2023-228-Minutes for Meeting June 05,2023 Recorded 7/24/2023Recorded in Deschutes County CJ2023-228
Steve Dennison, County Clerk
Commissioners' .journal 07/24/2023 4:13:29 PM
vi E S COG
BOAR® OF
COMMISSIONERS
1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon
(541) 388-6570
2023-228
FOR RECORDING STAMP ONLY
BOCC MEETING MINUTES
MONDAY June 5, 2023
Allen Room
Live Streamed Video
Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone and Phil Chang. Also present were Nick Lelack, County
Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Whitney Hale, Deputy County Administrator;
Dave Doyle, County Counsel; and Brenda Fritsvold, BOCC 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 DeBone called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. and noted the
excused absence of Commissioner Adair.
CITIZEN INPUT: None
AGENDA ITEMS:
1. Consideration to increase solid waste franchise fees from three percent to
five percent to fund nuisance abatement compliance
Tim Brownell, Incoming Solid Waste Director, presented a proposal to amend
Deschutes County Code sections 13.24.120 (Fees for Commercial Haulers) and
13.24.120 (Fees for Noncommercial Haulers) to increase solid waste franchise fees
from three percent to five percent. Staff anticipates these increases would generate
approximately $240,000 per year; the first $200,000 received would be transferred
to the Community Development Department (CDD) to fund nuisance abatement
compliance.
BOCC MEETING JUNE 5, 2023 PAGE 1 OF 4
Brownell explained that franchise fees are assessed on commercial and
noncommercial haulers which provide services to residents and businesses within
the unincorporated areas of the County. These increases would be passed on to
customers of the haulers through their monthly service fees; the average residential
customer would pay approximately $0.60 more per month for a 65 gallon garbage
bin, and the average business would pay approximately $6 per month more for a
four cubic yard container.
Commissioner Chang said while the County is responsible for ensuring that
properties determined to be in violation of Code are brought into compliance, he
sought more information on whether this revenue source is the appropriate one to
fund those efforts.
Brownell referred to the risk of unmanaged waste posing environmental hazards
and confirmed that the Solid Waste Department is tasked with ensuring the proper
disposal of waste to address and alleviate contamination concerns.
County Administrator Nick Lelack added that Solid Waste is responsible for
enforcing the nuisance code, and contracts with CDD to do that work.
Peter Gutowsky, Community Development Director, said at least 30% of the
County's Code enforcement cases involve solid waste.
Responding to Commissioner DeBone, Brownell said if the increased funds are no
longer needed in the future, staff will return to the Board and either propose that
the fee increase be retracted or the revenues be allocated to a different purpose.
Brownell concluded that a public hearing will be held on this proposal on June 21 st.
2. Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 197.307(4) "clear and objective" standards for
rural residential housing
Will Groves, Planning Manager, explained that ORS 197.307(4)1 requires local
governments to adopt and apply clear and objective standards, conditions and
procedures to regulate housing development. In 2017, Senate Bill 1051 expanded the
applicability of this provision outside of UGBs to all rural lands. As a result,
discretionary standards are subject to challenge and may be unenforceable.
Groves said the applicant of the Eden Central development has argued that the
majority of Deschutes County's rules are not enforceable because they are not clear
and objective. To remedy this situation, County staff are coordinating with
Association of Oregon Counties on HB 3197 which was introduced in the current
legislative session; this bill would clarify that ORS 197.307(4) does not apply outside of
BOCC MEETING JUNE 5, 2023 PAGE 2 OF 4
UGBs. Groves spoke to the increased likelihood of appeals and other potential
problems if HB 3197 does not pass and said the County could be forced to allocate a
very large amount of staff resources towards drafting and accomplishing updates to
its Code.
Peter Gutowsky, Community Development Director, added that Washington County
has been working since 2017 or 2018 to update its code in response to these
regulations„ but a court found that its attempts resulted in rules which were not
sufficiently clear and objective.
3. Work Session on Senate Bill 391 - Rural Accessory Dwelling Units Legislative
Amendments
Kyle Collins, Associate Planner, reviewed the work done thus far to develop
regulations to allow accessory dwelling units (ADUs) in rural areas and described
recent state legislative changes associated with SB 644 and SB 391, both of which
affect rural ADU standards. Collins explained that SB 644 removes the connection
that previously existed between the Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk and the
development of local ADU standards. Additional changes have established clear and
objective standards for rural ADU development.
In light of these changes, staff requests direction whether the County should initiate a
new Post -Acknowledgement Plan Amendment (PAPA) notice to DLCD to incorporate
all recent legislative changes into the County's proposed ADU regulations. This would
restart the ADU adoption process and allow for additional public comment. Collins
said DLCD staff has indicated it does not believe a new PAPA notice is required;
however, staff notes there is an unknown level of legal vulnerability associated with
not reinitiating the adoption process.
