is discretionary. The purpose of an ESEE analysis is to provide a qualitative exercise for
local governments to weigh the positive and negative consequences of three scenarios in order to
determine a preferred outcome. Governments may choose to use quantitative data as necessary,
but are not required to gather new information or hire wildlife biologists, economists, sociologists,
or energy consultants.
ESEE Scenario Descriptions
Scenario (A) - Allow the Conflicting Use
In this scenario, the local government may decide that a conflicting use should be allowed fully,
without any restrictions, no matter the potential impacts on the inventory site(s). In this instance,
the Goal 5 rule would require the government to determine the conflicting use is of such importance
compared to the site that the use should be allowed without any protections or limitations. In
choosing this scenario, the local government could still use other tools to protect the inventories
that are currently in place.
Scenario (B) - Prohibit the Conflicting Use
In this scenario, the focal government may decide that the inventory site is of such importance or
the conflicting use has the potential to be so detrimental to the inventory site(s), that the conflicting
use should be entirely prohibited.
Scenario (C) - Limit the Conflicting Use
In this scenario, the local government may decide that the inventory site and the conflicting use are
both important when compared to each other, and the use should be allowed with limitations to
balance the impacts to the inventory site(s).
Accessory Dwelling Unit ESEE Analysis
Scenario (A) Allow the Conflicting Use
In this scenario, Deschutes County would allow ADUs in MUA-10 and RR-10 zones without any
additional requirements to protect the inventoried resources.
Economic Consequences:
Permitting ADUs would have positive consequences by allowing a second dwelling on a property.
Deschutes County is experiencing a housing shortage. Allowing ADUs, which are limited to 900
square feet of livable floor area and cannot be used as vacation rentals, could help address work
force housing shortages in the region. It could reduce commuting costs for those workers that live
in adjoining Crook, Jefferson and Klamath counties, and coupled with other work force housing
strategies, attract businesses and employment opportunities in Central Oregon.
Allowing ADUs could also have negative consequences. The development of ADUs in MUA-10 and
RR-10 zones could significantly increase land value, which could price out low and middle -income
residents from the opportunity to own a home. Previous testimony from ODFW estimates that
hunting and wildlife viewing contributed more than $50 million to the Deschutes County economy
annually. Deschutes County is proposing to allow ADUs in some areas that contain riparian areas
247-22-000671-TA Page 23 of 43
and species that rely on the riparian area for habitat including fish, furbearers, upland game birds,
and waterfowl. Allowing for ADUs near these areas could reduce income associated with wildlife
viewing and hunting of these species.
Based on previous ODFW testimony, mule deer populations have declined in recent years and are
currently at about 40% of management objectives for the areas in Central OR managed out of the
ODFW Bend office. This reduction represents an approximately 55% population decline since 1998.
There are many factors that have contributed to the decline of mule deer populations in Central
Oregon, some of which can be directly tied to increased human presence, including habitat
alteration, habitat conversion and loss, roadkill, and illegal harvest. Other contributing factors may
include increased predation and increased disease amount mule deer populations. By allowing
ADUs in Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat, there is the
potential for greater disturbance of deer and elk populations that could reduce hunting and viewing
opportunities.
Social Consequences:
Permitting ADUs could have positive consequences by allowing property owners with an existing
single family dwelling to build an ADU that accommodates aging parents or family members, farm
help for those that are working on MUA-10 zoned agricultural properties or nearby Exclusive Farm
Use zoned properties. By providing affordable housing, it could help lift people out of poverty and
increase economic mobility. It could bring a positive impact on the surrounding community,
encouraging social connections and lowering crime rates.
It could also have negative consequences by allowing ADUs in rural areas with inadequate access
to employment, schools, food markets, medical facilities and parks. This could lead to higher
automobile -dependence and vehicle emissions caused by more people driving to and from rural
areas. Based on previous testimony from ODFW, there could also be negative impacts due to the
potential loss of wildlife habitat. Many residents, advocacy organizations, and wildlife agencies
continue to express concerns regarding the loss of fish and wildlife habitat due to the region's rapid
growth and development. There is a recognition that increases in human activity, especially in rural
areas, displace habitat and diminish, incrementally, Deschutes County's rural character and quality
of life. The proposed amendments could have negative consequences due to increased human
presence and infrastructure near the inventoried Goal 5 resources, which could lead to a reduced
level of access and enjoyment for recreationalists.
Environmental Consequences:
In this scenario, ADUs would be permitted outright. As stated previously, ADUs could present
negative impacts as they have the potential to increase noise and light near fish and wildlife habitats,
and in turn cause distress to inventoried Goal 5 species.
Developing an ADU would likely require removal of upland vegetation, grading, and soil compaction
that could alter drainage and runoff patterns. This could increase peak runoff, cause bank erosion,
flooding, or increase the flow of sediment into water bodies. The removal of upland vegetation could
also reduce tree canopy and understory vegetation which could be utilized by wildlife, outside of
their primary habitat. Permitting ADUs could create negative impacts to designated habitat for Deer
247-22-000671-TA Page 24 of 43
Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant EIk Habitat. Based on previous ODFW
testimony, mule deer populations have declined in recent years and are currently at about 40% of
management objectives for the areas in Central OR managed out of the ODFW Bend office. This
reduction represents an approximately 55% population decline since 1998. There are many factors
that have contributed to the decline of mule deer populations in Central Oregon, some of which can
be directly tied to increased human presence, including habitat alteration, habitat conversion and
loss, roadkill, and illegal harvest. Other contributing factors may include increased predation and
increased disease amount mule deer populations.
As previously stated, the following Goal 5 protections established during the creation of the initial
inventory would remain in place:
1. Setback Protections: 100-foot structural setback from the ordinary high water mark of
rivers or streams.
2. Scenic Protections: Development near rivers in the Landscape Management Combining
Zone must be reviewed for aesthetic compatibility.
3. Wetland Protections: Prohibition of fill or removal of any material or wetland vegetation,
regardless of the amount, within the bed and banks of any stream or river or in any
wetland unless approved as a conditional use.
4. Mitigation Protections: Impacts to any wetland or riverbank impacts to be fully mitigated,
as evaluated by ODFW.
5. Flood Plain Protections: All new construction, expansion or substantial improvement of an
existing dwelling, an agricultural related structure, a commercial, industrial or other non-
residential structure, or an accessory building in a designated Flood Plain shall obtain a
conditional use permit.
6. Combining Zone Requirements: Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, Significant EIk
Habitat and Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat have site specific requirements including
development setbacks and seasonal construction requirements to prevent impact to
sensitive species and habitat.
Existing protections would prevent riparian areas from being developed with ADUs established near
them. As the existing Goal 5 measures in place today protect riparian areas and the fish and wildlife
within that habitat area, the addition of ADUs near these areas will be neutral.
Energy Consequences:
ADUs are unlikely to cause any major energy consequences. Per SB 391, the ADU must be within
100 feet of the existing dwelling. It must utilize the existing onsite system if there is no pre-existing
centralized wastewater treatment system. It can also rely on an existing domestic well.
247-22-000671-TA Page 25 of 43
A potential negative consequence of the proposed amendments could be additional development
in rural Deschutes County. Depending on the location of the ADU, it could lead to additional Vehicle
Miles Traveled and greater congestion on county owned roads for employment, education, and
basic services.
Scenario (B) Prohibit the Conflicting Use
In this scenario, Deschutes County would not allow ADUs in the MUA-10 and RR-10 zones associated
with the WA Combining Zone and Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk
Habitat.
Economic Consequences:
Prohibiting ADUs could have negative economic consequences, as it prevents certain property
owners from using their land and building a secondary dwelling unit. This could contribute to work
force housing deficiencies in the region and compel residents to commute from adjoining areas in
Crook, Jefferson, and Klamath counties.
It could also have neutral consequences based on previous testimony from ODFW. Prohibiting ADUs
could contribute to stabilizing mule deer populations, thereby maintaining economic benefits from
wildlife viewing or hunting. Wildlife viewing, hunting, and fishing experiences in Deschutes County
is a major economic asset to the region. Continuing with the current regulations could minimize
further habitat fragmentation and help maintain wildlife viewing, hunting, and fishing revenues in
Deschutes County.
Social Consequences:
Prohibiting ADUs could have negative consequences. Many residents and multi -generational
families in Deschutes County need affordable housing and are rent -burdened. Limiting the potential
supply of ADUs could exacerbate Central Oregon's housing crisis by forcing some residents to pay
higher rents, commute longer distances for basic services, or relocate. Those circumstances could
lead to further mental and physical stress.
It could also have positive consequences. Many residents express their appreciation for
undisturbed landscapes because they contribute to Deschutes County's rural character and quality
of life. Prohibiting ADUs, which generate noise and light would continue to limit disturbance to
existing fish and wildlife habitats.
Environmental Consequences:
There are 386 RR-10 tax lots, two acres or greater that abut the Little Deschutes River or Deschutes
River and 505 tax lots that are split -zoned RR-10 or MUA-10 with Flood Plain. These properties
contain a Goal 5 Riparian Area which is also the habitat for Goal 5 inventoried waterfowl, upland
game bird, furbearers, and fish. The WA Combining Zone contains Deer Migration Corridor, Deer
Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat. By prohibiting ADUs and maintaining the status quo, these
species will continue to be protected against habitat fragmentation and distress from second
dwellings. The environmental consequences are therefore neutral.
247-22-000671-TA Page 26 of 43
Energy Consequences:
Energy consumption would have neutral consequences as this scenario maintains the status quo.
Development associated with ADUs may be displaced to other areas of rural Deschutes County,
which could still have demands on utilities.
Scenario (C) Limit the Conflicting Use
In this scenario, Deschutes County would allow ADUs in the MUA-10 and RR-10 zones, with
additional limitations to protect the inventoried resources, outside of existing protections. The
existing limitation would require the entire ADU to be within a 100 feet of the existing dwelling.
Economic Consequences:
Permitting ADUs would have positive consequences by allowing a second dwelling on a property.
Deschutes County is experiencing a housing shortage. Allowing ADUs, which are limited to 900
square feet of livable floor area and cannot be used as vacation rentals, could help address work
force housing shortages in the region. It could reduce commuting costs for those workers that live
in adjoining Crook, Jefferson and Klamath counties and coupled with other work force housing
strategies, attract businesses and employment opportunities in Central Oregon.
Compared to scenario (a) in which only a portion of the ADU must be within a 100 feet of the existing
dwelling, the addition of limitations could lessen the impact by minimizing the buildable footprint
and ultimately, the number of eligible properties, recognizing that some may not have enough area
to accommodate an ADU. This could positively impact the hunting and wildlife viewing economy in
Central Oregon, valued at $50 million annually. While such measures could lessen impacts, the
overall burden caused by allowing ADUs nevertheless may still overall impact wildlife and thereby
impact revenue generated from the recreation economy.
In comparison to scenario (a), which would allow the use outright, Deschutes County finds that this
scenario would provide a limitation to reduce the amount of impacts, even if those impacts still
exist.
Social Consequences:
The positive social consequences in this scenario are very similar to scenario (a). Permitting ADUs
could have positive consequences by allowing property owners with an existing single family
dwelling to build an ADU that accommodates aging parents or family members, farm help for those
that are working on MUA-10 zoned agricultural properties or nearby Exclusive Farm Use zoned
properties. By providing affordable housing, it could help lift people out of poverty and increase
economic mobility. It could bring a positive impact on the surrounding community, encouraging
social connections and lowering crime rates.
The existing limitation would require the entire ADU to be within a 100 feet of the existing dwelling.
Even adding a limitation (or others), there could be a negative consequence of ADUs in rural areas
with inadequate access to employment, schools, food markets, medical facilities and parks. This
could lead to higher automobile -dependence and vehicle emissions caused by more people driving
to and from rural areas. Based on previous testimony from ODFW, there could also be negative
247-22-000671-TA Page 27 of 43
impacts due to the potential loss of wildlife habitat stemming from the possible removal of habitat
areas and the establishment of structures and their associated human presence. Many residents,
advocacy organizations, and wildlife agencies continue to express concerns regarding the loss of
fish and wildlife habitat due to the region's rapid growth and development. There is a recognition
that increases in human activity, especially in rural areas, displace habitat and diminish,
incrementally, Deschutes County's rural character and quality of life. The proposed amendments
could have negative consequences due to increased human presence and infrastructure near or
within the inventoried Goal 5 resources, which could lead to a reduced level of access and
enjoyment for recreationalists.
Environmental Consequences:
ADUs could present negative consequences as they have the potential to increase activity, noise,
and light near fish and wildlife habitats, and in turn cause distress to inventoried Deer Migration
Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat.
Development of an ADU would likely require removal of upland vegetation, grading, and soil
compaction that could alter drainage and runoff patterns. This could increase peak runoff, cause
bank erosion, flooding, or increase the flow of sediment into water bodies. The removal of upland
vegetation could also reduce tree canopy and understory vegetation which could be utilized by fish
and wildlife species, outside of their primary habitat. Permitting ADUs could result in further
negative impacts to the Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat.
Based on previous ODFW testimony, mule deer populations have declined in recent years and are
currently at about 40% of management objectives for the areas in Central OR managed out of the
ODFW Bend office. This reduction represents an approximately 55% population decline since 1998.
There are many factors that have contributed to the decline of mule deer populations in Central
Oregon, some of which can be directly tied to increased human presence, including habitat
alteration, habitat conversion and loss, roadkill, and illegal harvest. Other contributing factors may
include increased predation and increased disease amount mule deer populations.
Existing protections in place today (discussed above) would prevent Goal 5 riparian areas from
being developed when ADUs are nearby. The establishment of ADUs in these areas would likely be
neutral.
By limiting the entire ADU within a 100 feet of the existing dwelling, the negative environmental
consequences associated with ADU could be mitigated to a certain extent.
Energy Consequences:
The energy consequences in this scenario are the same as in scenario (a). Limiting the entire ADU
to within a 100 feet of the existing dwelling could decrease the amount of energy used to operate
the ADU.
247-22-000671-TA Page 28 of 43
Chapter 6: ESEE Decision
660-023-0040(5): Develop a program to achieve Goal 5. Local governments shall determine whether
to allow, limit, or prohibit identified conflicting uses for significant resource sites. This decision
shall be based upon and supported by the ESEE analysis. A decision to prohibit or limit conflicting
uses protects a resource site. A decision to allow some or all conflicting uses for a particular site
may also be consistent with Goal 5, provided it is supported by the ESEE analysis. One of the
following determinations shall be reached with regard to conflicting uses for a significant resource
site:
(c) A local government may decide that the conflicting use should be allowed fully,
notwithstanding the possible impacts on the resource site. The ESEE analysis must demonstrate
that the conflicting use is of sufficient importance relative to the resource site, and must indicate
why measures to protect the resource to some extent should not be provided, as per subsection
(b) of this section.
The graphic below is meant to be a simplified representation to balance each of the ESEE factors.
As stated in the ESEE analysis, there are a variety of positive, negative, and neutral consequences
associated with each scenario. Deschutes County finds that the issue of allowing an ADU in MUA-10
and RR-10 zones would contribute significant environmental impacts that outweigh the other ESEE
consequences. The County considered allowing the use with no limitations, but given ongoing
population declines in wildlife populations, particularly mule deer populations, this option was
considering incompatible with attempts to maintain stable Goal 5 resources over the coming years.
Based on testimony from agency partners at ODFW, at least some portion of wildlife population
declines can be attributed to increased human population and development pressures in the
region. Additionally, the County considered allowing the use with limitations by limiting the entire
ADU within a 100 feet of the existing dwelling, but this practice could still produce potential negative
impacts on declining wildlife populations. The relatively small number of properties likely to remain
eligible with these limitations in place significantly reduced any positive social or economic impacts
that may be expected from allowing ADUs, and thus total prohibition was found to be the preferable
option. Therefore the County is choosing scenario (b) which will prohibit the use entirely to limit
possible impacts on the resource sites.
247-22-000671-TA Page 29 of 43
Table 5: ESEE Factors
ESEE Factors
Support habitat
functions
(Environmental,
economic,
social)
Support
Affordable
Housing
(Social,
economic)
Support
Recreational
Economy
(Economic,
Social)
Preserves Rural
Character
(Social,
economic)
Transportation
(Energy)
Prohibit conflict
(No code change)
+
-
+
+
0
Allow conflict
Allow ADUs with
no additional
requirements
-
+
Limit conflict
Allow ADUs with
additional
limitation
_
+
247-22-000671-TA Page 30 of 43
Chapter 7: Program to Achieve Goal 5
660-023-0050(1): For each resource site, local governments shall adopt comprehensive plan
provisions and land use regulations to implement the decisions made pursuant to OAR 660-023-
0040(5). The plan shall describe the degree of protection intended for each significant resource
site. The plan and implementing ordinances shall clearly identify those conflicting uses that are
allowed and the specific standards or limitations that apply to the allowed uses. A program to
achieve Goal 5 may include zoning measures that partially or fully allow conflicting uses (see OAR
660-023-0040(5)(b) and (c)).
660-023-0050(2): When a local government has decided to protect a resource site under OAR 660-
023-0040(5)(b), implementing measures applied to conflicting uses on the resource site and within
its impact area shall contain clear and objective standards. For purposes of this division, a
standard shall be considered clear and objective if it meets any one of the following criteria:
(a) It is a fixed numerical standard, such as a height limitation of 35 feet or a setback of 50 feet;
(b) It is a nondiscretionary requirement, such as a requirement that grading not occur beneath
the dripline of a protected tree; or ...
Deschutes County has determined that ADUs within the MUA-10 and RR-10 zones and within the
Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, Significant Elk Habitat, Greater Sage Grouse Area
Combining Zone, and Sensitive Bird and Mammal Habitat Combining Zone should be prohibited
fully. The implementing measures do not include alternative, discretionary procedures for
compliance.
247-22-000671-TA Page 31 of 43
Attachment 1 - Deschutes County Significant Goal 5 Resources
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Fish Habitat
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92-041, page
18; creeks, rivers
and lakes)
Yes
Major conflicts are
removal of riparian
vegetation, fill and
removal activities
within the bed and
banks of streams or
wetlands,
hydroelectric, rural
residential
development and
water regulation
Floodplain zone recognized as
program to achieve the goal to
conserve fish habitat (Ordinance
Nos. 88-030, 88-031, 89-009).
Others include: fill and removal
permits, wetland removal
regulations, hydro prohibitions,
rimrock setbacks, 100' setback
from OHW, conservation
easements and restrictions on
boats and docks.
Ordinance Nos.
86-018, 86-053,
86-054, 86-056,
88-030, 88-031,
89-009, 92-040,
92-041
Deer Winter Range
(Inventory -Ord.
No. 92-041, page
22; Metolius,
Tumalo, North
Paulina, and Grizzly
ranges identified by
ODFW
Yes
Major conflicts are
dwellings, roads, and
dogs. Activities which
cause deterioration of
forage quality and
quantity or cover are
conflicting uses.
Fences which impede
safe passage are also
a conflicting use.
Floodplain zone recognized as a
program to achieve the goal to
protect deer winter range
(Ordinance Nos. 88-030, 88-031,
89-009).
Others include Wildlife Area
Combining Zone, Requires 40-acre
minimum lot size for all new
residential land divisions.
Underlying zoning in most of the
deer winter range is: EFU, Forest,
and Floodplain. These zones
provide for large lot sizes and limit
uses that are not compatible with
farm or forest zones.
Ordinance Nos.
gg 030, 88 031,
89 009, 92 040,
92 041, 92 042,
92 046
Deer Migration
Corridor
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92-041, page
26; Bend -La Pine
migration corridor
identified by ODFW)
Yes
Major conflicts are
dwellings, roads, and
dogs. Fences whichcorridor
impede safe passage
are also a conflicting
use.
Wildlife Area Combining Zone was
recognized as the only program to
achieve the goal to protect the deer
migration corridor. Underlying
zoning is RR-10. It was amended to
require cluster development for all
land divisions in the RR-10 zone in
the Bend/La Pine migration
(92-042). A 20-acre parcel
is the minimum size required for a
cluster development. Siting and
fencing standards also apply in the
deer migration corridor. Migration
corridor includes some EFU, Forest,
and Floodplain zoned land. These
resource zones provide for large lot
sizes and limit uses that are not
compatible with farm or forest
zones.
Ordinance Nos.
92-040, 92-041,
92-042, 92-046
247-22-000671-TA
Page 32 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Elk Habitat
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92-041- page
32; identified by
USFS and ODFW)
Yes
Major conflict is the
loss of habitat due to
increased residential
densities in the
habitat areas.
Increased human
disturbance can cause
conflict with elk. The
use of land which
necessitates the
removal of large
amounts of vegetative
cover can also alter
the quality of elk
habitat.
Wildlife Area Combining Zone was
recognized as the only program to
achieve the goal to protect the elk
habitat.
it was amended to require a 160-
acre minimum lot size for areas
identified as significant elk habitat.
Siting standards are required to
minimize conflicts of residences
with habitat protection.
Underlying zoning in the elk habitat
areas is either Floodplain, Forest, or
Open Space and Conservation.
These resource zones restrict high
density residential development
and prohibit industrial and
commercial uses.
* Some lands are zoned RR10,
including lots that are split zoned
with flood plain. They are already
parcelized, preventing future land
divisions.
Ordinance Nos.
88-030, 88-031,
89-009, 92-040,
92-041, 92-042,
92-046
Antelope Habitat
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92-041— page
38; identified by
ODFW)
No
Land use or
development
activities which would
result in the loss of
habitat, and animal
harassment and
disturbance
associated with
human activity.
To achieve the goal to conserve
antelope habitat, uses conflicting
with antelope habitat are limited to
the Wildlife Area Combining Zone.
In antelope range, the minimum lot
size is 320 acres. Except for rural
service centers, the antelope
habitat is zoned EFU or F1.
Ordinance Nos.
92-040, 92-041,
92-042, 92-046
Habitat for
Sensitive Birds
(inventory — Ord.
No. 92-041- page
41 and Table 5;
identified by ODFW,
ODF, OSU, Oregon
Natural Heritage
Data Bases).
The area required
for each nest site
varies between
species.
No
Nest sites are found in
Forest, EFU and Open
Space and
Conservation zones.
Uses that could
conflict with the
habitat site are
surface mining,
residential use,
recreation facilities,
roads, logging, and air
strips.
Any activity which
would disturb the
nesting birds,
including intensive
recreational use or
removal of trees or
The Sensitive Bird and Mammal
Combining Zone achieves the goal
to protect sensitive bird sites.
Ordinance Nos.
92-040, 92-041,
92-042, 92-046
247-22-000671-TA
Page 33 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
vegetation could
conflict with the
habitat site.
(UPDATE -
Inventory —Ord.
No. 94-004 -pages
3 to'140 Site
specific ESEE
analysis and
decisions follow
each site.
No
See above.
Habitat areas for sensitive birds of
the Fish and Wildlife Element,
adopted in No. 92-041 is repealed
and replaced by inventories in
Exhibit 1. Area required around
each nest site needed to protect
the nest from conflict varies
between species. It's called
"sensitive habitat area."
Note: Northern bald eagle, osprey,
golden eagle, prairie falcon, and
great blue heron rookeries are
located on federal land. Classified
as "2A"Goal 5 Resources. Great
Grey owl site no longer exists.
Some bald eagle, golden eagle sites
are controlled by the Sensitive Bird
and Mammal Combining Zone.
Ordinance Nos.
94 004, 94-005
and 94-021
Waterfowl Habitat
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92 041—page
56; includes all
rivers, streams,
lakes and perennial
wetlands and ponds
identified on the
1990 US Fish and
Wildlife Wetland
Inventory Maps;
ODFW provided lists
of all bird species;
Co/City of Bend
River Study
provides additional
information)
Yes
Future resort and
vacation home
development, human
activity associated
with recreation along
rivers and lakes,
timber -cutting around
sensitive habitats, fill
and removal of
material in wetlands
and within the bed
and banks of rivers
and streams, and
removal of riparian
vegetation are
conflicting uses.
Floodplain zone recognized as
program to achieve the goal to
conserve waterfowl habitat
(Ordinance Nos. 88-030, 88-031,
89-009).
Others include: fill and removal
permits, wetland removal
regulations, rimrock setbacks, 100'
setback from OHW, conservation
easements, restrictions on boats
and docks, landscape management,
state and federal scenic water
regulations. In addition, the Forest
and EFU zones require large
minimum lot size which limits the
potential density of development in
the areas adjacent to many of the
rivers, streams, wetlands, and
ponds used for waterfowl habitat.
Ordinance Nos.
86 018, 86 054,
86 056, 88 030,
88 031, 89 009,
92 040, 92 041,
92-042- 92 045
92-046
247-22-000671-TA
Page 34 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Pheasant and quail
are affected
whenever agricultural
land is taken out of
production through
For all of the upland game birds
except sage grouse, the habitat is
adequately protected by the
Upland Game Bird
urban sprawl, road
existing EFU and Forest zoning and
Habitat
(Inventory - Ord.
No. 92-041— page
construction,
industrial
development and
the provisions to protect wetlands
and riparian areas to achieve the
60; ODFW did not
other land clearing
goal of protecting upland game
identify critical
activities.
birds.
Ordinance Nos.
habitat for any of
County provisions to protect
86-018, 86-
the upland game
Farming practices on
riparian areas and wetlands protect
053,86-054, 86-
species except for
Yes
existing agricultural
one of the most significant
056, 88-030, 88-
the sage grouse;
lands also have an
components of upland game
031, 89-009, 92-
habitat for upland
game birds is
impact. Fence row,
woodlots, and
habitat.
040, 92-041, 92-
042, 92-046
dispersed
riparian vegetation
Note: conflicts with sage grouse are
throughout the
county in riparian,
forest, agricultural,
and rangeland
areas)
are constantly being
removed at the
expense of upland
bird use.
Chapter 6 of
limited by EFU zoning with a 320
acre minimum parcel size.
Sensitive Bird and Mammal
Combining Zone pertaining to sage
grouse and leks have been repealed
due to LCDC enacted rules in OAR
County/City of Bend
660, Division 23.
River Study identifies
conflicting uses with
upland bird habitat.
Habitat areas for Upland Game Bird
Habitat, adopted in No. 92-041 is
repealed and replaced and further
amended in Exhibit 4 with the ESEE
Analysis and inventory for upland
game bird habitat.
Conflicts with sage grouse are
reduced by the limitations on uses
UPDATE - Inventory
in the EFU and Floodplain zone, by
Ordinance Nos.
- Ord. No. 94-004 —
Yes
See above.
the 320 acre minimum lot size and
94-004 and 94-
pages 156-201.
predominance of BLM lands.
021
Note: conflicts with sage grouse are
limited by EFU zoning with a 320
acre minimum parcel size.
Sensitive Bird and Mammal
Combining Zone pertaining to sage
grouse and leks have been repealed
due to LCDC enacted rules in OAR
660, Division 23.
247-22-000671-TA
Page 35 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Furbearer Habitat
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92 041—page
65; ODFW has not
identified any
specific habitat sites
other than riparian
and wetland areas
that are critical for
the listed species.
Yes
The conflicting uses
are those activities or
development which
would degrade or
destroy habitat, or
disturb the animals
causing them to
relocate.
Conflicts between
furbearers and other
land uses are minimal
in the county.
Furbearer habitat is adequately
protected by the existing EFU and
Forest zoning and the provisions to
protect farm use and forest zoning,
and the provisions to protect
wetlands and riparian areas to
achieve the goal to protect
furbearers.
The farm and forest zones require
large minimum lot sizes and many
uses are permitted only as
conditional uses. The measures to
protect riparian and wetland
habitat are detailed in this plan in
the Riparian and Wetland Habitat
section.
Ordinance Nos.
86-018, 86-
053,86-054, 86-
056, 88 030, 88
031, 89-009, 92-
040, 92-041
Habitat Areas for
Townsend's Big-
Eared Bats
(Inventory -Ord.
No. 92 041-page
69; identified by
ODFW, ODF, OSU,
Oregon Natural
Heritage Data
Bases)
No
Caves located in EFU
zones. Uses permitted
in those zones that
could conflict with the
habitat site are
surface mining,
recreation facilities
including golf courses
and destination
resorts, roads,
logging, and air strips.
Program to achieve the goal is
Sensitive Bird and Mammal
Combining Zone
Ordinance No.
92 041 and 042
UPDATE - Inventory
— Ord. No. 94-004 —
pages 140 to 155 ':
Site specific ESEE
analysis and
decisions follow
each site.
No
See above.
Habitat areas for Townsend Bats,
adopted in No. 92-041 is repealed
and replaced and further amended
in Exhibit 2. The ESEE for
Townsend's big -eared bats is
amended for additional bat sites in
Exhibit 3.
Ordinance Nos.
94-004 and 94-
021
247-22-000671-TA
Page 36 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Wetlands and
Riparian Areas
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92 041—page
73; identified on
USFWS NWI)
Yes
Conflicting uses
include fill and
removal of material,
including vegetation
which could cause a
reduction in the size
or quality or function
of a wetland, or cause
destruction or
degradation of the
riparian habitat and
vegetation.
Structural
development in
wetlands or riparian
areas would reduce
the habitat and the
use of the structure
could cause conflicts
such as harassment or
disturbance or wildlife
dependent on the
habitat. Cutting of
riparian vegetation
can remove important
shade for streams,
eliminate habitat for
various waterfowl,
furbearers, and
nongame bird species,
and can increase the
potential for erosion
or bank instability in
riparian areas.
Floodplain zone recognized as
program to achieve the goal to
conserve wetland and riparian
habitat (Ordinance Nos. 88-030, 88
031, 89-009).
Others include: fill and removal
permits, wetland removal
regulations, hydro prohibitions,
100' setback from OHW,
conservation easements,
restrictions on boats and docks,
and landscape management.
Ordinance Nos.
86-018 86-054
86 056, 88 030,
88 031, 89 009,
92 040, 92 041,
92-045
247-22-000671-TA
Page 37 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Conflicting uses:
Locating septic
systems in riparian
area could cause
Riparian Areas inventory and ESEE
UPDATE —Riparian
pollution of ground
analysis adopted by Ordinance No.
inventory — Ord.
and surface water
92-041 is deleted and replaced by
No. 94-007;
systems. The potential
an inventory and ESEE contained in
Significant riparian
habitat is located in
for this conflict
depends on the
Exhibit A.
three areas:
characteristics of the
New parcels meeting the minimum
Area within 100' of
OHW of an
soil.
Locating structural
lot size in the resource zones (EFU,
Forest, non -exception flood plain)
will not cause an increase in
inventoried stream
development in
residential density that would
or river;
riparian areas can
reduce the habitat
conflict with riparian habitat values.
Area adjacent to an
and the use of
In RR10, MUA-10, and Floodplain
inventoried river or
structures could cause
zones found adjacent to
stream and located
conflicts such as
inventoried riparian areas, the
within a flood plain
harassment or
creation of new 10 acre parcels
Ordinance Nos.
mapped by FEMA
Yes
disturbance of wildlife
would not significantly increase the
94-007
and zoned
dependent on habitat.
overall density of residential use
Floodplain by the
county (Deschutes
Recreational use of
adjacent to riparian areas because
the areas where new parcels could
River, Little
the riparian area
be created, with the exception of
Deschutes River,
Paulina Creek, Fall
including boat landing
areas, formal and
Tumalo Creek, are already divided
into lots considerably smaller than
River, Indian Ford
informal trails, and
10 acres.
Creek, Tumalo
camping areas can
Creek, Squaw
alter soil composition
Program to achieve Goal 5 for
(Whychus) Creek,
and Crooked River
and cause destruction
of vegetation.
Riparian Habitat: fill and removal
regulations to protect wetlands,
Area adjacent to a
100' setback from OHW, Floodplain
river or stream and
inventoried as a
wetland on the NWI
Increase in density of
residential lots in or
adjacent to riparian
areas could result in a
decrease of habitat
effectiveness because
of disturbance to
wildlife.
zone (regulates docks too),
Landscape Management zone,
Conservation easements, State
Scenic Waterway
247-22-000671-TA
Page 38 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Conflicting uses
include fill and
removal of material,
including vegetation,
which could cause
reduction in the size,
quality or function of
a wetland.
Locating structural
development in
wetlands could
reduce the habitat
and the use of the
structure could cause
conflicts such as
harassment or
disturbance of wildlife
dependent on the
habitat.
Wetlands Inventory and ESEE
analysis adopted by Ordinance No.
92-041 is deleted and replaced by
an inventory and ESEE contained in
Exhibit B, Wetlands.
UPDATE — Wetland
Program to achieve Goal 5 for
Inventory— Ord.
Draining wetlands for
Wetland Habitat:
Ordinance Nos.
No. 94 007, Exhibit
Yes
agriculture of other
94-007
B ®inventory is NWI
development
• Fill and removal
(Ord. No. 92-045)
purposes destroys the
hydrological function
of the wetland and
alters the habitat
qualities that certain
wildlife depend on.
regulations to protect
wetlands
• 100' setback from OHW
• Flood plain zone (regulates
docks too)
• DSL Removal / Fill law
Cutting wetland
vegetation adjacent to
streams can remove
important shade for
streams, eliminate
habitat for various
waterfowl, furbearers,
and nongame bird
species, and can also
increase the potential
for erosion or bank
instability in riparian
areas.
247-22-000671-TA
Page 39 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Ecologically and
Scientifically
Significant Natural
Areas * Little
Deschutes River /
Deschutes River
Confluence
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92-052, Exhibit `
8, Page 1;
identified by
Oregon Natural
Heritage Program); ;
Analysis of Pringle
Falls and Horse
Ridge Research
Areas, West
Hampton Butte and
Davis Lakes
excluded b/c
they're on federal
land and/or not
related to flood
plains.
Yes
Resort and vacation
home development,
recreational
uses livestock grazing,
and fill and removal in
wetlands are
conflicting uses.
Programs for resource protection
include the zoning of the; property,
the provisions of the flood plain,
wetlands and the river corridor.
The implementing measures which
protect and regulate development
in the confluence area are: EFU
zoning, Floodplain zoning,
conservation easements, and fill
and removal permits.
The confluence area is located in
the undeveloped open space area
of the Sunriver development
(Crosswater). 80% of the property
is retained as open space.
Today, zoning is Floodplain and
Forest Use.
Ordinance Nos.
86-018, 86-054,
86-056, 88-030,
88-031,89-009,
92 040, 92-041,
92-045
Landscape
Management
Rivers and Streams
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92-052, Exhibit
C, Page 3;
identified by state
and federal wild
and scenic
corridors; and
within 660' of OHW
of portions of
Deschutes River,
Little Deschutes
River, Paulina
Creek, Fall River,
Spring river, Tumalo
Creek, Squaw
(Whychus) Creek,
and Crooked River
not on the state or
federal scenic
designations)
Yes
Uses conflicting with
open space and scenic
resources along the
designated Landscape
Management rivers
and streams include
land management
activities that result in
habitat loss or
development within
river or stream
corridors which would
excessively interfere
with the scenic or
natural appearance of
the landscape as seen
from the river or
stream or alteration
of existing natural
landscape by removal
of vegetative cover.
Program for resource protection
includes: Floodplain zone and
restrictions, fill and removal
permits, wetland removal
regulations, hydro prohibitions,
rimrock setbacks, conservation
easements, restrictions on boats
and docks, and landscape
management.
Ordinance Nos.
g6 018, 86-053,
g6 054, 86 056,
88_030, 88 031,
89_009, 92 033,
93-034
247-22-000671-TA
Page 40 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Lakes and
Reservoirs
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92-052, Exhibit
C, Page 10; includes
Upper Tumalo
Reservoir;
remaining are on
federal land
No
Conflicting uses with
the open space and
scenic values of the
land adjacent to the
inventoried lakes
include development
which would cause a
Toss of open space or
a decrease in the
aesthetic and scenic
resources, and land
management
activities resulting in
the removal of natural
vegetation which
provides wildlife
habitat and scenic
value.
Conflicting uses around Tumalo
Reservoir are specifically limited by
Title 18.48, Open Space
Conservation Zone and a 100'
setback for any structure from
OHW.
Ordinance No.
91-020
State Scenic
Waterways and
Federal Wild and
Scenic Rivers
(Inventory — Ord.
No. 92-052, Exhibit
E, Page 1;
Yes
See County / City of
Bend River Study and
1986 River Study Staff
Report. Both
referenced in Ord. 92-
005, Exhibit E.
Program for resource protection
includes:
Floodplain zone and restrictions, fill
and removal permits, wetland
removal regulations, hydro
prohibitions, rimrock setbacks,
conservation easements,
restrictions on boats and docks,
and landscape management.
Ordinance Nos.
86-018, 86-053,
86-054, 86-056,
88-030, 88-031,
89-009, 92-033,
93-034
Wilderness Areas,
Areas of Special
Concern, Energy
Sources (Ord. No
92-052), and
Groundwater
Resources (Ord. No.
94-003) not
analyzed because
they're on federal
land or don't relate
to flood plains.
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
247-22-000671-TA
Page 41 of 43
Attachment 2 - Inventory Site Maps
247-22-000671-TA Page 42 of 43
� V
0,000'
Exception Area Taxlots Meeting ADU Criteria - Deer Migration Range
Legend
Wildlife Area - Deer Migration Range
Exception Area Taxlots Meeting Criteria
Flood Plain
Wetland
November 4, 2022
ArAr
N AC u stom \ County \COMP Ian ning\PeterG\Goal5Resources\2022
AI
11111111
rarammion
Frommi
OR POPON
upriver
ni
1"= 6 mi
Exception Area Taxlots Meeting ADU Criteria - Deer Winter Range
Wildlife Area - Deer Winter Range
Exception Area Taxlots Meeting Criteria
N:\Custom \ County \C DD\Planning\PeterG\Goal5Resources\2022
Exception Area Taxlots Meeting ADU Criteria - EIk Range
Sunrive
Legend
Wildlife Area - EIk Range
Exception Area Taxlots Meeting Criteria
Flood Plain
Wetland
November 4, 2022
N:\C u slom \ County \ COD \ Planning \ PeterG Goal5Resources \ 2022
Attachment 3 - Proposed Text Amendments
247-22-000671-TA Page 43 of 43
CHAPTER 18.32 MULTIPLE USE AGRICULTURAL ZONE; MUA
18.32.020 Uses Permitted Outright
**
18.32.020 Uses Permitted Outright
The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright:
A. Agricultural uses as defined in DCC Title 18.
B. A single family dwelling, or a manufactured home subject to DCC 18.116.070.
C. Propagation or harvesting of a forest product.
D. Class I and II road or street project subject to approval as part of a land partition, subdivision or
subject to the standards and criteria established by DCC 18.116.230.