Stephanie Marshall, Senior Assistant Legal Counsel, provided further comment and
advice on the options before the Board.
Commissioner DeBone said he always envisioned that this matter would return to the
Planning Commission for a secondary review.
Following discussion regarding the options for proceeding and the timeframes
involved in each, Chair DeBone noted the consensus of the Board to restart the
process, which will require a new work session before the Planning Commission, and
schedule the required public hearings before the Board. A separate joint meeting of
the Board and the Planning Commission will also be scheduled.
BOCC MEETING JUNE S, 2023 PAGE 3 OF 4
OTHER ITEMS:
• jen Patterson, Strategic Initiatives Manager, distributed a draft letter of
support to potential funders for the Heart of Oregon Corps campus
campaign. A majority of the Board was in consensus to sign the letter as
drafted.
• Following discussion, the Board concurred to send emails to certain
individual legislators regarding HB 5525 in support of public health funding.
• County Administrator Nick Lelack said the Board's customary annual joint
meeting with the Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled forJuly 13tn
• Commissioner Chang shared that the Coalition for the Deschutes"'Springs to
Sprouts" tour last Saturday highlighted efforts to track water diversion.
• Commissioner Chang reported he will be out of the office this Friday and
unable to attend the Made in Redmond event.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: None
ADJOURN:
Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:21 p.m.
DATED this 1-/Day of 2023 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners.
ATTEST:
It
RECORDING SECRETARY
ANTHONY DEBONE, CHAIR
PATTI ADAIR, VICE CHAIR
PHIL CHANG, COMMISSIONER
BOCC MEETING JUNE 5, 2023 PAGE 4 OF 4
wTES CO
BOAR® OF
g COMMISSIONERS
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2023
SUBIECT: Consideration to increase solid waste franchise fees from three percent to five
percent to fund nuisance abatement compliance
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
None at this time.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Staff seeks Board consideration to amend Deschutes County Code sections 13.24.120 (Fees
for Commercial Haulers) and 13.24.120 (Fees for Noncommercial Haulers) to increase solid
waste franchise fees from three percent to five percent.
Earlier this year, the Community Development Department (CDD) approached the Solid
Waste Department to discuss its need to address the increasing number of private
properties that have accumulated large amounts of solid wastes onsite which require
County involvement to ensure the abatement of these situations. Under DCC 13.36
Nuisances and Abatement, if a property is determined to be a nuisance, the County has the
right and responsibility to ensure compliance to remediate the situation. CDD staff has
worked with these types of properties for years to voluntarily remove materials and bring
these properties back into compliance. However, the number of properties that are
considered to be nuisances are increasing, and many of the owners have not voluntarily
come back into compliance. Before these sites get any worse, and with the risk of them
becoming an environmental hazard, CDD is anticipating moving into a different stage of
enforcement that would allow the County to place liens on these properties and hire
private contractors to remove the wastes and other materials from the sites. These
operations will be significant and require funding that is not currently within the CDD
budget. Seeing that these enforcements actions are for solid waste code violations, CDD
staff approached the Solid Waste staff for funding in the amount of $200,000 per year to
support these enforcement activities.
Solid Waste staff identified the franchise fee as an appropriate funding mechanism to
support the CDD's enforcement activity. The franchise fee is assessed primarily to the
commercial franchise haulers which provide services to residents and commercial
businesses within the unincorporated areas of the County as prescribed through the
franchise agreements with Cascade Disposal, Wilderness Disposal, Bend Garbage and
Recycling, High Country Disposal, and Deschutes Transfer. The amount of the franchise fee
is defined in and determined by the Deschutes County Code. The franchise fee is currently
set at three percent of gross receipts for each of the commercial haulers, as well as for any
non-commercial haulers. In 2021, these fees generated approximately $354,000. A two
percent increase in the franchise fee to five percent would generate approximately
$240,000 a year of additional revenue to support the funding request from CDD for
abatement services. These revenues are subject to fluctuations due to the economic
activities in the County's service areas.
This increase in the franchise fee would be passed on to residential and commercial
customers through their monthly service fees. It is anticipated to impact the average
residential customer rate by $0.60 per month for a 65-Gallon garbage cart, and
approximately $6 per month for a commercial business receiving weekly service for a 4-
cubic yard container. These impacts will vary depending on service levels and locations
throughout the county.
These changes in the franchise fees have already been anticipated and included in the
franchise rate modification request that Solid Waste staff is recommending to the Board of
County Commissioners in June, 2023.
The purpose of the work session is to prepare for a public hearing before the Board
regarding this proposal to increase the Solid Waste franchise fee.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
If the change in the franchise fee is adopted, the Solid Waste department will seek to
amend the adopted FY'23-24 budget to increase the revenues in accordance with this
change, and add an increase in M&S expenses of $200,000 to account for the transfer of
funds to CDD. Any additional revenues above this expense will be added to the Solid Waste
Department's contingency. CDD and the Solid Waste department will develop a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that will further define the terms and timing of the
funding arrangement.