E. Class III road or street project.
F. Noncommercial horse stables, excluding horse events.
G. Horse events, including associated structures, involving:
1. Fewer than 10 riders;
2. Ten to 25 riders, no more than two times per month on nonconsecutive days; or
3 More than 25 riders, no more than two times per year on nonconsecutive days.
Incidental musical programs are not included in this definition. Overnight stays by
participants, trainers or spectators in RVs on the premises is not an incident of such
horse events.
H. Operation, maintenance, and piping of existing irrigation systems operated by an Irrigation
District except as provided in DCC 18.120.050.
I. Type 1 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
J. Historic Accessory Dwelling Units, subject to DCC 18.116.350.
K. Residential Accessory Dwelling Units, subject to DCC 18.116.370.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. PL-15 on 11/1/1979
Amended by Ord. 91-002 §6 on 2/6/1991
Amended by Ord. 91-005 §18 on 3/4/1991
Amended by Ord. 91-020 §1 on 5/29/1991
Amended by Ord. 91-038 §1 on 9/30/1991
1
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Recorded by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
93-001 §1 on 1/27/1993
93-043 §4 on 8/25/1993
94-008 §10 on 6/8/1994
2001-016 §2 on 3/28/2001
2001-039 §2 on 12/12/2001
2004-002 §3 on 4/28/2004
2019-009 §1 on 9/3/2019
2019-009 §1 on 9/3/2019
2022-00x §x on [date/
CHAPTER 18.60 RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE; RR-10
18.60.020 Uses Permitted Outright
18.60.020 Uses Permitted Outright
The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright.
A. A single-family dwelling, or a manufactured home subject to DCC 18.116.070.
B. Utility facilities necessary to serve the area including energy facilities, water supply and
treatment and sewage disposal and treatment.
C. Community center, if shown and approved on the original plan or plat of the development.
D. Agricultural use as defined in DCC Title 18.
E. Class I and II road or street project subject to approval as part of a land partition, subdivision or
subject to the standards and criteria established by DCC 18.116.230.
F. Class lil road or street project.
G. Noncommercial horse stables as defined in DCC Title 18, excluding horse events.
H. Horse events, including associated structures, involving:
1. Fewer than 10 riders;
2 Ten to 25 riders, no more than two times per month on nonconsecutive days; or
3. More than 25 riders, no more than two times per year on nonconsecutive days.
Incidental musical programs are not included in this definition. Overnight stays by
participants, trainers or spectators in RVs on the premises is not an incident of such
horse events.
I. Operation, maintenance, and piping of existing irrigation systems operated by an Irrigation
District except as provided in DCC 18.120.050.
J. Type 1 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
K. Historic Accessory Dwelling Units, subject to DCC 18.116.350.
L. Residential Accessory Dwelling Units, subject to DCC 18.116.370.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. PL-15 on 11/1/1979
Amended by Ord. 91-005 §§30 & 31 on 3/4/1991
Amended by Ord. 91-020 §1 on 5/29/1991
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Recorded by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
93-043 §8 on 8/25/1993
94-008 §12 on 6/8/1994
2001-016 §2 on 3/28/2001
2001-039 §5 on 12/12/2001
2004-002 §7 on 4/28/2004
2019-009 §2 on 9/3/2019
2019-009 §2 on 9/3/2019
2022-00x §x on [datel
CHAPTER 18.116 SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS
18.116.350 Historic Accessory Dwelling Units In RR10 And MUA Zones
18.116.370 Residential Accessory Dwelling Units in RR10 and MUA 10 Zones
18.116.350 Historic Accessory Dwelling Units In RR10 And MUA Zones
A. As used in this section:
1. "Historic Accessory dwelling unit" means a residential structure that is used in
connection with or that is auxiliary to a s;rble family dwclling;historic home. For the
purposes of DCC Title 18, the term "auxiliary" shall besy_nonymouswith the terms
"incidental and subordinate to."
2. "Area zoned for rural residential use" means land that is not located inside an urban
growth boundary as defined in ORS 195.060 and that is subject to an acknowledged
exception to a statewide land use planning goal relating to farmland or forestland and
planned and zoned by the county to allow residential use as a primary use.
3. "Historic home" means a single-family dwelling constructed between 1850 and 1945.
4. "New" means that the dwelling being constructed did not previously exist in residential
or nonresidential form. "New" does not include the acquisition, alteration, renovation
or remodeling of an existing structure.
5 "Place a manufactured home" means the placement of a manufactured home that did
not previously exist on the subject lot of record; it may include the placement of a
manufactured home that was previously used as a dwelling on another lot and moved
to the subject lot of record.
6. "Single-family dwelling" means a residential structure designed as a residence for one
family and sharing no common wall with another residence of any type.
B. An owner of a lot or parcel within an area zoned for rural residential use (RR10 and MUA zones)
may construct a new single-family dwelling or place a manufactured home on the lot or parcel,
provided:
1. The lot or parcel is not located in an area designated as an urban reserve as defined in
ORS 195.137;
2. The lot or parcel is at least two acres in size;
3. A historic home is sited on the lot or parcel;
4. The owner converts the historic home to an accessory dwelling unit upon completion of
the new single-family dwelling or placement of a manufactured home; and
5. The accessory dwelling unit may be required to comply with all applicable laws and
regulations relating to sanitation and wastewater disposal and treatment.
C. The construction of an accessory dwelling under subsection (B) of this section is a land use
action subject to DCC 22.20.
D. An owner that constructs a new single-family dwelling or places a manufactured home under
subsection (B) of this section may not:
1. Subdivide, partition or otherwise divide the lot or parcel so that the new single-family
dwelling or manufactured home is situated on a different lot or parcel from the
accessory dwelling unit.
2. Alter, renovate or remodel the accessory dwelling unit so that the square footage of the
accessory dwelling unit is more than 120 percent of the historic home's square footage
at the time construction of the new single-family dwelling commenced.
3. Rebuild the accessory dwelling unit if the structure is deemed a dangerous building due
to fire or other natural disaster, pursuant to the Uniform Code for the Abatement of
Dangerous Buildings, which defines "dangerous building" as "Whenever any portion
thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood or by any other cause, to
such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it
was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the Building
Code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location."
4. Construct an additional accessory dwelling unit on the same lot or parcel.
E. A new single-family dwelling constructed or a manufactured home placed under this section
may be required to be served by the same water supply source as the accessory dwelling unit.
F. Owner occupancy of either the accessory dwelling unit or the new single-family dwelling is not
required. However, the new single-family dwelling and the accessory dwelling unit may not be
used simultaneously for short-term rentals of thirty (30) consecutive days or less.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2019-009 §3 on 9/3/2019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §3 on 9/3/2019
Amended by Ord. 2022-00x §x on [date/
18.116.370 Residential Accessory Dwelling Units in RR10 and MUA Zones
A. As used in this section:
1. "Accessory dwelling unit" means a residential structure that is used in connection with
or that is auxiliary to an existing single-family dwelling or manufactured home. For the
purposes of DCC Title 18, the term "auxiliary" shall be ynonyrnous with the terms
"incidental and subordinate to."
2. "Right-of-way" means either a public road maintained by the county, a private road with
a public access easement, a public road maintained by a road district, or an
unmaintained road.
3. "Rural residential use" means a lot or parcel located in the RR-10 or MUA-10 zones,
consistent with the definition in ORS 215.501.
4. "Safe evacuation plan" means an identifiable route on a right(s)-of-ways from the rural
accessory dwelling unit to the staged evacuation area.
5. "Single-family dwelling" or "manufactured home" means a residential structure
designed as a residence for one family and sharing no common wall with another
residence of any type.
6. "Staged evacuation area" means a public or private location that occupants of the rural
accessory dwelling unit may evacuate to reorganize.
7. "Useable floor area" means the area of the accessory dwelling unit included within the
surrounding exterior walls, including ,arages_andother accessory components.
8. "Vacation occupancy" means occupancy in a dwelling unit, not including transient
occupancy in a hotel or motel, that has all of the following characteristics:
a. The occupant rents the unit for vacation purposes only, not as a principal residence;
b. The occupant has a principal residence other than at the unit; and
c. The period of authorized occupancy does not exceed 45 days.
B. One accessory dwelling unit is permitted outright on a lot or parcel zoned for RR-10 or MUA-10,
provided:
1. One single-family dwelling is sited on the lot or parcel;
2. The lot or parcel is not located within the Redmond Urban Reserve Area, consistent with
ORS 195.137.
3. No portion of the lot or parcel is within the Metolius Area of Critical State Concern, as
defined in ORS 197.416.
4. The lot area or parcel area is at least two acres in size, with the exception of those
unsewered areas between Sunriver and the Klamath County border; defined as those
unincorporated portions of Deschutes County contained in Townships 19S, 20S, 215,
and 22S and Ranges 9E, 10E and 11E, the minimum lot or parcel area must be at least
five acres in size.
5. The accessory dwelling unit will have a minimum setback of 100 feet between the
accessory dwelling unit and adjacent land zoned F-1, F-2, or EFU and meet the other
minimum setback requirements of the underlying zone and combining zones.
6. The accessory dwelling unit will not include more than 900 square feet of useable floor
area.
7. The accessory dwelling unit will be located no farther than 100 feet from the existing
single-family dwelling, measured from a wall of the single-family dwelling to the nearest
part of the useable floor area of the accessory dwelling unit.
8. Accessory dwelling units are prohibited in the Wildlife Area Combining Zone, Sensitive
Bird and Mammal Habitat CombiningZ_one and the Greater Sage Grouse Area
Combining Zone.
9. The accessory dwelling unit receives approval from a sewer authority or Deschutes
County Environmental Soils for onsite wastewater disposal and treatment.
10. The lot orparcel is served by a fire protection service_providerwith professionals who
have received training or certification described in ORS 181A.410.
11. Adequate access for firefighting equipment, safe evacuation and staged evacuation
areas are met by providing:
a. Written certification from a fire protection service provider with professionals who
have received training or certification described in ORS 181A.410, on a form
prepared by Deschutes County, that access to the property meets minimum fire
district requirements to provide emergency services to the property;
b. A safe evacuation plan; and
c. Written authorization from the owner of the staged evacuation area that the
occupants of the rural accessory dwelling unit may evacuate to the staged
evacuation area.
12. The lot or parcel and accessory dwelling unit comply with rules of the State Board of
Forestry under ORS 477.015, 477.025 and 477.027.
a. If the accessory dwellin-g_unit is not suject to ORS 477.015, 477.025 and 477.027,
the accessoEydwellinjunit has defensiblespace and fuel breakstandards as
developed in consultation with local fire protection service providers.
13. Statewide wildfire risk nips described in ORS 477.490, have been approved. Pursuant
to the Statewide wildfire risk maps, the followingreguirements shall apply:
a. For extreme and high wildfire risk classes in the wildland-urban interface that are
widentifiedpursuant to ORS 477.490, the wildfire hazard mitation building code
standards as described in section R327 of the 2021 Oregon Residential Specialty_
Code;
b. For extreme and huh wildfire risk classes in the wildland-urban interface that are
identified pursuant to ORS 477.490 the minimum defensible space rules established
by the State Fire Marshal as described in ORS 476.392.
c. If the accessor dwellin unit is not subject to ORS 477.015 477.025 and 477.027L
the accessory dwelling unit has defensible space and fuel break standards as
developed in consultation with local fire protection service providers.
14. The existing single-family dwelling property on the lot or parcel is not subject to an
order declaring it a nuisance or subject to any pending action under ORS 105.550 to
105.600.
15. A lot or parcel with an accessory dwelling unit approved under this section is not
authorized for:
a. A subdivision, partition, or other division of the lot or parcel so that the existing
single-family dwelling is situated on a different lot or parcel than the accessory
dwelling unit.
b. Construction of a second accessory dwelling unit or a medical hardship dwelling in
conjunction with the existing accessory dwelling unit.
16. If the accessory dwelling unit is served by a well, the construction of the accessory
dwelling unit shall maintain all setbacks from the well required by the Water Resources
Commission or Water Resources Department.
17. An existing single-family dwelling and an accessory dwelling unit allowed under this
section are considered a single unit for the purposes of calculating ground water right
exemptions under ORS 537.545(1).
18. The applicant shall sign and record with the County Clerk, prior to the issuance of a
building permit, a restrictive covenant stating an accessory dwelling unit allowed under
this section cannot be used for vacation occupancy, as defined in DCC 18.116.370(A)(8)
and consistent with ORS 90.100.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2022-OOx §x on [datel
CHAPTER 19.12 URBANAREA RESERVE ZONEUAR-10
19.12.020 Permitted Uses
***
19.12.020Permitted Uses
The following usesare permitted:
A. Farm uses as defined in D[CTitle 19.
^
`
B. Single-family dwelling.
C. Hume occupation subject to D[[19.QQ.14O. `
D. Other accessory uses and accessory buildings and structures customarily appurtenant to a
permitted use subject toD[C19.9Z.020. .
E. Day care center facilities subject to site review, DCC 19.76 and DCC 19.88.160.
F. Farm stands subject toDCC19.76and DCCl9.88]90. `
`
G. Historic Accessory Dwelling Units, subject to DCC
19.92.150.
`
H. Residential Accessory Dwelling Units, subject toDCCI9.9Z.lbD
HISTORY
Adopted byOrd. pL_22on7/11/1979
Amended by Ord. §4 on 22119/2988
Repealed & Reenacted byOrd. 90-038 §12un201311990
Amended byOrd. 91'002§2on2/28/1991
Amended byOrd. J0O8'024§3on3<32/20DD
Repealed & Reenacted byOrd. 2009-002§1,Jon2111/200y
Amended byOrd. J019-009§4on9/3/2019
Recorded byOrd. J029'009§4on9/312029
Amended byOrd. 2U22-00x§xnn[dote/
CHAPTER 19.20 SUBURBAN LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE; SR 2 1/2
19.20.020 Permitted Uses
19.20.020 Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted:
A. Single-family dwelling.
B. Agriculture, excluding the keeping of livestock.
C. Home occupations subject to DCC 19.88.140.
D. Other accessory uses and accessory buildings and structures customarily appurtenant to a
permitted use subject to DCC 19.92.020.
E. Historic Accessory Dwelling Units, subject to DCC 19.92.150.
F_Child care facility and/or preschool_
G. Residential Accessory Dwelling Units, subject to DCC 19.92.160.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. PL-11 on 7/11/1979
Amended by Ord. 88-042 §6 on 12/19/1988
Repealed & Reenacted by Ord. 90-038 §1,2 on 10/3/1990
Amended by Ord. 91-001 §4 on 1/28/1991
Amended by Ord. 93-018 §3 on 5/19/1993
Repealed & Reenacted by Ord. 2009-002 §1,2 on 2/11/2009
Amended by Ord. 2019-009 §5 on 9/3/2019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §5 on 9/3/2019
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §20 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2020-010 §9 on 7/3/2020
Amended by Ord. 2022-00x §x on [datel
CHAPTER 19.92 INTERPRETATIONS AND EXCEPTIONS
19.92.150 Accessory Dwelling Units In UAR-10 And SR-2 1/2 Zones
19.92.160 Residential Accessory Dwelling Units in UAR-10 and SR-21/2 Zones
19.92.150 Historic Accessory Dwelling Units In UAR-10 And SR-2 1/2 Zones
A. As used in this section:
1. "Historic Accessory dwelling unit" means a residential structure that is used in
connection with or that is auxiliary to a historic home. For the purposes of DCC Title 19,
the term "auxiliary" shall be synonymous with the terms "incidental and subordinate
to."
2. "Area zoned for rural residential use" means land that is not located inside an urban
growth boundary as defined in ORS 195.060 and that is subject to an acknowledged
exception to a statewide land use planning goal relating to farmland or forestland and
planned and zoned by the county to allow residential use as a primary use.
3. "Historic home" means a single-family dwelling constructed between 1850 and 1945.
4. "New" means that the dwelling being constructed did not previously exist in residential
or nonresidential form. "New" does not include the acquisition, alteration, renovation
or remodeling of an existing structure.
5 "Single-family dwelling" means a residential structure designed as a residence for one
family and sharing no common wall with another residence of any type.
B. An owner of a lot or parcel within an area zoned for rural residential use (UAR-10 and SR-2 1/2
zones) may construct a new single-family dwelling on the lot or parcel, provided:
1. The lot or parcel is not located in an area designated as an urban reserve as defined in
ORS 195.137;
2. The lot or parcel is at least two acres in size;
3. A historic home is sited on the lot or parcel;
4. The owner converts the historic home to an accessory dwelling unit upon completion of
the new single-family dwelling; and
5. The accessory dwelling unit may be required to comply with all applicable laws and
regulations relating to sanitation and wastewater disposal and treatment.
C. The construction of an accessory dwelling under subsection (B) of this section is a land use
action subject to DCC 22.20.
D. An owner that constructs a new single-family dwelling under subsection (B) of this section may
not:
1. Subdivide, partition or otherwise divide the lot or parcel so that the new single-family
dwelling is situated on a different lot or parcel from the accessory dwelling unit.
2. Alter, renovate or remodel the accessory dwelling unit so that the square footage of the
accessory dwelling unit is more than 120 percent of the historic home's square footage
at the time construction of the new single-family dwelling commenced.
3. Rebuild the accessory dwelling unit if the structure is deemed a dangerous building due
to fire or other natural disaster, pursuant to the Uniform Code for the Abatement of
Dangerous Buildings, which defines "dangerous building" as "Whenever any portion
thereof has been damaged by fire, earthquake, wind, flood or by any other cause, to
such an extent that the structural strength or stability thereof is materially less than it
was before such catastrophe and is less than the minimum requirements of the Building
Code for new buildings of similar structure, purpose or location."
4. Construct an additional accessory dwelling unit on the same lot or parcel.
E. A new single-family dwelling constructed under this section may be required to be served by the
same water supply source as the accessory dwelling unit.
F. Owner occupancy of either the accessory dwelling unit or the new single-family dwelling is not
required. However, the new single-family dwelling and the accessory dwelling unit may not be
used simultaneously for short-term rentals of thirty (30) consecutive days or less.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2019-009 §6 on 9/3/2019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §6 on 9/3/2019
Amended by Ord. 2022-00x §x on [date!
19.92.160 Residential Accessory Dwelling Units in UAR-10 and SR-2 'A Zones
A. As used in this section:
1. "Accessory dwelling unit" means a residential structure that is used in connection with
or that is auxiliary to an existing single-family dwelling or manufactured home. For the
purposes of DCC Title 19, the term "auxiliary" shall be synonymous with the terms
"incidental and subordinate to."
2. "Right-of-way" means either a public road maintained by the county, a private road with
a public access easement, a public road maintained by a road district, or an
unmaintained road.
3. "Rural residential use" means a lot or parcel located in the UAR-10 and SR-2 %z zones,
consistent with the definition in ORS 215.501.
4. "Safe evacuation plan" means an identifiable route on a riight s)-of-way from the rural
accessory dwelling unit to the staged evacuation area.
5. "Single-family dwelling" or "manufactured home" means a residential structure
designed as a residence for one family and sharing no common wall with another
residence of any type.
6. "Staged evacuation area" means a public or private location that occupants of the rural
accessory dwelling unit may evacuate to reorganize.
7. "Useable floor area" means the area of the accessory dwelling unit included within the
surrounding exterior walls, includin _garages and other accessory components.
8. "Vacation occupancy" means occupancy in a dwelling unit, not including transient
occupancy in a hotel or motel, that has all of the following characteristics:
a. The occupant rents the unit for vacation purposes only, not as a principal residence;
b. The occupant has a principal residence other than at the unit; and
c. The period of authorized occupancy does not exceed 45 days.
B. One accessory dwelling unit is permitted outright on a lot or parcel zoned for UAR-10 and SR-
2 %2, provided:
1. One single-family dwelling is sited on the lot or parcel;
2. The lot area or parcel area is at least two acres in size.
3. The accessory dwelling unit will have a minimum setback of 100 feet between the
accessory dwelling unit and adjacent land zoned F-1, F-2, or EFU and meet the other
minimum setback requirements of the underlying zone and combining zones.
4. The accessory dwelling unit will not include more than 900 square feet of useable floor
area.
5 The accessory dwelling unit will be located no farther than 100 feet from the existing
single family dwelling, measured from a wall of the single-family dwelling to the nearest
part of the useable floor area of the accessory dwelling unit.
6. The accessory dwelling unit receives approval from a sewer authority or Deschutes
County Environmental Soils for onsite wastewater disposal and treatment.
7. The lot or parcel is served by aiire protection service provider with professionals who
have received training or certification described in ORS 181A.410.
8. Adequate access for firefighting equipment, safe evacuation and staged evacuation
areas are met by providing:
a. Written certification from a fire protection service provider with professionals who
have received training or certification described in ORS 181A.410, on a form
prepared by Deschutes County, that access to the property meets minimum fire
district requirements to provide emergency services to the property;
b. A safe evacuation plan; and
c. Written authorization from the owner of the staged evacuation area that the
occupants of the rural accessory dwelling unit may evacuate to the staged
evacuation area.
9. The lot or parcel and accessory dwelling unit comply with rules of the State Board of
Forestry under ORS 477.015, 477.025 and 477.027.
a. If the accessory dwellipg unit is not subject to ORS 477.015, 477.025 and 477.027,
the accessory dwelling unit has defensible space and fuel break standards as
developed in consultation with local fire protection service providers.
10. Statewide wildfire risk maps,_ described in ORS 477.490, have been approved. Pursuant
to the Statewide wildfire risk maps, the following requirements shall apply:
a. For extreme and high wildfire risk classes in the wildland-urban interface that are
identified pursuant to ORS 477.490, the wildfire hazard mitigation buildinjcode
standards as described in section R327 of the 2021 Oregon Residential Specialty
Code,
b For extreme and high wildfire risk classes in the wildland-urban interface that are
identified_ pursuant to ORS 477.490, the minimum defensible space rules established
by the State Fire Marshal as described in ORS 476.392.
c. If the accessory dwelling unit is not subject to ORS 477.015, 4//.025 and 477.027,
the accessory dwelling unit has defensible space and fuel break standards as
developed in consultation with local fire protection service providers
11. The existing single-family dwelling property on the lot or parcel is not subject to an
order declaring it a nuisance or subject to any pending action under ORS 105.550 to
105.600.
12. A lot or parcel with an accessory dwelling unit approved under this section is not
authorized for:
a. A subdivision, partition, or other division of the lot or parcel so that the existing
single-family dwelling is situated on a different lot or parcel than the accessory
dwelling unit.
b. Construction of a second accessory dwelling unit or a medical hardship dwelling in
conjunction with the existing accessory dwelling unit.
13. If the accessory dwelling unit is served by a well, the construction of the accessory
dwelling unit shall maintain all setbacks from the well required by the Water Resources
Commission or Water Resources Department.
14. An existing single-family dwelling and an accessory dwelling unit allowed under this
section are considered a single unit for the purposes of calculatin: ground water right
exemptions under ORS 537.545(1).
15. The applicant shall sign and record with the County Clerk, prior to the issuance of a
building permit, a restrictive covenant stating an accessory dwelling unit allowed under
this section cannot be used for vacation occupancy, as defined in DCC 19.92.160(A)(8)
and consistent with ORS 90.100.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2022-OOx §x on [date]
CHAPTER 22.04 INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITIONS
22.04.040 Verifying Lots of Record
22.04.040 Verifying Lots of Record
A. Purpose; scope. Concurrent with or prior to the issuance of certain permits, a lot or parcel shall
be verified pursuant to this section to reasonably ensure compliance with the zoning and land
division laws in effect on the date the lot or parcel was created. Not all permits require
verification. If required, verifying that the lot or parcel was lawfully created is a threshold issue
that should be addressed before the permit may be issued, but does not supersede or nullify
other permit requirements. This section 22.04.040 provides an applicant the option to
concurrently verify a lot or parcel as part of applying for a permit that requires verification, or
preliminarily apply for a declaratory ruling to thereby determine the scope of available permits.
B. Permits Requiring Verification.
1. Unless an exception applies pursuant to subsection (B)(2) below, verifying a lot or parcel
pursuant to subsection (C) shall be required prior to the issuance of the following
permits:
a. Any land use permit for a unit of land in the Exclusive Farm Use Zones (DCC
Chapter 18.16), Forest Use Zone - F1 (DCC Chapter 18.36), or Forest Use Zone —
F2 (DCC Chapter 18.40);
b. Any permit for a lot or parcel that includes wetlands as shown on the Statewide
Wetlands Inventory;
c Any permit for a lot or parcel subject to wildlife habitat special assessment;
d. In all zones, a land use permit relocating property lines that reduces in size a lot
or parcel;
e_In all zones, a land use, structural, or non -emergency on -site sewage disposal
system permit if the lot or parcel is smaller than the minimum area required in
the applicable zone;
f. In all zones, a permit for a Historic Accessory Dwelling Unit as defined in DCC
18.116.350 or DCC 19.92.150
e:g. In all zones, a permit for a Residential Accessory Dwelling Unit as defined in DCC
18.116.370 or DCC 19.92.160.
C. Verified Lots of Record. Permits that require verification shall only be issued to lots or parcels
that meet the "lot of record" definition in 18.04.030.
D. Findings; Declaratory Ruling. If an applicant is applying for a land use permit listed in subsection
(B)(1), the County shall include a finding verifying that the lot or parcel meets the "lot of record"
definition in 18.04.030, a finding noting that the lot or parcel does not meet the "lot of record"
definition in 18.04.030, or a finding noting that verification was not required because the lot or
parcel qualified for an exception pursuant to subsection (B)(2). If an applicant is applying for a
permit listed in subsection (B)(1) that does not require public notice, or prior to applying for any
permit, an applicant may request a declaratory ruling pursuant to DCC Chapter 22.40. If the lot
or parcel meets the "lot of record" definition in 18.04.030, the County shall issue the declaratory
ruling determining that the lot or parcel qualifies for all permits listed in subsection (B)(1). If the
lot or parcel does not meet the "lot of record" definition in 18.04.030, the County shall not issue
the declaratory ruling and instead shall provide the applicant information on permit options that
do not require verification and information on verification exceptions that may apply pursuant
to subsections (B)(2).
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2017-015 §3 on 11/1/1979
Amended by Ord. 2022-00x §x onJdatJ
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 14, 2022
SUBJECT: Preparation for Public Hearing - Psilocybin TPM Amendments
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Staff will present proposed text amendments to the Board in preparation for a public
hearing on November 21 st regarding time, place, and manner text amendments for rules
related to the licensing and use of psilocybin.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
None
ATTENDANCE:
Tanya Saltzman, Senior Planner
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
FROM: Tanya Saltzman, AICP, Senior Planner
DATE: November 9, 2022
SUBJECT: Preparation for Public Hearing - Psilocybin TPM Amendments
Staff will present proposed text amendments to the Board of County Commissioners (Board) on
November 14, 2022, in preparation for a November 21 public hearing concerning time, place, and manner
(TPM) text amendments for psilocybin.
Staff submitted a 35-day Post -Acknowledgement Plan Amendment (PAPA) notice to the Department of
Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) on August 25, 2022. Staff presented the proposed
amendments to the Planning Commission at a work session on September 8, 2022.1 The initial public
hearing was held on September 29, 2022,2 at which time the Planning Commission voted to continue the
hearing to October 13 in order to receive additional oral and written testimony. s At the conclusion of the
October 13 public hearing continuation, the oral record was closed and the written record was left open
until October 14, 2022. The Planning Commission conducted deliberations on October 27, 20224; the
recommendations of the Planning Commission are outlined later in this memorandum and reflected in
the proposed text amendments.
The draft text amendments as well as draft findings are provided as attachments to this memorandum.
The record, which contains all memoranda, notices, and written testimony received, is available at the
following website: https://www.deschutes.org/cd/page/247-22-000676-ta-psilocybin-time-place-and-
manner-tpm-text-amendments.
I. BACKGROUND
On June 1, 2022, staff provided the Board with an overview of Measure 109, which legalized psilocybin in
Oregon subject to the criteria noted in the measure and subsequent rulemaking.5 The memorandum
introduced the origin of the measure, the types of licenses that will be available, the role of the Oregon
1 https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-16
2 https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-19
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-20
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-21
5 https://www.deschutes.org/bcc/page/board-commissioners-meeting
Health Authority (OHA) and its committees, and the rulemaking process. During the discussion, staff
noted the compressed timeline: OHA is currently in the process of rulemaking, which may not be
complete until December 2022, yet OHA is due to begin accepting applications for licenses on January 2,
2023. As noted, OHA licenses will require a Land Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) to be issued by the
County.
Measure 109 automatically opts cities and counties into the psilocybin program. However, Measure 109
offers the option for cities and counties to opt out of the program via a ballot measure in the next general
election —in this case, November 8, 2022. On July 13, 2022, the Board conducted an afternoon and
evening hearing to consider Ordinance No. 2022-009, Referring a Measure to the Electors to Prohibit
Product Manufacturers and Psilocybin Service Center Operators within Unincorporated Deschutes
County.' The Board deliberated on the matter on July 20 and adopted a first reading of Ordinance No.
2022-009. Second reading occurred on August 8. The ordinance was subject to Deschutes County voters
for the November 8, 2022 General Election, at which time the electors voted to overturn the opt out.'
Measure 109—and the corresponding Oregon Revised Statute 475A.530—allows cities and counties to
adopt "reasonable regulations" for time, place, and manner (TPM) concerning psilocybin businesses.
During deliberation of Ordinance No. 2022-009 the Board expressed interest in developing TPM
amendments in the event voters reject prohibiting psilocybin manufacturing and psilocybin service
centers in the unincorporated county. Amendments could be adopted by the end of the calendar year,
prior to OHA accepting applications for iicensure on January 2, 2023. On July 27, the Board directed staff
to begin the TPM process.'
Staff continues to monitor the rulemaking process as it continues this winter and has been coordinating
with Association of Oregon Counties (AOC) on any pertinent developments to the program. Staff is also
coordinating with other counties, including Wasco and Jackson, which are undertaking TPM amendments
on a similar schedule, while recognizing that ultimately each county will have its own set of opportunities
and constraints.
II. PROPOSAL
This is a legislative text amendment to Deschutes County Code (DCC), Title 18, County Zoning. The
primary purpose of the amendments is to create time, place, and manner regulations concerning
psilocybin manufacturing, service centers, and testing laboratories. A brief summary of the amendments
are as follows, with further description following:
• DCC 18.04.030: Adds new definitions for terms relating to psilocybin.
• DCC 18.65 Rural Service Center, 18.66 Terrebonne Rural Community, 18.67 Tumalo Rural
Community, 18.74 Rural Commercial, 18.108 Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community: Adds
psilocybin service centers as a conditional use with site plan review
6 https://www.deschutes.org/bcc/page/board-county-commissioners-meeting-63
Unofficial results as of Wednesday, November 9 were 56.31% in favor of overturning the opt out versus 43.69% in favor of opting
out.
8 https://www.deschutes.org/bcc/page/board-county-commissioners-meeting-65
-2-
• DCC 18.67 Tumalo Rural Community, 18.100 Rural Industrial: Adds psilocybin testing laboratories
as a conditional use with site plan review
• DCC 18.113.030 Destination Resorts: Adds psilocybin service centers to allowable uses in
destination resorts
• DCC 18.116.380: Adds a new chapter creating time, place, and manner criteria for psilocybin
manufacture as farm use; psilocybin manufacture as a processing use; psilocybin service centers.
III. PLANNING COMMISSION PROCESS
As noted above, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 29 and October 13 and
deliberated on October 27.
A. Public Testimony
A total of 32 individuals provided written testimony concerning the proposed amendments, spanning the
timeframe between initial 35-day DLCD notice on August 25 to the conclusion of the open record period
on October 14, 2022. Approximately one dozen individuals testified at the September 29 public hearing,
and a dozen more testified on October 13. The majority of in -person testimony focused on similar themes
as the written testimony, with the majority supporting psilocybin services and wanting to expand options.
Oral and written testimony topics were generally grouped as follows:
Twenty individuals in written testimony were in favor of psilocybin as a treatment option for conditions
such as PTSD (particularly for veterans), trauma and addiction.
• General support of psilocybin as a treatment option.
• Many comments stated the proposed regulations are too restrictive. Specifically:
o Service centers should be allowed to have overnight/multi-day stays owing to the nature
of psilocybin treatment, which ideally involves an initial intake/consultation, a facilitated
experience, and then follow-up integration.
o Service centers should be placed in rural, nature -based settings owing to the sensitivity of
clients either from the issues they are seeking to address (i.e. PTSD) and the heightened
sensitivity to surroundings/sensations during the treatment itself. The proposed locations
of commercial and retail/service zones therefore were not appropriate.
o Increased access to psilocybin services in general is important, for reasons both financial
and societal/cultural (for instance, some veterans prefer maximum privacy)
o Proposed hours of service centers are too limited and should match OHA guidelines
o The County should consider allowing service centers in destination resorts
o The County should consider allowing psilocybin manufacturing in forest zones in addition
to Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) zones.
-3-
Eight individuals in written testimony were against psilocybin in the rural county:
• Several comments directed the Planning Commission to vote yes to Measure 9-152 (prohibiting
psilocybin manufacturing and service centers). It was apparent that many citizens conflated this
hearing —which is considering potential zoning if the opt out is overturned —with the opt -out
ballot measure in November. During the hearing, staff attempted to clarify this distinction and
noted that the voters of the county, not the Planning Commission, will determine if the county
opts out of psilocybin altogether.
• Concerns about rural compatibility, orderly growth, safety, and water usage, and a subsequent
desire to put psilocybin businesses in cities first.
Additional items from the open record period include:
• Questions and answers regarding the psilocybin program and rulemaking between the Oregon
Health Authority (OHA) and the Association of Oregon Counties Planning Directors group
(AOCPD).
• Correspondence between Planning Commissioner Altman and Senior Planner Tanya Saltzman
concerning more detailed maps of the areas around service center zones as well as discussion
regarding options for overnight stays.
• Central Oregon LandWatch (COLW) testified that the proposed amendments should be subject to
Goal 5.
In addition to comments from the general public, staff received two written comments from DLCD; both
were responses to requests from staff concerning DLCD's interpretation of a component of ORS
475A.570, which addresses psilocybin service centers in relation to farmland.
B. Agency Testimony
DLCD provided written testimony concerning its interpretation along with that of the Department of
justice, of ORS 475A.570(3), which states "(3) The operation of a psilocybin service center may be carried
on in conjunction with a psilocybin-producing fungi crop." In addition to the agency's written comments,
Hilary Foote, Farm/Forest Specialist from DLCD, provided verbal testimony that further explained the
legal mechanisms behind designated uses on EFU land.
Ultimately, DLCD's interpretation of the statute is that psilocybin service centers would not be permitted
as a stand-alone use on EFU land. However, it is possible that a service center could be permitted as a
part of another use that is allowed in EFU—namely, a home occupation or a commercial activity in
conjunction with farm use. These avenues are not without their own criteria and restrictions, and DLCD
noted in its follow-up written testimony that Deschutes County's current code is more restrictive than
state law concerning commercial activity in conjunction with farm use (DCC 18.16.040(B) requires that
the commercial activity be related to an on -property farm use).
-4-
C. Planning Commission Deliberations and Recommendations
Based on the testimony received, the Planning Commission deliberated and formulated several
recommendations. In general, the Planning Commission supported providing more/broader options for
psilocybin businesses where possible, while recognizing that there are regulatory limitations associated
with the Oregon land use system and the rulemaking process, which is not yet finalized. To that end,
Planning Commission recommendations are as follows, with staff notes where applicable:
• Allow psilocybin manufacturing as farm use and manufacturing as processing use to occur
on Forest zoned properties (F1, F2).
Some testimony requested that areas permitting psilocybin manufacturing be expanded to forest
uses, citing ORS 475A.571(1), which declares psilocybin-producing fungi as a crop for the purposes of
"farm" use and "farming practice." ORS 475A.570(4) states "A county may allow the manufacture of
psilocybin products as a farm use on land zoned for farm or forest use in the same manner as the
manufacture of psilocybin products is allowed in exclusive farm use zones under this section and ORS
215.213, 215.283 and 475C.053." The original amendments only allowed manufacturing in EFU zones;
the code provided today reflects the Planning Commission's recommendation.
• Amend the operating hours relating to psilocybin service centers to align with Oregon
Health Authority (OHA) proposed rules, 6:00 a.m. to 11:59 p.m., with allowances beyond this
for extenuating circumstances based on the determination of the facilitator.
The original amendments allowed service center hours as 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. This was intended to
be a placeholder until further information was received via testimony. A significant amount of
testimony requested that service center hours match those of Oregon Health Authority's: 6:00 a.m.
to 11:59 p.m., with allowances beyond this for extenuating circumstances based on the determination
of the facilitator. This provision currently exists in OHA's proposed rules; staff will aim to match final
OHA language. The code provided today reflects the Planning Commission's recommendation.
• Amend Deschutes County's Destination Resort code to permit psilocybin service centers
in destination resorts.
The original amendments did not allow service centers in destination resorts. However, testimony
from representatives from Pronghorn Resort (now called Juniper Preserve) (C. Celko/Emerge Law
Group, 2022-10-13 and 2022-9-29 and several individuals providing verbal testimony) recommended
that service centers are in fact suitable for destination resorts as promoting wellness opportunities.
The testimony noted that siting service centers within destination resorts could potentially be an
easier fit with respect to state and local land use law, given its natural setting without potential
conflicts. The testimony cited DCC 18.113.010(B), which states the Destination Resort zone "will
ensure resort development that complements the natural and cultural attractiveness of the area
without significant adverse effect on commercial farming and forestry, environmental and natural
features, cultural and historic resources and their settings and other significant resources." The same
testimony also noted the existing overnight accommodations and other ancillary uses in destination
resorts.
-5-
Testimony against siting service centers in destination resorts (J. Guild, 2022-10-14) cited the
requirement in a destination resort of CCRs requiring HOA Board approval. Concerning compatibility,
Guild noted that "Pronghorn has a 3 mile Right of Way across Federal land and is surrounded by
Bureau of Land Management land where shooting and hunting is allowed." Other concerns cited
included compatibility, liability, and public safety.
The code provided today reflects the Planning Commission's recommendation to allow service
centers in destination resorts. Upon consultation with legal counsel, staff made changes to the
language proposed in the testimony to more accurately reflect the approval process with respect to
a resort's master plan. If adopted, it is unclear whether a destination resort could immediately apply
for a site plan review. Modifying the conceptual and/or final master plan may be required. This would
be a matter of first impression and would be sent directly to a Hearings Officer.
• Recognize that psilocybin service centers can be allowed as home occupations or
commercial activities in conjunction with farm use.
As noted above, DLCD provided written testimony that psilocybin service centers could not be a stand-
alone use in EFU zones but could potentially be allowed on EFU land through two paths: home
occupations and commercial activity in conjunction with farm use. Specifically:
• Commercial activities that are in conjunction with farm use are conditional uses subject to
DCC 18.16.040, Limitations On Conditional Uses, and 18.128.015; and
• Home Occupations are conditional uses subject to DCC 18.16.0030(M), Limitations On
Conditional Uses, and DCC 18.116.280, Home Occupations.
The Planning Commission recommended keeping these options available (as opposed to specifically
prohibiting them). No code changes are required to support this interpretation, as the uses
(commercial activity in conjunction with farm use and home occupation) already exist in DCC.
• The proposed amendments are not subject to a Goal 5 analysis.
Testimony received from Central Oregon LandWatch (R. Isbell, 2022-9-29) suggested that the
proposed amendments must demonstrate compliance with Goal 5. Given the proposed uses and
their locations, staff currently maintains that the proposed uses for psilocybin will not be subject to
Goal 5:
• Psilocybin manufacturing is considered a farm crop/farm/use/farming practice per ORS 475A.570
• The areas in which service centers are currently proposed (retail/commercial zones) are not
subject to the current WA combining zone
• Service centers on EFU may be allowed not as new conflicting, stand-alone uses but under existing
uses within EFU (home occupations/commercial activity in conjunction with farm use)
This does not require a change to any code language, but staff has updated the findings to reflect the
above statements more specifically.
-6-
• Allow overnight accommodations and ancillary uses (meditation, yoga, etc.) as accessory
uses to psilocybin service centers.
A significant amount of testimony —as well as Planning Commissioners' clarifying questions —focused
on the possibility of allowing psilocybin service centers to allow overnight/multi-day stays due to
reasons ranging from safety concerns to promoting a better, more complete therapeutic experience.
At the conclusion of deliberations, the Planning Commission recommended that overnight
accommodations and ancillary uses be permitted, while recognizing that the regulatory path to do so
is currently unclear.
Staff has shared the following remarks to psilocybin advocates, Planning Commission, and the Board
throughout the TPM process. OHA's proposed rules and the testimony submitted to date by
psilocybin advocates have not defined the operational characteristics of service centers, whether they
contain overnight accommodations or not. While we know that OHA's proposed rules allow up to 25
clients in one group psilocybin session at a service center, staff are unable to develop findings that
evaluate the cumulative impacts associated with that number of participants, not to mention
"ancillary services" (currently undefined) or overnight accommodations. Legislative amendments to
DCC require staff to analyze service centers to demonstrate compliance with the Comprehensive Plan,
Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs), and Oregon Revised Statutes
(ORS). Without more detailed information, staff are unable to evaluate their impacts on farm and
forest lands (Goals 3 and 4), wildlife (Goal 5), and county and state transportation facilities (Goal 12).
More specifically, staff are unable to:
o Perform a farm (or forest) impacts test to determine whether service centers disrupt
agricultural (or forest) activities.
o Determine if this new conflicting use should be permitted, limited, or prohibited in Deschutes
County's wildlife area, sensitive bird and mammal, and sage grouse combining zones based
on an Economic, Social, Environmental, and Energy (ESEE) analysis.
o Analyze whether county or state transportation facilities are affected by service centers as
required under the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR).
IV. AMENDMENT SUMMARY
Measure 109 and the subsequent ORS 475A statute provides no direction as to reasonable time, place,
and manner restrictions. The measure contains limited basic criteria pertaining to land use. For instance,
psilocybin service centers may not be located within 1,000 feet of elementary or secondary schools (500
feet if there is a physical or geographic barrier), and manufacturing facilities may not be located outdoors.
Service centers may not be located in single family dwellings.
Table 1 outlines the psilocybin uses in the proposed amendments, including Planning Commission
recommendations where applicable, as discussed above.
-7-
Table 1 — Summary of Proposed TPM Amendments
Use
Description
Notes
Psilocybin Manufacturing
as a Farm Use
Allowed in:
• EFU zone
• F-1 and F-2 zones
• Psilocybin-producing fungi is recognized by
Measure 109 as a farm use and is therefore
permitted outright in EFU zones.
• Psilocybin-producing fungi must be grown
indoors.
Psilocybin Manufacturing
as a Processing Use
Allowed in:
• EFU zone.9
• F-1 and F-2 zones
• Manufacturing may be carried on in
conjunction with a psilocybin producing fungi
crop according to Measure 109.
Service Centers
Allowed subject to a conditional use
permit and site plan review in:
Rural Commercial
•• Rural Service Centers
Sunriver Commercial District
• Sunriver Town Center District
•Psilocybin
• Terrebonne Commercial District
• Tumalo Commercial District
Allowed as a commercial service in
Destination Resort Overlay Zone
• Hours of operation will be limited to daily
treatments.
• No option for larger retreat -style, overnight
operations.
• Service centers may not be located within 1,000
feet of elementary or secondary schools (500
feet if there is a physical or geographic barrier).
• According to DLCD interpretation, service
centers could not be a stand-alone use on EFU
land but could be allowed on EFU land through
two paths: home occupations and commercial
activity in conjunction with farm use
Psilocybin Testing
Laboratories
Allowed subject to a conditional use
permit and site plan review in:
• Rural Industrial
• Tumalo Industrial
• OHA rulemaking concerning testing
requirements thus far appear in OAR 333-333-
7010 through 333 333 7150
IV. NEXT STEPS
The Board will conduct a public hearing on November 21, 2022, at 3:00 p.m. until 5:00 p.m., reconvening
at 6 p.m.
Given the need to adopt regulations by the end of the calendar year so that they will be in place when
OHA begins accepting license applications, the adoption timeline is somewhat compressed. Staff
recommends the following schedule with respect to keeping the record open. This will allow for one week
of an open record period and will allow staff to prepare a package for deliberation. Given that this
timeline anticipates the need for first reading to occur during the same session as deliberations, if
commissioners would like to pursue any additional issues or amendment directions not already
9 DCC 18.16.025 requires the facility uses less than 10,000 square feet for its processing area and complies with all applicable
siting standards. Exception: A facility which uses less than 2,500 square feet for its processing area is exempt from any
applicable siting standards.
-8-
addressed, he or she should notify staff to coordinate one on one meetings; this will allow staff to prepare
potential amendment versions that can be considered for first reading.
The timeline for the development and adoption of TPM amendments is as follows:
Table 2 - Psilocybin TPM Schedule
Task
Timeline
1.
Board Work Session
November 14
2.
Board Hearing
November 21
3.
Written Record left open until
November 28
4.
Deliberation packet due
November 30
5.
Board Deliberation and First Reading
December 7
6.
Consideration of Second Reading (if needed)
December 21
Attachments
1. Draft Text Amendments
2. Draft Findings
-9-
CHAPTER 18.04 TITLE, PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS
18.04.030 Definitions
***
"Psilocybin" means psilocybin or psilocin.
"Psilocybin manufacture as a farm use" means the manufacture, planting, cultivation, growing,
harvesting, production, preparation, propagation, any packaging or repackaging of psilocybin-producing
fungi or labeling or relabeling of its container, provided that the psilocybin manufacturer is licensed by
the Oregon Health Authority with a psilocybin manufacturing endorsement for fungi cultivation. It does
not include psilocybin manufacture as a processing use.
"Psilocybin manufacture as a processing use" means the compounding, conversion, or processing of a
psilocybin product, either directly or indirectly by extraction from substances of natural origin, or
independently by means of chemical synthesis, or by a combination of extraction and chemical
synthesis, provided that the psilocybin manufacturer is licensed by the Oregon Health Authority with a
psilocybin manufacturing endorsement for psilocybin extraction and/or edible psilocybin production.
"Psilocybin premises" includes the following areas of a location licensed under ORS 475A.210 to
475A.722:
A. All public and private enclosed areas at the location that are used in the business operated
at the location, including offices, kitchens, rest rooms and storerooms;
B. All areas outside a building that the Oregon Health Authority has specifically licensed for the
manufacturing of psilocybin products or the operation of a psilocybin service center; and
C. For a location that the authority has specifically licensed for the operation of a psilocybin
service center outside a building, that portion of the location used to operate the psilocybin
service center and provide psilocybin services to clients.
"Psilocybin premises" does not include a primary residence.
"Psilocybin-producing fungi" is:
A. A crop for the purposes of "farm use" as defined in ORS 215.203;
B. A crop for purposes of a "farm" and "farming practice," both as defined in ORS 30.930;
C. A product of farm use as described in ORS 308A.062; and
D. The product of an agricultural activity for purposes of ORS 568.909.
"Psilocybin products" means psilocybin-producingfun'i, mycelium and mixtures or substances
containing a detectable amount of psilocybin, including whole fungi, homogenized fungi, psilocybin
extract and edible psilocybin products. "Psilocybin products" does not include psilocybin services.
"Psilocybin service center" means an establishment licensed by the Oregon Health Authority:
A. At which administration sessions are held; and
B. At which other psilocybin services may be provided.
HISTORY
Adopted by 0
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
Amended by
rd. PL-15 on 11/1/1979
Ord. 82-013 §1 on 5/25/1982
Ord. 83-037 §2 on 6/1/1983
Ord. 83-033 §1 on 6/15/1983
Ord. 84-023 §1 on 8/1/1984
Ord. 85-002 §2 on 2/13/1985
Ord. 86-032 §1 on 4/2/1986
Ord. 86-018 §1 on 6/30/1986
Ord. 86-054 §1 on 6/30/1986
Ord. 86-056 §2 on 6/30/1986
Ord. 87-015 §1 on 6/10/1987
Ord. 88-009 §1 on 3/30/1988
Ord. 88-030 §3 on 8/17/1988
Ord. 88-030 §4 on 8/17/1988
Ord. 89-004 §1 on 3/24/1989
Ord. 89-009 §2 on 11/29/1989
Ord. 90-014 §2 on 7/12/1990
Ord. 91-002 §11 on 2/6/1991
Ord. 91-005 §1 on 3/4/1991
Ord. 92-025 §1 on 4/15/1991
Ord. 91-020 §1 on 5/29/1991
Ord. 91-038 §§3 and 4 on 9/30/1991
Ord. 92-004 §§1 and 2 on 2/7/1992
Ord. 92-034 §1 on 4/8/1992
Ord. 92-065 §§1 and 2 on 11/25/1992
Ord. 92-066 §1 on 11/25/1992
Ord. 93-002 §§1, 2 and 3 on 2/3/1993
Ord. 93-005 §§1 and 2 on 4/21/1993
Ord. 93-038 §1 on 7/28/1993
Ord. 93-043 §§1, 1A and 18 on 8/25/1993
Ord. 94-001 §§1, 2, and 3 on 3/16/1994
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord.
Amended by Ord
Amended by Ord
Amended by Ord
Amended by Ord
Amended by Ord
Amended by Ord
Repealed by Ord.
Amended by Ord
Amended by Ord
Amended by Ord
Amended by Ord
94-008 §§1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 on 6/8/1994
94-041 §§2 and 3 on 9/14/1994
94-038 §3 on 10/5/1994
94-053 §1 on 12/7/1994
95-007 §1 on 3/1/1995
95-001 §1 on 3/29/1995
95-075 §1 on 11/29/1995
95-077 §2 on 12/20/1995
96-003 §2 on 3/27/1996
96-082 §1 on 11/13/1996
97-017 §1 on 3/12/1997
97-003 §1 on 6/4/1997
97-078 §5 on 12/31/1997
2001-037 §1 on 9/26/2001
2001-044 §2 on 10/10/2001
2001-033 §2 on 10/10/2001
2001-048 §1 on 12/10/2001
2003-028 §1 on 9/24/2003
2004-001 §1 on 7/14/2004
2004-024 §1 on 12/20/2004
2005-041 §1 on 8/24/2005
2006-008 §1 on 8/29/2006
2007-019 §1 on 9/28/2007
2007-020 §1 on 2/6/2008
2007-005 §1 on 2/28/2008
2008-015 §1 on 6/30/2008
2008-007 §1 on 8/18/2008
2010-018 §3 on 6/28/2010
2010-022 §1 on 7/19/2010
2011-009 §1 on 10/17/2011
2012-004 §1 on 4/16/2012
2012-007 §1 on 5/2/2012
2013-008 §1 on 7/5/2013
. 2014-009 §1 on 8/6/2014
. 2015-004 §1 on 4/22/2015
. 2016-015 §1 on 7/1/2016
. 2016-026 §1 on 11/9/2016
. 2016-006 §1 on 2/27/2017
. 2017-015 §1 on 11/1/2017
2018-005 §8 on 10/10/2018
. 2018-006 §4 on 11/20/2018
. 2019-010 §1 on 5/8/2019
. 2019-016 §1 on 2/24/2020
. 2020-001 §1 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2020-010 §1 on 7/3/2020
Amended by Ord. 2020-007 §7 on 10/27/2020
Amended by Ord. 2021-013 §3 on 4/5/2022
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
CHAPTER 18.65 RURAL SERVICE CENTER; UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY ZONE
18.65.020 RSC; Commercial/Mixed Use District (Brothers, Hampton, Millican, Whistlestop And Wildhunt)
18.65.021 Alfalfa RSC; Commercial/Mixed Use District
18.65.020 RSC; Commercial/Mixed Use District (Brothers, Hampton, Millican, Whistlestop And
Wildhunt)
A. Uses Permitted Outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright,
subject to applicable provisions of this chapter:
1. Single-family dwelling.
2. Manufactured home, subject to DCC 18.116.070.
3. Type 1 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
4. Residential home and residential facility.
5. Two-family dwelling or duplex.
6. Agricultural uses, as defined in Title 18, and excluding livestock feed lot or sales yard,
and hog or mink farms.
7. Class I and II road or street project subject to approval as part of a land partition,
subdivision or subject to the standards and criteria established by DCC 18.116.230.
8. Class III road and street project.
9. Operation, maintenance, and piping of existing irrigation systems operated by an
Irrigation District except as provided in DCC 18.120.050.
B. Uses Permitted Subject to Site Plan Review. The following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted, subject to applicable provisions of this chapter, DCC 18.116, Supplementary
Provisions, and DCC 18.124, Site Plan Review, of this title:
1. Retail store, business office and/or commercial establishment in a building or buildings
each not exceeding 4,000 square feet of floor space. The aggregate area for any one
type of use that takes place in multiple buildings may not exceed 4,000 square feet.
2. Residential use in conjunction with a permitted commercial use.
3. Park or playground.
4. Community building.
5. Public or semipublic building or use.
6. Highway maintenance facility.
7. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items or
products at the same location.
8. Religious institutions or assemblies.
C. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted subject
to applicable provisions of this chapter, DCC 18.116, Supplementary Provisions, DCC 18.124, Site
Plan Review, and DCC 18.128, Conditional Use, of this title:
1. Multi -family dwelling with three or more units.
2. School.
3. Cemetery.
4. Type 2 or Type 3 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
5. Medical clinic or veterinary clinic.
6. Community Center.
7. Manufactured home park.
8. Recreational vehicle or trailer park.
9. Wireless telecommunications facilities, except those facilities meeting the requirements
of DCC 18.116.250(A).
10. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
11. Psilocybin service centers, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.380.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2002-002 §2 on 6/5/2002
Amended by Ord. 2002-028 §1 on 7/24/2002
Amended by Ord. 2004-002 §11 on 4/28/2004
Amended by Ord. 2015-004 §2 on 4/22/2015
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §4 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2018-006 §8 on 11/20/2018
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §6 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
18.65.021 Alfalfa RSC; Commercial/Mixed Use District
In Alfalfa, the following uses and their accessory uses are permitted:
A. Uses Permitted Outright.
1. Single-family dwelling.
2. Manufactured home, subject to DCC 18.116.070
3. Type 1 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
4. Residential home and residential facility.
5. Two-family dwelling or duplex.
6. Agricultural uses, as defined in Title 18, and excluding livestock feed lot or sales yard,
and hog or mink farms.
7. Class I and II road or street project subject to approval as part of a land partition,
subdivision or subject to the standards and criteria established by DCC 18.116.230.
8. Class III road and street project.
9. Operation, maintenance, and piping of existing irrigation systems operated by an
Irrigation District except as provided in DCC 18.120.050.
B. Uses Permitted Subject to Site Plan Review. The following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted, subject to applicable provisions of this chapter, DCC 18.116, Supplementary
Provisions and DCC 18.124, Site Plan Review, of this title:
1. Retail store, business office and/or commercial establishment in a building or buildings
each not exceeding 4,000 square feet of floor space. The aggregate area for any one
type of use that takes place in multiple buildings may not exceed 4,000 square feet.
2. Residential use in conjunction with a permitted commercial use.
3. Park or playground.
4. Community building.
5. Public or semipublic building or use.
6. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items or
products at the same location.
7. Religious institutions or assemblies.
C. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted subject
to applicable provisions of this chapter, DCC 18.116, Supplementary Provisions, DCC 18.124, Site
Plan Review, and DCC 18.128, Conditional Use, of this title:
1. School.
2. Cemetery.
3. Type 2 or Type 3 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
4. Medical clinic or veterinary clinic.
5. Community Center.
6. Recreational vehicle or trailer park.
7. Wireless telecommunications facilities, except those facilities meeting the requirements
of DCC 18.116.250(A).
8. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
9. Psilocvbin service centers, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.380.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2002-002 §2 on 6/5/2002
Amended by Ord. 2018-006 §8 on 11/20/2018
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §6 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
CHAPTER 18.66 TERREBONNE RURAL COMMUNITY ZONING DISTRICTS
18.66.040 Commercial (TeC) District
18.66.040 Commercial (TeC) District
The Terrebonne Commercial District is intended to allow a range of commercial and limited industrial
uses to serve the community and surrounding rural area.
A. Permitted Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright and do not
require site plan review:
1. Single-family dwelling or two-family on a lot or parcel existing on June 4, 1997.
2. Manufactured home on a lot or parcel existing on June 4, 1997, subject to DCC
18.116.070.
3. Type 1 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
4. Class I and II road or street project subject to approval as part of a land partition,
subdivision or subject to the standards of DCC 18.66.070 and 18.116.230.
5. Class III road or street project.
6. Operation, maintenance, and piping of existing irrigation systems operated by an
Irrigation District except as provided in DCC 18.120.050.
B. Uses Permitted Subject to Site Plan Review. The following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted subject to the applicable provisions of DCC 18.66, 18.116 and 18.1248:
1. A building or buildings not exceeding 4,000 square feet of floor space to be used by any
combination of the following uses:
a. Retail or service business.
b. Eating or drinking establishment.
c. Offices.
d. Veterinary clinic and kennel entirely within an enclosed building.
e. Residential use in the same building as a use permitted by DCC 18.66.040(B)(1).
f. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items
or products at the same location.
2. Any of the uses allowed under DCC 18.66.04.0 proposing to occupy more than 4,000
square feet of floor area in a building or buildings, subject to provisions of DCC
18.66.040(E).
3. Child care facility and/or preschool.
C. Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted subject to the
applicable provisions of DCC 18.66, 18.116, 18.124 and 18.128:
1. Motel, with a maximum of 35 units, only if served by a community sewer system as
defined in OAR 660-22-010(2).
2. Recreational vehicle park.
3. Religious institutions or assemblies.
4. Type 2 or Type 3 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
5. Public or private school.
6. Park.
7. Public or semi-public building.
8. Medical center in a building or buildings not exceeding 4,000 square feet of floor space.
9. Utility facility.
10. Water supply or treatment facility.
11. Vehicle and trailer sales, service, repair or rental in a building or buildings not exceeding
4,000 square feet of floor space.
12. Uses listed below carried on in a building or buildings not exceeding 4,000 square feet of
floor space with no exterior displays or storage of industrial equipment, industrial
vehicles or industrial products:
a. Manufacturing and production.
b. Wholesale sales.
c. Mini -storage.
13. Wireless telecommunications facilities, except those facilities meeting the requirements
of DCC 18.116.250(A) or (B).
14. Surface mining of mineral and aggregate resources in conjunction with the operation
and maintenance of irrigation systems operated by an Irrigation District, including the
excavation and mining for facilities, ponds, reservoirs, and the off -site use, storage, and
sale of excavated material.
15. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
16. Psilocybin service centers, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.380.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 97-003 §2 on 6/4/1997
Amended by Ord. 97-063 §3 on 11/12/1997
Amended by Ord. 2004-002 §15 on 4/28/2004
Amended by Ord. 2015-004 §3 on 4/22/2015
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §5 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §7 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2020-010 §3 on 7/3/2020
Amended by Ord. 2021-004 §3 on 5/27/2021
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
CHAPTER 18.67 TUMALO RURAL COMMUNITY ZONING DISTRICTS
18.67.040 Commercial (TuC) District
18.67.060 Industrial (Tul) District
18.67.040 Commercial (TuC) District
The Tumalo Commercial District is intended to allow a range of limited commercial and industrial uses to
serve the community and surrounding area.
A. Permitted Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright and do not
require site plan review.
1. Single-family dwelling or duplex.
2. Manufactured home subject to DCC 18.116.070.
3. Type 1 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
4. Class I and II road or street project subject to approval as part of a land partition,
subdivision or subject to the standards of DCC 18.67.060 and 18.116.230.
5. Class III road or street project.
6. Operation, maintenance, and piping of existing irrigation systems operated by an
Irrigation District except as provided in DCC 18.120.050.
B. Uses Permitted, Subject to Site Plan Review. The following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted subject to the applicable provisions of DCC 18.67, 18.116 and 18.124:
1. A building or buildings, none of which exceeds 4,000 square feet of floor space to be
used by any combination of the following uses:
a. Retail or service business.
b. Eating and/or drinking establishment.
c. Offices.
d. Residential use in the same building as a use permitted in DCC 18.67.040.
e. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items
or products at the same location.
2. Any of the uses listed under DCC 18.67.040 proposing to occupy more than 4,000 square
feet of floor area in a building subject to the provisions of DCC 18.67.040(E).
3. Child care facility and/or preschool.
C. Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted subject to the
applicable provisions of DCC 18.116, 18.124, and 18.128:
1. Religious institutions or assemblies.
2. Bed and breakfast inn.
3. Type 2 or Type 3 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
4. Park.
5. Public or semi-public building.
6. Utility facility.
7. Water supply or treatment facility.
8. Manufactured home/RV park on a parcel in use as a manufactured home park or
recreational vehicle park prior to the adoption of PL-15 in 1979 and being operated as of
June 12, 1996 as a manufactured home park or recreational vehicle park, including any
expansion of such uses on the same parcel as configured on June 12, 1996.
9. The following uses and their accessory uses may be conducted in a building or buildings
not to exceed 4,000 square feet of floor space.
a. Farm equipment, sales, service or repair.
b. Trailer sales, service or repair.
c. Vehicle service or repair.
d. Veterinary clinic.
10. The following uses may be conducted in a building or buildings not to exceed 10,000
square feet of floor space:
a. Manufacturing or production.
b. Wholesale sales.
c. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
11. Wireless telecommunications facilities, except those facilities meeting the requirements
of DCC 18.116.250(A) or (B).
12. Surface mining of mineral and aggregate resources in conjunction with the operation
and maintenance of irrigation systems operated by an Irrigation District, including the
excavation and mining for facilities, ponds, reservoirs, and the off -site use, storage, and
sale of excavated material.
13. Psilocybin service centers, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.380.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 97-033 §2 on 6/25/1997
Amended by Ord. 97-063 §3 on 11/12/1997
Amended by Ord. 2000-033 §11 on 12/6/2000
Amended by Ord. 2001-016 §2 on 3/28/2001
Amended by Ord. 2001-039 §8 on 12/12/2001
Amended by Ord. 2004-002 §19 on 4/28/2004
Amended by Ord. 2004-013 §7 on 9/21/2004
Amended by Ord. 2015-004 §5 on 4/22/2015
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §6 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §8 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2020-010 §4 on 7/3/2020
Amended by Ord. 2021-004 §4 on 5/27/2021
Amended by Ord. 2021-013 §8 on 4/5/2022
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
18.67.060 Industrial (Tul) District
The purpose of the Industrial District is to allow a limited range of industrial uses to serve the
community and the surrounding area.
A. Uses permitted outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright:
1. Industrial uses in existence on the date of adoption of the Unincorporated Communities
ru►e, OAR 660-022 (October 28, 1994);
2. Office buildings associated with industrial uses in existence on the date of adoption of
the Unincorporated Communities rule, OAR 660-022 (October 28, 1994);
3. Restaurants and cafeteria facilities associated with industrial uses in existence on the
date of adoption of the Unincorporated Communities rule, OAR 660-022 (October 28,
1994);
4. Residence for caretaker or night watchman on property with industrial uses in existence
on the date of adoption of the Unincorporated Communities rule, OAR 660-022
(October 28, 1994);
5. Equipment storage associated with industrial uses in existence on the date of adoption
of the Unincorporated Communities rule, OAR 660-022 (October 28, 1994);
6. Class I and II road or street project subject to approval as part of a land partition,
subdivision or subject to the standards of DCC 18.67.080 and 18.116.230.
7. Class III road or street project.
8. Operation, maintenance, and piping of existing irrigation systems operated by an
Irrigation District except as provided in DCC 18.120.050.
B. Uses Permitted, Subject to Site Plan Review. The following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted in a building or buildings not to exceed 40,000 square feet of floor area, subject to the
applicable provisions of DCC 18.67, 18.116, and 18.124.
1. Expansion or replacement of uses allowed under DCC 18.67.060(A);
2. Office buildings associated with industrial uses;
3. Restaurant and cafeteria facilities associated with industrial uses;
4. Residence for caretaker or night watchman on property with industrial uses;
5. Equipment storage associated with industrial uses;
6. Primary processing, packaging, treatment, bulk storage and distribution of the following
products:
a.Agricultural products, including foodstuffs, animal and fish products, and animal
feeds.
b.Ornamental horticultural products and nurseries.
c. Softwood and hardwood products excluding pulp and paper manufacturing.
d.Sand, gravel, clay and other mineral products.
7. Freight depot, including the loading, unloading, storage and distribution of goods and
materials by railcar or truck;
8. Contractor's or building materials business and other construction -related business
including plumbing, electrical, roof, siding, etc.;
9. Welding, sheet metal, or machine shop provided such is wholly enclosed within a
building or all outside storage is enclosed by site -obscuring fencing.
10. Mini -storage facility.
11. Manufacturing, storage, sales, rental, repair and servicing of equipment and materials
associated with farm and forest uses, logging, road maintenance, mineral extraction,
construction or similar rural activities;
12. Any industrial use proposing to occupy more than 40,000 square feet of floor area in a
building or buildings is subject to the provisions of DCC 18.67.060(C) and (D).
C. Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted subject to the
applicable provisions of DCC 18.116, 18.124, and 18.128:
1. Any use permitted by DCC 18.67.060(B) which will exceed 40,000 square feet of floor
area;
2. Concrete or ready mix plant;
3. Stockpiling, storage, crushing and processing of minerals, including the processing of
aggregate into asphaltic concrete or Portland Cement Concrete;
4. Buildings, structures, apparatus, equipment and appurtenances necessary for the above
uses to be carried on.
5. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
6. Psilocybin testing laboratories.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2005-016 §1 on 4/27/2005
Amended by Ord. 2015-004 §6 on 4/22/2015
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §6 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2021-004 §4 on 5/27/2021
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
CHAPTER 18.74 RURAL COMMERCIAL ZONE
18.74.020 Uses Permitted; Deschutes Junction And Deschutes River Woods Store
18.74.027 Uses Permitted; Pine Forest And Rosland
18.74.020 Uses Permitted; Deschutes Junction And Deschutes River Woods Store
A. Uses Permitted Outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright and
do not require site plan review:
1. Single-family dwelling.
2. Manufactured home subject to DCC 18. 1 16. 070.
3. Two-family dwelling.
4. Type 1 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18. 1 16. 280.
5. Agricultural uses.
6. Class I and II road or street project subject to approval as part of a land partition or
subdivision, or subject to the standards and criteria established in DCC 18.116.230.
7. Class III road or street project.
8. A lawfully established use existing as of 11/05/02, the date this chapter was adopted,
not otherwise permitted by this chapter.
B. Uses Permitted Subject to Site Plan Review. The following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted subject to the applicable provisions of this chapter and DCC 18.116 and 18.124:
1. A building or buildings not exceeding 2,500 square feet of floor space to be used by any
combination of the following uses.
a. Restaurant, cafe or delicatessen.
b. Grocery store.
c. Tavern.
d. Retail sporting goods and guide services.
e. Barber and beauty shop.
f. General store.
g. Video store.
h. Antique, art, craft, novelty and second hand sales if conducted completely
within an enclosed building.
2. Expansion of a nonconforming use listed under section B(1)(a-h), existing as of
11/05/2002, the date this chapter was adopted, shall be limited to 2,500 square feet or
25 percent of the size of the building as of said date, whichever is greater.
3. A building or buildings not exceeding 3,500 square feet of floor space to be used by any
combination of the following uses.
a. Retail sales of agricultural or farm products.
b. Farm machinery sales and repair.
c. Kennel.
d. Veterinary clinic.
e. Automobile service station and repair garage, towing service, fuel storage and
sales.
f. Public or semi-public use.
g. Residential use in the same building as a use permitted by this chapter.
h. Park or playground.
4. Expansion of a nonconforming use listed under section B(3)(a-h), existing as of
11/05/2002, the date this chapter was adopted, shall be limited to 3,500 square feet or
25 percent of the size of the building as of said date, whichever is greater.
C. Uses Permitted Subject to Site Plan Review. The following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted, subject to the applicable provisions of this chapter, DCC 18.116, Supplementary
Provisions, and DCC 18.124, Site Plan Review, of this title:
1. Child care facility and/or preschool.
D. Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted subject to the
applicable provisions of this chapter and DCC 18.116, 18.124 and 18.128:
1. A building or buildings not exceeding 3,500 square feet of floor space to be used by any
combination of the following uses.
a. Type 2 or Type 3 Home Occupation, subject to DCC 18.116.280.
b. Utility facility.
c. Wireless telecommunications facilities, except those facilities meeting the
requirements of DCC 18.116.250(A) or (B).
d. Religious institutions or assemblies.
e. School.
2. Recreational vehicle park
3. Mini -storage facilities limited to 35,000 square feet in size.
4. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
5. Psilocybin service centers, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.380.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2002-019 §2 on 8/7/2002
Amended by Ord. 2004-002 §20 on 4/28/2004
Amended by Ord. 2008-008 §1 on 3/18/2008
Amended by Ord. 2015-004 §7 on 4/22/2015
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §7 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §9 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2020-010 §5 on 7/3/2020
Amended by Ord. 2021-013 §9 on 4/5/2022
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
18.74.027 Uses Permitted; Pine Forest And Rosland
A. Uses Permitted Outright. Any use listed as a use permitted outright by DCC 18.74.020(A).
B. Uses Permitted subject to Site Plan Review. The following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted subject to the applicable provisions of this chapter and DCC 18.116 and 18.124:
1. A building or buildings each not exceeding 2,500 square feet of floor space to be used by
any combination of the following uses that serve the surrounding rural area or the travel
needs of persons passing through the area:
a. Eating and drinking establishments.
b. Retail store, office and service establishments.
c. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items
or products at the same location.
2. Expansion of a nonconforming use existing as of 11/05/2002 shall be limited to 2,500
square feet or 25 percent of the size of the building (or portion of the building) housing
the nonconforming use as of said date, whichever is greater.
3. A building or buildings each not exceeding 3,500 square feet of floor space to be used by
any combination of the following uses:
a. Sales of agricultural or farm products.
b. Farm machinery sales and repair.
c. Kennel or veterinary clinic.
d. Automobile service station, repair garage, towing service, fuel storage and fuel
sales.
e. Public or semi-public use.
f. Residential use in the same building as a use permitted in this chapter.
g. Park or playground.
4. Expansion of a nonconforming use existing as of 11/05/2002 shall be limited to 3,500
square feet each or 25 percent of the size of the building (or portion of the building)
housing the nonconforming use as of said date, whichever is greater.
5. Child care facility and/or preschool.
C. Conditional Uses. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted subject to the
applicable provisions of this chapter and DCC 18.116, 18.124 and 18.128:
1. A building or buildings each not exceeding 3,500 square feet of floor space to be used by
any of the following uses:
a. Home occupation as defined in DCC 18.04.
b. Utility facility.
c. Wireless telecommunications facilities, except those facilities meeting the
requirements of DCC 18.116.250(A) or (B).
d. Religious institutions or assemblies.
e. School.
f. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
2. Recreational vehicle park.
3. Mini -storage facilities limited to 35,000 square feet in size.
4. Psilocybin service centers, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.380.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2003-080 §1 on 1/6/2004
Amended by Ord. 2007-007 §1 on 3/5/2007
Amended by Ord. 2008-008 §1 on 3/18/2008
Amended by Ord. 2015-004 §7 on 4/22/2015
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §7 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §9 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2020-010 §5 on 7/3/2020
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
CHAPTER 18.100 RURAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE; R-I
18.100.020 Conditional Uses
18.100.020 Conditional Uses
The following uses may be allowed subject to DCC 18.128:
A. Any use permitted by DCC 18.100.010, which is located within 600 feet of a residential dwelling,
a lot within a platted subdivision or a residential zone.
B. Any use permitted by DCC 18.100.010, which involves open storage.
C. Concrete or ready -mix plant.
D. Petroleum products storage and distribution.
E. Storage, crushing and processing of minerals, including the processing of aggregate into
asphaltic concrete or Portland Cement Concrete.
F. Commercial feedlot, stockyard, sales yard, slaughterhouse and rendering plant.
G. Railroad trackage and related facilities.
H. Pulp and paper manufacturing.
I. Any use permitted by DCC 18.100.010, which is expected to exceed the following standards:
1. Lot coverage in excess of 70 percent.
2. Generation of any odor, dust, fumes, glare, flashing lights or noise that is perceptible
without instruments 500 feet from the property line of the subject use.
J. Manufacture, repair or storage of articles manufactured from bone, cellophane, cloth, cork,
feathers, felt, fiber, glass, stone, paper, plastic, precious or semiprecious stones or metal, wax,
wire, wood, rubber, yarn or similar materials, provided such uses do not create a disturbance
because of odor, noise, dust, smoke, gas, traffic or other factors.
K. Processing, packaging and storage of food and beverages including those requiring distillation
and fermentation.
L. Public Landfill Transfer Station, including recycling and other related activities.
M. Mini -storage facility.
N. Automotive wrecking yard totally enclosed by a sight -obscuring fence.
O. Wireless telecommunications facilities, except those facilities meeting the requirements of DCC
18.116.250(A) or (B).
P. Utility facility.
Q.
Manufacturing, storage, sales, rental, repair and servicing of equipment and materials
associated with farm and forest uses, logging, road maintenance, mineral extraction,
construction or similar rural activities.
R. Electrical substations.
S. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
T. Psilocvbin testing laboratories.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. PL-15 on 11/1/1979
Amended by Ord. 86-018 §15 on 6/30/1986
Amended by Ord. 90-014 §38 on 7/12/1990
Amended by Ord. 91-020 §1 on 5/29/1991
Amended by Ord. 91-038 §1 on 9/30/1991
Amended by Ord. 97-063 §3 on 11/12/1997
Amended by Ord. 2001-016 §2 on 3/28/2001
Amended by Ord. 2001-039 §12 on 12/12/2001
Amended by Ord. 2002-126 §1 on 12/11/2002
Amended by Ord. 2004-013 §10 on 9/21/2004
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §8 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2018-006 §12 on 11/20/2018
Amended by Ord. 2021-004 §5 on 5/27/2021
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
CHAPTER 18.108 URBAN UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITY ZONE; SUNRIVER
18.108.050 Commercial; C District
18.108.055 Town Center; TC District
18.108.050 Commercial; C District
A. Uses Permitted Outright. Any combination of the following uses and their accessory uses are
permitted outright in the C district.
1. Recreational path.
2. Ambulance service.
3. Library.
4. Religious institutions or assemblies.
5. Bus stop.
6. Community center.
7. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any
combination of:
a. Retail/rental store, office and service establishment.
b. Art galleries
c. Dry cleaner and/or self-service laundry establishment.
d. Radio and television sales and service.
e. Radio and television broadcasting studios and facilities, except towers.
f. Restaurant, bar and cocktail lounge, including entertainment.
g. Automobile service station.
h. Technical and business school.
i. Catering establishment.
Crafts in conjunction with retail sales (occurring on premises, such as stained
glass/pottery, etc.).
k. Medical and dental clinic, office and laboratory.
I. Theater not exceeding 4,000 square feet of floor area.
m. Marijuana wholesaling, office only. There shall be no storage of marijuana items
or products at the same location.
8. Multiple -family residential dwelling units, subject to the provisions of DCC
18.108.050(C)(1).
9. Residential dwelling units constructed in the same building as a commercial use, subject
to the provisions of DCC 18.108.050(C)(2).
10. Post Office.
11. Administrative and office facility associated with a community association or community
use.
12. Police facility.
B. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following conditional uses may be permitted subject to DCC
18.128 and a conditional use permit.
1. Public buildings and public utility buildings and structures.
2. Club, lodge or fraternal organization.
3. Commercial off-street parking lot.
4. Bus passenger station.
5. Interval ownership and/or time-share unit or the creation thereof.
6. Miniature golf.
7. Bed and breakfast inn.
8. Inn.
9. Residential facility.
10. A building or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space housing any
combination of:
a. Bowling alley.
b. Car wash.
c. Dancing or music school, nursery school, kindergarten and day-care facility.
d. Theater exceeding 4,000 square feet in floor area.
e. Veterinary clinic or kennel operated entirely within an enclosed building.
f. Automotive repair and maintenance garage, or tire store, provided the business
is wholly conducted within an enclosed building.
g. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
11. Psilocybin service centers, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.380.
HISTORY
Repealed & Reenacted by Ord. 97-078 §2 on 12/31/1997
Amended by Ord. 98-016 §1 on 3/11/1998
Amended by Ord. 2003-026 §1 on 7/9/2003
Amended by Ord. 2015-004 §9 on 4/22/2015
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §9 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §12 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/xx/2022
18.108.055 Town Center; TC District
A. Uses Permitted Outright. The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright in
the TC District.
1. Park or plaza.
2. Library.
3. Community center.
4. Visitors center.
5. A building, or buildings each not exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space, unless
approved as a Large Scale Use pursuant to DCC 18.108.055(C), including any of the
following uses:
a. Retail/rental store, office, civic and service establishment.
b. Grocery store.
c. Art gallery.
d. Restaurant, bakery, delicatessen, pub, cocktail lounge, including entertainment.
e. Health care service including medical and dental clinic, office, pharmacy, and
laboratory but excluding nursing homes.
f. Health & fitness facility.
g. Barber, beauty shop or spa.
h. Child care center, preschool and daycare facility.
i. Bank.
j. Post office.
k. Veterinary clinic (without animal boarding facilities).
I. Crafts in conjunction with retail sales (occurring on premises such as sculpture,
stained glass, pottery, etc.).
m. Meeting room, convention and banquet facility.
n. Property sales, mortgage, management or rental office.
o. Movie theater.
6. Multi -family Residential, subject to paragraphs (E)(1) and (2).
7. Developed recreational facilities, outdoors or in a building or buildings each not
exceeding 8,000 square feet of floor space, unless approved as a Large Scale Use
pursuant to DCC 18.108.055(C), including, but not limited to the following facilities:
a. Indoor and outdoor swimming pools.
b. Ice skating rink.
c. Indoor and outdoor tennis courts.
d. Indoor and outdoor basketball court or other ball field.
e. Physical fitness facilities.
f. Park, playground and picnic and barbeque area.
g. Walkways, bike paths, jogging paths.
h. Bowling alley.
i. Arcade.
8. Hotel with up to 100 hotel units in a single building.
9. Mixed Use Structure, subject to the rules of DCC 18.108.055(E)(3) and a limit of 8,000
square feet of floor space for commercial uses listed in DCC 18.108.055(A)(5) or
recreational uses listed in DCC 18.108.055(A)(7), unless said uses are approved as large
scale uses pursuant to DCC 18.108.055(C).
10. Residential Facility.
11. Senior housing/assisted living or active adult development, excluding nursing homes.
12. Townhomes, subject to paragraphs (E)(1) and (2).
13. Accessory uses to uses permitted outright, including, but not limited to, parking
facilities, private roads, storage facilities, trash receptacles and recycling areas.
14. Similar uses to those allowed outright, provided they are approved by the County in the
decision approving the Conceptual Site Plan described in DCC 18.108.055(K).
15. Religious institutions or assemblies.
B. Conditional Uses Permitted. The following conditional uses may be permitted pursuant to the
provisions of DCC 18.128, Conditional Use Permits.
1. Public buildings and public utility buildings and structures.
2. Bed and breakfast inn.
3. Ambulance service.
4. Fire station.
5. Police station.
6. Bus passenger station.
7. Live/work residence.
8. Stand-alone parking structure.
9. Accessory uses to the above -listed conditional uses.
10. Marijuana retailing, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.330.
11. Psilocybin service centers, subject to the provisions of DCC 18.116.380.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2008-015 §2 on 6/30/2008
Amended by Ord. 2015-004 §9 on 4/22/2015
Amended by Ord. 2016-015 §9 on 7/1/2016
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §12 on 4/21/2020
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §xx on x/xx/2022
CHAPTER 18.113 DESTINATION RESORTS ZONE; DR
18.113.030 Uses In Destination Resorts
18.113.030 Uses In Destination Resorts
The following uses are allowed, provided they are part of, and are intended to serve persons at, the
destination resort pursuant to DCC 18.113.030 and are approved in a final master plan:
A. Visitor -oriented accommodations designed to provide for the needs of visitors to the resort:
1. Overnight lodging, including lodges, hotels, motels, bed and breakfast facilities, time
share units and similar transient lodging facilities;
2. Convention and conference facilities and meeting rooms;
3. Retreat centers;
4. Restaurants, lounges and similar eating and drinking establishments; and
5. Other similar visitor -oriented accommodations consistent with the purposes of DCC
18.113 and Goal 8.
B. Developed recreational facilities designed to provide for the needs of visitors and residents of
the resort;
1. Golf courses and clubhouses;
2. Indoor and outdoor swimming pools;
3. Indoor and outdoor tennis courts;
4. Physical fitness facilities;
5. Equestrian facilities;
6. Wildlife observation shelters;
7. Walkways, bike paths, jogging paths, equestrian trails;
8. Other similar recreational facilities consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and Goal
8.
C. Residential accommodations:
1. Single-family dwellings;
2. Duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and multi -family dwellings;
3. Condominiums;
4. Townhouses;
5. Living quarters for employees;
6. Time-share projects.
D. Commercial services and specialty shops designed to provide for the visitors to the resort:
1. Specialty shops, including but not limited to delis, clothing stores, bookstores, gift shops
and specialty food shops;
2. Barber shops/beauty salons;
3. Automobile service stations limited to fuel sales, incidental parts sales and minor
repairs;
4. Craft and art studios and galleries;
5. Real estate offices;
6. Convenience stores;
7. Psilocybin service centers licensed by the Oregon Health Authority;
7 8.Other similar commercial services which provide for the needs of resort visitors and are
consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and Goal 8.
E. Uses permitted in open space areas generally include only those uses that, except as specified
herein, do not alter the existing or natural landscape of the proposed open space areas. No
improvements, development or other alteration of the natural or existing landscape shall be
allowed in open space areas, except as necessary for development of golf course fairways and
greens, hiking and bike trails, lakes and ponds and primitive picnic facilities including park
benches and picnic tables. Where farming activities would be consistent with identified
preexisting open space uses, irrigation equipment and associated pumping facilities shall be
allowed.
F. Facilities necessary for public safety and utility service within the destination resort.
G. Other similar uses permitted in the underlying zone consistent with the purposes of DCC
18.113.030.
H. Accessory Uses in Destination Resorts:
1. The following accessory uses shall be permitted provided they are ancillary to the
destination resort and consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and Goal 8:
a. Transportation -related facilities excluding airports;
b. Emergency medical facilities;
c. Storage structures and areas;
d. Kennels as a service for resort visitors only;
e. Recycling and garbage collection facilities;
f. A psilocybin product manufacturer licensed by the Oregon Health Authority, so
long as the use is in conjunction with a psilocybin service center;
f7g. Other similar accessory uses consistent with the purposes of DCC 18.113 and
Goal 8.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 92-004 §13 on 2/7/1992
Amended by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
CHAPTER 18.116 SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS
18.116.380 Psilocybin Manufacturing, Service Centers, and Testing Laboratories
18.116.380 Psilocybin Manufacturing, Service Centers, and Testing Laboratories
A. Applicability. Section 18.116.380 applies to:
1. Psilocybin Manufacture as a Farm Use in the EFU, F-1, and F-2 zones.
2. Psilocybin Manufacture as a Processing Use in the EFU, F-1, and F-2 zones.
3. Psilocybin Service Centers in the EFU, RC, RSC, SUC, SUTC, TeC, and TuC zones.
4. Psilocybin Testing Laboratories in the RI and Tul zone.
B. Psilocybin Manufacture as a Farm Use. Psilocybin manufacture as a farm use shall be subject to
the following standards:
1. Indoor Fungi Cultivation. Psilocybin-producing fungi must be grown indoors. Fungi
cultivation is prohibited in any outdoor area.
2. Setbacks. Setback requirements shall be applied from the underlying zone.
3. Separation distances.
a. Psilocybin manufacture as a farm use shall be located a minimum of 1,000 feet
from:
(1) A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance is
compulsory under ORS 339.020; or
(2) A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching
children as described in ORS 339.030 (1)(a); and
b. Notwithstanding DCC 18.116.380(D)(3)(a), psilocybin manufacture as a farm use
may be located within 1,000 feet of a school if:
(1) The psilocybin service center is not located within 500 feet of:
i. A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance
is compulsory under ORS 339.020; or
ii. A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching
children as described in ORS 339.030 (1)(a).
(2) The Oregon Health Authority determines that there is a physical or
geographic barrier capable of preventing children from traversing to the
premises of the psilocybin manufacture as a farm use.
4. Prohibited Uses.
a. In the EFU zone, the following uses are prohibited:
(1) A new dwelling used in conjunction with a psilocybin-producing fungi
crop;
(2) A farm stand, as described in DCC 18.16.038(C), used in conjunction
with a psilocybin-producing fungi crop.
C. Psilocybin Manufacture as a Processing Use. Psilocybin manufacture as a processing use shall be
subject to the standards in DCC 18.16.025(1).
D. Psilocybin service centers. Psilocybin service centers shall be subject to the following standards:
1. Co -Location. The operation of a psilocybin service center may be carried on in
conjunction with a psilocybin-producing fungi crop in the Exclusive Farm Use zone
subject to either DCC 18.16.030(E) or 18.16.030(M).
2. Prohibited Uses.
a. In zones other than Exclusive Farm Use zone, a psilocybin service center as a
Home Occupation or Commercial Activity in Conjunction with Farm Use.
3. Separation distances.
a. Psilocybin service centers shall be located a minimum of 1,000 feet from:
(1) A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance is
compulsory under ORS 339.020; or
(2) A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching
children as described in ORS 339.030 (1)(a)
b. Notwithstanding DCC 18.116.380(D)(3)(a), a psilocybin service center may be
located within 1,000 feet of a school if:
(1) The psilocybin service center is not located within 500 feet of:
i. A public elementary or secondary school for which attendance
is compulsory under ORS 339.020; or
ii. A private or parochial elementary or secondary school, teaching
children as described in ORS 339.030 (1)(a); and
(2) The Oregon Health Authority determines that there is a physical or
geographic barrier capable of preventing children from traversing to the
premises of the psilocybin service center.
4. Setbacks. Setback requirements shall be applied from the underlying zone.
5. Hours of Operation. Hours of operation shall be no earlier than 6:00 a.m. and no later
than 11:59 p.m. on the same day, unless a facilitator determines that it is appropriate to
continue an administration session beyond 11:59 PM local time, subject to the
requirements in OAR 333-333-5250(3).
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2022-xxx §x on x/x/2022
FINDINGS
I. PROPOSAL
This is a legislative text amendment to Deschutes County Code (DCC), Title 18, County Zoning. The
primary purpose of the amendments is to create time, place, and manner regulations concerning
psilocybin manufacturing, service centers, and testing laboratories. A brief summary of the
amendments are as follows:
• DCC 18.04.030: Adds new definitions for terms relating to psilocybin.
• DCC 18.65 Rural Service Center, 18.66 Terrebonne Rural Community, 18.67 Tumalo Rural
Community, 18.74 Rural Commercial, 18.108 Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community:
Adds psilocybin service centers as a conditional use with site plan review
• DCC 18.113.030 Destination Resorts: Adds psilocybin service centers to allowable uses in
destination resorts
• DCC 18.67 Tumalo Rural Community, 18.100 Rural Industrial: Adds psilocybin testing
laboratories as a conditional use with site plan review
• DCC 18.116.380: Adds a new chapter creating time, place, and manner criteria for
psilocybin manufacture as farm use; psilocybin manufacture as a processing use;
psilocybin service centers.
II. BACKGROUND
On November 3, 2020, Oregon voters approved Ballot Measure 109, the Psilocybin Program
Initiative, which legalized psilocybin in Oregon subject to the criteria noted in the measure and
subsequent rulemaking.
Measure 109 automatically opts cities and counties into the psilocybin program, which first
underwent a two-year development period, and is slated to begin statewide on January 2, 2023.
However, Measure 109 offers the option for cities and counties to opt out via a ballot measure in
the next general election —in this case, November 8, 2022.
On June 1, 2022, staff provided the Board of County Commissioners (Board) with an overview of
Measure 109.E During the discussion, staff noted the compressed timeline: Oregon Health Authority
(OHA), which administers the program and the licensing system, was engaged in rulemaking
1 https://www.deschutes.org/bcc/page/board-commissioners-meeting
Page 1 of 8 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2022-xxx
throughout late 2021 and all of 2022, with completion anticipated by December 2022, yet OHA is
due to begin accepting applications for licenses on January 2, 2023. OHA licenses will require a Land
Use Compatibility Statement (LUCS) to be issued by the County. This timeline placed the Board —as
well as the industry and the public —in a difficult position of not knowing key aspects of the program
in advance of the program beginning.
On July 13, 2022, the Board of County Commissioners conducted an afternoon and evening hearing
to consider Ordinance No. 2022-009, Referring a Measure to the Electors to Prohibit Product
Manufacturers and Psilocybin Service Center Operators within Unincorporated Deschutes County.2
The Board deliberated on the matter on July 20 and adopted a first reading of Ordinance No. 2022-
009; second reading occurred on August 8. The opt -out measure was subject to Deschutes County
voters for the November 8, 2022 General Election, at which time the voters overturned the opt out.
Measure 109—and the corresponding Oregon Revised Statute 475A.530—allows cities and counties
to adopt "reasonable regulations" for time, place, and manner (TPM) concerning psilocybin
businesses. During deliberation the Board expressed interest in developing TPM amendments in
the event voters reject prohibiting psilocybin manufacturing and psilocybin service centers in the
unincorporated county. Amendments could be adopted by the end of the calendar year, prior to
the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) accepting applications for licensure on January 2, 2023. On July
27, the Board directed staff to begin the TPM process.'
Measure 109 provides no direction as to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. It is
difficult for staff to estimate impacts from a transportation and land use standpoint without real
world examples of psilocybin production, processing, and service centers that the Board can
consider. Ultimately, in order for regulations to be "reasonable," such regulations must be necessary
to protect public health, safety and welfare. Erring on the side of more restrictive TPM regulations
is defensible because the range and extent of potential impacts of psilocybin production, processing
and service centers cannot be defined at this stage.
HI. REVIEW CRITERIA
Deschutes County lacks specific criteria in DCC Titles 18, 22, or 23 for reviewing a legislative text
amendment. Nonetheless, since Deschutes County is initiating one, the County bears the
responsibility for justifying that the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goals and
its existing Comprehensive Plan.
IV. FINDINGS
CHAPTER 22.12, LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES
Section 22.12.010.
2 https://www.deschutes.org/bcc/page/board-county-commissioners-meeting-63
3 https://www.deschutes.org/bcc/page/board-county-commissioners-meeting-65
Page 2 of 8 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2022-xxx
Hearing Required
FINDING: This criterion will be met because a public hearing was held before the Deschutes
County Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners.
Section 22.12.020, Notice
Notice
A. Published Notice
1. Notice of a legislative change shall be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the county at least 10 days prior to each public hearing.
2. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing and contain a statement
describing the general subject matter of the ordinance under consideration.
FINDING: This criterion will be met as notice was published in the Bend Bulletin newspaper for the
Planning Commission public hearing, and the Board of County Commissioners' public hearing.
B. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted at the discretion of the Planning Director and
where necessary to comply with ORS 203.045.
FINDING: Posted notice was determined by the Planning Director not to be necessary.
C. Individual notice. Individual notice to property owners, as defined in DCC
22.08.010(A), shall be provided at the discretion of the Planning Director, except as
required by ORS 215.503.
FINDING: Given the proposed legislative amendments do not apply to any specific property, no
individual notices were sent.
D. Media notice. Copies of the notice of hearing shall be transmitted to other
newspapers published in Deschutes County.
FINDING: Notice was provided to the County public information official for wider media
distribution. This criterion is met.
Section 22.12.030 Initiation of Legislative Changes.
A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of
required fees as well as by the Board of County Commissioners.
FINDING: The application was initiated by the Deschutes County Planning Division at the direction
of the Board of County Commissioners, and has received a fee waiver. This criterion is met.
Section 22.12.040. Hearings Body
Page 3 of 8 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2022-xxx
A. The following shall serve as hearings or review body for legislative changes in this
order:
1. The Planning Commission.
2. The Board of County Commissioners.
8. Any legislative change initiated by the Board of County Commissioners shall be
reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to action being taken by the Board of
Commissioners.
FINDING: The Deschutes County Planning Commission held the initial public hearing on September
29 and October 13, 2022. The Board then held a public hearing on November 21. These criteria are
met.
Section 22.12.050 Final Decision
All legislative changes shall be adopted by ordinance
FINDING: The proposed legislative changes will be implemented by Ordinance No. [number TBD]
upon approval and adoption by the Board of County Commissioners. This criterion will be met.
A. Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines
Goal 1: Citizen Involvement: The amendments do not propose to change the structure of the
County's citizen involvement program. Notice of the proposed amendments were provided to the
Bulletin for each public hearing.
Goal 2: Land Use Planning: This goal is met because ORS 197.610 allows local governments to initiate
post acknowledgments plan amendments (PAPA). An Oregon Land Conservation and Development
Department 35-day notice was initiated on August 25, 2021. The Planning Commission held a public
hearing on September 29, 2022 and the Board of County Commissioners held a public hearing on
November 21, 2022. This Findings document provides the adequate factual basis for the
amendments.
Goal 3: Agricultural Lands: Measure 109 and the corresponding Oregon Revised Statute 475A.570(2)
specify that psilocybin-producing fungi is:
(a) A crop for the purposes of "farm use" as defined in ORS 215.203;
(b) A crop for purposes of a "farm" and "farming practice," both as defined in ORS 30.930;
(c) A product of farm use as described in ORS 308A.062; and
(d) The product of an agricultural activity for purposes of ORS 568.909.
Page 4 of 8 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2022-xxx
The statute clearly permits the production of psilocybin-producing fungi in Exclusive Farm Use
zones. DCC 18.16.025 allows small-scale processing of farm crops, provided that the facility uses
less than 10,000 square feet for its processing area and complies with all applicable siting standards.
Processing facilities smaller than 2,500 square feet are exempt from any applicable siting standards.
ORS 475A.570(2) prohibits psilocybin-related farm dwellings and psilocybin-related farm stands.
ORS 475A.570(3) states "The operation of a psilocybin service center may be carried on in
conjunction with a psilocybin-producing fungi crop." The interpretation of this statute by the
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) is that psilocybin service centers would
not be a stand-alone use on EFU but could potentially be permitted either as a commercial activity
in conjunction with farm use or as a home occupation. The proposed amendments to the County
Code are consistent with these provisions of state law and are therefore consistent with Goal 3.
Goal 4: Forest Lands: ORS 475A.570(4) states "A county may allow the manufacture of psilocybin
products as a farm use on land zoned for farm or forest use in the same manner as the manufacture
of psilocybin products is allowed in exclusive farm use zones under this section and ORS 215.213,
215.283 and 475C.053." The proposed amendments are consistent with these provisions of state
law and are therefore consistent with Goal 4.
Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources: Goal 5 is to protect natural
resources and conserve scenic and historical areas and open spaces. OAR 660-023-0250(3) states
that local governments are not required to apply Goal 5 in consideration of a PAPA unless the PAPA
affects a Goal 5 resource. The proposed text amendments do not create or amend a resource list
or any portion of the County's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan or land use regulations adopted
to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5. The proposed
text amendments do not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with a particular significant
Goal 5 resource site on an acknowledged resource list because the County's LM and WA overlay
zones are not changed in these proposed amendments. More specifically, the amendments are not
subject to a Goal 5 analysis because:
• Psilocybin manufacturing is considered a farm crop/farm/use/farming practice per ORS
475A.570
• The areas in which service centers are proposed (retail/commercial zones) are not subject to
the current WA combining zone
• Service centers on EFU land could be allowed not as new conflicting, stand-alone uses that
would require a Goal 5 analysis, but under existing uses within EFU (home occupations/
commercial activity in conjunction with farm use)
For these reasons, the proposed text amendments are in compliance with Goal 5.
Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality: The proposed text amendments do not propose to
change the County's Plan policies or implementing regulations for compliance with Goal 6. The text
amendments will not impact the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the County given
the fact that psilocybin farm use is required to take place fully indoors, is not odorous and is not a
water -intensive use. Psilocybin service centers are proposed to be limited to commercially -zoned
Page 5 of 8 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2022-xxx
areas and therefore will not impact the quality of land resources. For these reasons, the proposed
text amendments are in compliance.
Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: The proposed text amendments do not
propose to change the County's Plan or implementing regulations regarding natural disasters and
hazards; therefore, they are in compliance.
Goal 8: Recreational Needs: The text amendments do not propose to change the County's Plan or
implementing regulations regarding recreational needs; therefore, they are in compliance.
Goal 9: Economic Development: Goal 9 and its implementing regulations focus on economic analysis
and economic development planning required in urban Comprehensive Plans to ensure there is
adequate land available to realize economic growth and development opportunities. The proposed
amendments apply to rural lands and do not propose to amend the Comprehensive Plan. The
proposed text amendments will encourage economic development in the County as they will
provide new business and economic development opportunities. Because these new businesses
will be taxed, the public will benefit as well. For these reasons, the proposed text amendments are
in compliance with Goal 9.
Goal 10: Housing: This goal is not applicable because, unlike municipalities, unincorporated areas
are not obligated to fulfill certain housing requirements.
Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services: Complies because the text amendments do not propose to
change the County's Plan or implementing regulations regarding public facilities and services.
Goal 12: Transportation: Goal 12 is to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic
transportation system. The proposed text amendments will not change the functional classification
of any existing or planned transportation facility or standards implementing a functional
classification system. The proposed text amendments will not allow any new uses expected to result
in transportation system impacts that differ in degree or severity from other allowed or allowable
uses in the zones in which psilocybin manufacture and/or psilocybin service centers could be sited.
Goal 13: Energy Conservation: The proposed text amendments do not propose to change the
County's Plan or implementing regulations regarding energy conservation. Therefore, compliance
with Goal 13 is established.
Goal 14: Urbanization: The proposed text amendments do not propose to change the County's Plan
or implementing regulations regarding urbanization. Therefore, compliance with Goal 14 is
established.
Goals 15 through 19 are not applicable to the proposed text amendments because the County does
not contain these types of lands.
Page 6 of 8 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2022-xxx
D. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
Chapter 1, Comprehensive Planning: This chapter sets the Goals and Policies of how the County will
involve the community and conduct land use planning. As described above, the proposed
regulations will be discussed at work sessions with the Board of County Commissioners, as well as
to the Planning Commission, which is the County's official committee for public involvement. Both
will conduct separate public hearings.
These actions also satisfy the Goals and relevant Policies of Section 1.3, Land Use Planning Policies.
Goal 1 of this section is to "maintain an open and public land use process in which decisions are
based on the objective evaluation of facts." Staff, the Planning Commission, and the Board reviewed
the text amendments.
Chapter 2, Resource Management: This chapter sets the Goals and Policies of how the County will
protect resource lands, including but not limited to, Agriculture and Forest as well as Water
Resources and Environmental Quality.
Section 2.2, Agricultural Lands Policies, states that Goal 1 is to "preserve and maintain agricultural
lands and the agricultural industry."
As noted above, Measure 109 and the corresponding Oregon Revised Statute 475A.570(2) specify
that psilocybin-producing fungi is:
(a) A crop for the purposes of "farm use" as defined in ORS 215.203;
(b) A crop for purposes of a "farm" and "farming practice," both as defined in ORS 30.930;
(c) A product of farm use as described in ORS 308A.062; and
(d) The product of an agricultural activity for purposes of ORS 568.909.
The statute clearly permits the production of psilocybin-producing fungi in Exclusive Farm Use
zones as well as in other zones that allow farm or forest use (ORS 475A.570(4)). DCC 18.16.025 allows
small-scale processing of farm crops, provided that the facility uses less than 10,000 square feet for
its processing area and complies with al! applicable siting standards. Processing facilities smaller
than 2,500 square feet are exempt from any applicable siting standards. The proposed text
amendments allow a new state -recognized agricultural use on agricultural lands.
Section 2.2 Goal 2 promotes a diversified, sustainable, revenue -generating agricultural sector.
Policy 2.2.10 calls for the promotion of economically viable opportunities and practices while Policy
2.2.11 encourages small farming enterprises including but not limited to, niche markets and organic
farming and value-added projects. The proposed text amendments allow a new state -recognized
agricultural use on agricultural lands, thereby satisfying this goal.
Section 2.2 Goal 3 specifies the Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) policies, classifications, and codes are
consistent with local and emerging agricultural conditions and markets. The proposed amendments
Page 7 of 8 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2022-xxx
are a direct response to changes in state law, which pursuant to Measure 109, recognize psilocybin-
producing fungi as a farm crop. Resource lands devoted to agricultural use in Deschutes County will
thereby permit the production of psilocybin-producing fungi, ensuring consistency between local
code, emerging markets, and stage law.
Section 2.3, Forest Lands Policies, states that Goal 1 is to "preserve and maintain forest lands for
multiple uses, including forest products, watershed protection, conservation, recreation and wildlife
habitat protection." Policy 2.3.5 calls for uses allowed in Forest zones to comply with state statute
and Oregon Administrative Rule. As noted above, ORS 475A.570(4) states "A county may allow the
manufacture of psilocybin products as a farm use on land zoned for farm or forest use in the same
manner as the manufacture of psilocybin products is allowed in exclusive farm use zones under this
section and ORS 215.213, 215.283 and 475C.053." The amendments allow psilocybin manufacturing
in forest zones pursuant to this law.
Page 8 of 8 - EXHIBIT X TO ORDINANCE NO. 2022-xxx
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 14, 2022
SUBJECT: Paid Leave Oregon Implementation
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
Move approval of participation in the state plan for Paid Leave Oregon and authorization of
County Administrator signature on applicable plan documents.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
House Bill 2005 was signed in August 2019, making Oregon the eighth state to establish a
paid leave program for employees. Subsequent legislation in 2021 delayed the
implementation of Paid Leave Oregon until 2023.
Paid Leave Oregon (PLO) is a required program for employers and employees that allows
employees in Oregon to take paid time off for qualified family, medical, and safe leave.
Implementation options for employers include:
1) Participate in a State run plan;
2) Establish an equivalent plan and contract with a private insurance company; or
3) Establish an equivalent plan and self -insure the benefit internally.
Staff is seeking Board direction on how Deschutes County will structure implementation of
Paid Leave Oregon benefits. Due to the size of the County, the complexity of the PLO
benefit, and the lack of historical claims data, County staff believes self -insuring the PLO is
not feasible at this time. Staff is recommending that the County enroll in the State plan as
the most affordable option at this time.
Additional details on the PLO program and options for Board consideration follow.
What benefits does Paid Leave Oregon provide?
Employees can take paid leave in increments equal to one workday or one workweek.
Employees can take leave all at once (consecutive) or in separate blocks of time (non-
consecutive). This program will increase the amount of leave time available to employees
in specific circumstances. Employers are required to provide job protection and maintain
an employee's health benefits while on leave.
Paid leave time:
• 12 weeks of paid family, medical, or safe leave per benefit year.
o Additional 2 weeks of paid leave in some pregnancy -related situations.
Benefit amounts are calculated on the employee wages and taking into account the state
average weekly wage. Employers can choose to provide additional pay, or allow employees
to use their own paid leave to supplement the benefit amount they receive.
When does Paid Leave Oregon start?
• Employee benefits start Sept. 3, 2023
• For the State plan, employee and employer contributions start Jan. 1, 2023
• For equivalent plans and contracting with a private insurance company,
contributions would begin in September 2023 for both employee and employer
Financial and/or Resource Considerations
As established in Section 16 of House Bill 2005, the 2023 rate is set at 1 % of staff wages (up
to $132,900 annually) split between employers (40%) and employees (60%).
Example, if an employee made $1,000 in wages on their paycheck, the Paid Leave Oregon
contribution would be $10 for this paycheck; the employee would pay $6 and the employer
would pay $4.
If the County enrolls in the State plan, employees and the County would begin making
contributions to the State program through payroll deductions on January 1, subject to
statute and bargaining. For fiscal year 2023 (FY23) the County budgeted for the employer
cost of enrolling in the State plan. FY23 employer costs are estimated at approximately
$216,000 due to the half year implementation; annualized employer costs are estimated at
$433,000.
Estimated cost for Paid Leave Oregon State Plan:
• Annual estimate:
o -$649,000 for employee contributions
o -$433,000 for employer contributions
Human Resources staff has reviewed bids for equivalent plan options and the option for
the County to participate in an equivalent plan has a rate of 1.42% of wages. Employers
may not withhold more than 60% of the total state rate (1 %) from employee's gross wages.
Given this rule, the County would pay more than 40% of the total cost if we were to select a
private plan.
Estimated cost for Paid Leave Oregon Private Equivalent Plan:
• Annual estimate:
o -$649,000 for employee contributions
o -$535,000 for employer contributions
Implementation and Recommendation
The details and major rulemaking by the State for the PLO was finalized very recently, with
additional rules and processes still being worked on. If the County enrolls in a private plan,
a notification and request for approval would need to be submitted to the State of Oregon
by November 30, 2022. A penalty fee would be assessed on required contributions should
the State deny a request to enroll in an equivalent plan. While year one costs would be
lower if selecting a private plan, staff still recommends enrolling in the State plan as
ongoing costs would be lower.
Employers are allowed to move from the state plan to an equivalent plan, and vice versa,
annually each fall. Given this flexibility, HR feels the best option is to enroll in the state plan
due to its lower cost, to avoid risk of non-compliance, and to provide time for the County to
evaluate this new benefit. After one or more years with this benefit, the County will have
data on utilization, claims costs, and the impact on staff administration. This useful
information will support analysis and decision making in the future. HR will continue to
monitor this benefit when it goes into effect.
PLO is available to employees beginning September 3, 2023. Time is needed provide
information to employees about this new leave program and set up internal processes to
support it.
As staff receives direction from the Board, we will provide notice of our intentions to
implement this law and its program requirements to our unions. HR will provide additional
updates and supports to departments and employees as new information is available and
as we move toward implementation.
Resource: https•//paidleave oregon.gov/Documents/Paid-Leave-Oregon-Employer-
Guidebook-EN-September-2022.pdf
BUDGET IMPACTS:
FY23 employer costs to enroll in the state plan are estimated at approximately $216,000,
due to the half -year implementation. Annualized employer costs are estimated at
$433,000. The County has budgeted for the employer cost of enrolling in the State plan for
FY23.
ATTENDANCE:
Kathleen Hinman, Human Resources Director
Vikki Walker, Director
Department of State Lands
775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100
Salem, OR 97301-1279
Director Walker,
Pursuant to ORS 565 the Deschutes County Fair Board is entrusted and charged with the
business management and financial affairs of the Deschutes County Fairgrounds. With respect
to this obligation, the County Fair Board is reaching out to you regarding the transfer of land
between Deschutes County and the State Land Board as initially approved via DSL application
62215-LS. As you are aware, the plan to transfer this land was developed through a
collaborative effort with federal, state, and local entities initiated in March 2006. This transfer
was discussed at your June 8th meeting, and approved at your August 10th meeting.
It should be of no secret to your office the Deschutes County Fair and Expo centers is a
tremendous economic asset to the State and the County generating hundreds of millions of
dollars in economic impact annually. With nearly 1 million visitors this year to one or more of
our 400 unique events we have hosted, the Deschutes County Fair and Expo is one of the most
utilized centers across the state, and attracts visitors from all 50 states, and more than 18
countries in 2022 alone.
The facility also serves as a primary emergency services resource benefitting the entire Pacific
Northwest region. As our environment continues to change, and our fire season expands and
becomes more dangerous and deadly, the importance of facilities for sheltering, staging, and
emergency command only becomes greater. Within the past 24 months, the Deschutes County
Fair & Expo has housed both people and animals; as well as serving as the operations command
post for Fires including the Beachie Creek, Lionshead, and other fires.
Indeed, Deschutes County Fair & Expo has agreements not only with local emergency response
groups, but also with state and federal agencies including FEMA. Without speaking specifically
to the plans of FEMA, their planning for utilization of our property includes the needs for large
swaths of open land for staging, storage, as well as sheltering. The role we play today is
important, but our future role is likely to be vital to any large scale emergency response state or
region wide. The acquisition of the additional land will help us to be a better and more
prepared partner, locally, regionally, and nationally.
It is absolutely imperative we place an emphasis on continual maintenance and development
of infrastructure so we can continue to be ready to provide these important services when the
need arises.
As a facility, we are currently 22 years old. Relative to many other like facilities across the state
this is young. Not relative to others however, this facility is greatly utilized. This usage places a
tremendous demand on infrastructure and we are seeing that impact today. Our groundwater
well is currently operating at 50% of the required flow. A prudent approach would be to have
redundant systems operating at 200% of the required flow. As we look to improve this system
the primary roadblock is the lack of a master plan which is a direct result of closure on the
pending land transfer. It is not fiduciary judicious to invest in infrastructure improvements
without a reasonable expectation of what future development potential exists.
We kninulrl alcn be interested in jnining the State Land Board fnr your next mooting, and to have
an agendized item to discuss this matter further. We trust that if we have the opportunity to
share in more detail the importance of this transfer, to our organization, the Citizens of the
entire Tri-County Central Oregon region, and indeed the entire State of Oregon, you will
continue to recognize the value and urgency of this transaction.
The time is now to complete the transfer of parcels so that we can invest in the future and
continue the important work entrusted to us by the citizens of Deschutes County, and the
State. This is why we, the County Fair Board, in conjunction with the Deschutes County
Commissioners, urge you to take immediate action and bring this to a closure as soon as
possible. We are available to answer any questions and are willing to utilize the resources at
our disposal in whatever capacity is needed.
Thank you for your time and commitment in serving the residents of our great State.
Sincerely,
\T ES
0
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING
1:00 PM, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2022
Barnes Sawyer Rooms - Deschutes Services Bldg - 1300 NW Wall St - Bend
(541) 388-6570 I www.deschutes.org
AGENDA
MEETING FORMAT: The Oregon legislature passed House Bill (HB) 2560, which requires that public
meetings be accessible remotely, effective on January 1, 2022, with the exception of executive
sessions. Public bodies must provide the public an opportunity to access and attend public
meetings by phone, video, or other virtual means. Additionally, when in -person testimony, either
oral or written is allowed at the meeting, then testimony must also be allowed electronically via,
phone, video, email, or other electronic/virtual means.
Attendance/Participation options are described above. Members of the public may still view the
BOCC meetings/hearings in real time via the Public Meeting Portal at ww.deschutes.org/meetings.
Citizen Input: Citizen Input is invited in order to provide the public with an opportunity to comment
on any meeting topic that is not on the current agenda. Citizen Input is provided by submitting an
email to: citizeninput@deschutes.org or by leaving a voice message at 541-385-1734. Citizen input
received by noon on Tuesday will be included in the Citizen Input meeting record for topics that are
not included on the Wednesday agenda.
Zoom Meeting Information: Staff and citizens that are presenting agenda items to the Board for
consideration or who are planning to testify in a scheduled public hearing may participate via Zoom
meeting. The Zoom meeting id and password will be included in either the public hearing materials
or through a meeting invite once your agenda item has been included on the agenda. Upon
entering the Zoom meeting, you will automatically be placed on hold and in the waiting room. Once
you are ready to present your agenda item, you will be unmuted and placed in the spotlight for your
presentation. If you are providing testimony during a hearing, you will be placed in the waiting room
until the time of testimony, staff will announce your name and unmute your connection to be invited
for testimony. Detailed instructions will be included in the public hearing materials and will be
announced at the outset of the public hearing.
For Public Hearings, the link to the Zoom meeting will be posted in the Public Hearing Notice as
well as posted on the Deschutes County website at https://www.deschutes.org/bcc/page/public-
hearing-notices.
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CITIZEN INPUT: Citizen Input may be provided as comment on any topic that is not on the
agenda.
Note: In addition to the option of providing in -person comments at the meeting, citizen input comments
may be emailed to citizeninput@deschutes.org or you may leave a brief voicemail at 541.385.1734. To be
timely, citizen input must be received by noon on Tuesday in order to be included in the meeting record.
CONSENT AGENDA
1. Renew Contract for Humane Society Animal Shelter Services
2. Consideration of Board Signature of Order No. 2022-064, Appointing Health Services
Director's Designees
3. Approve Document No. 2022-854, an Intergovernmental Agreement with the Oregon
Judicial Department for Parental Custody Mediation Funds
4. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter of Thanks to Bill Anderson for service on the
Deschutes County Facility Project Review Committee
5. Consideration of Board Signature on Letter of Thanks to Mark Davis for service on the
Spring River Special Road District
6. Approval of the Minutes of November 2, 2022 BOCC Meeting
ACTION ITEMS
7. 1:05 PM Consideration of Board signature of Central Oregon Intergovernmental
Council Agreement #2022-782
8. 1:25 PM Consideration of Document No. 2022-793, a Ground Lease with Mountain
View Community Development for the Redmond Safe Parking Program
9. 1:55 PM Consideration of American Rescue Plan Act Funding Proposal: Friends of the
Children
10. 2:05 PM First reading of Ordinance No. 2022-011, amending the Comprehensive Plan
and approving a Zone change for property totaling approximately 19.12
acres along Highway 97
11. 2:10 PM First reading of Ordinance No. 2022-013 amending the Comprehensive Plan
and approving a zone change for property totaling approximately 710 acres
to the west of Terrebonne and north of Highway 126
November 14, 2022
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING Page 2 of 3
12. 2:15 PM Senate Bill (SB) 391 Work Session - Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
Legislative Amendments
13. 2:45 PM Preparation for Public Hearing - Psilocybin TPM Amendments
14. 3:15 PM Paid Leave Oregon Implementation
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.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
At any time during the meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS
192.660(2)(e), real property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor
negotiations; ORS 192.660(2)(b), personnel issues; or other executive session categories.
Executive sessions are closed to the public; however, with few exceptions and under specific guidelines,
are open to the media.
15. Executive Session under ORS 192.660(2)(d) Labor Negotiations
ADJOURN
Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs
and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need
accommodations to make participation possible, please call (541) 617-4747.
November 14, 2022
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING Page 3 of 3