ATTENDANCE:
Chad Centola - Director of Solid Waste
Tim Brownell - Incoming Director of Solid Waste
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 197.307(4) "clear and objective" standards
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
N/A
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Board of County Commissioners (Board) needs to begin considering the implications of
clear and objective requirements for rural housing development. Following this briefing,
staff will seek Board direction later in the summer at the conclusion of the 2023 Legislative
Session.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
None
ATTENDANCE:
Will Groves, Planning Manager
MEMORANDUM
TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
FROM: Will Groves, Planning Manager
DATE: June 5, 2023
SUBJECT: Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 197.307(4) "clear and objective" standards
The Board of County Commissioners (Board) needs to begin considering the implications of clear and
objective requirements for rural housing development. Staff will seek Board direction later in the summer
at the conclusion of the 2023 Legislative Session.
I. BACKGROUND
ORS 197.307(4)' requires local governments to "adopt and apply only clear and objective' standards,
conditions and procedures regulating the development of housing." Prior to 2017, this rule clearly
applied to only lands within Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs). In 2017, the Governor signed Senate Bill
(SB) 1051, which amended several statutes, including, ORS 197.307(4).
SB 1051 made two changes to the statute. First, it expanded the "clear and objective" requirement from
"needed housing" to include "the development of housing, including needed housing[.]" Second, SB 1051
deleted the phrase "on buildable land." Both "needed housing' and "buildable land" constrained the
applicability of ORS 197.307(4) to specific lands within UGBs. These changes expanded the applicability
of this provision from lands within the UGB to all rural lands. In Warren vs. Washington County (2017), the
Land Use Board of Appeals confirmed that ORS 197.307(4) precludes counties from applying any
standards, conditions, and procedures that are not clear and objective to the development of housing.
To date, this preclusion has only been raised locally in Deschutes County file Eden Central Properties (247-
23-000261-TP). In this application, the applicant argues many of the Title 17 provisions relating to
subdivisions are not clear and objective and, thus, not enforceable. Staff anticipates increased use of ORS
1 ORS 197.307(4) Except as provided in subsection (6) of this section, a local government may adopt and apply only clear and
objective standards, conditions and procedures regulating the development of housing, including needed housing. The
standards, conditions and procedures:
(a) May include, but are not limited to, one or more provisions regulating the density or height of a development.
(b) May not have the effect, either in themselves or cumulatively, of discouraging needed housing through unreasonable
cost or delay.
z In order to be "clear" for purposes of ORS 197.307(4), a standard must be "clear enough for an applicant to know what he
must show during the application process," it must be "easily understood and without obscurity or ambiguity," and it must not
be capable of multiple constructions that support diametrically opposed conclusions.
197.307(4) to preclude application of County criteria to housing proposals or to appeal County housing
decisions that are based on discretionary standards.
II. HB 3197 (2023)
In the current legislative session, House Bill (HB) 3197 was proposed to clarify that ORS 197.307(4) is only
intended to apply within UGBs. As of early May, the bill is in its third set of amendments, specifying that
the "clear and object requirements would apply to:
":..unincorporated communities designated in a county's acknowledged comprehensive plan after
December 5, 1994, nonresource lands and areas zoned for rural residential use as defined in ORS
215.501."
These amendments also limit the clear and objective provisions to lands within UGBs until July 1, 2025.
This would provide Counties with two years to review and update local code to comply with the clear and
objective requirement. It is uncertain if this bill will be signed, and it is possible that land use code
provisions relating to housing will remain unenforceable unless they are clear and objective for the
foreseeable future.
111. IMPACTED COUNTY REGULATIONS
Following an initial review of County Code, Table 1 highlights some important sections of the Code that
relate to housing and likely do not meet clear and objective requirements. Example discretionary criteria
are identified below.
Table 1 - Impacted County Regulations
Code Provision/Section
Example Criteria
DCC 17.16.100(A) - The subdivision contributes to the orderly
development and land use patterns in the area...
Title 17 - Subdivisions
DCC 17.16.100 (B) - The subdivision would not create excessive
demand on public facilities, services and utilities required to serve
the development.
DCC 17.22.020(5) - Each parcel is suited for the use intended or
offered, considering the size of the parcels, natural hazards,
topography and access.
Title 17 - Partitions
DCC 17.22.020(6) -All required utilities,, public services and facilities
are available and adequate and are proposed to be provided by the
petitioner.
Title 18 - Definitions
DCC 18.04.030 - Grade, Height Single -Family, "Front" lot lines
-2-
Code Provision/Section
Example Criteria
DCC 18.16.050(G)(1)(a)(1) - The dwelling or activities associated
with the dwelling will not force a significant change in or significantly
increase the cost of accepted farming practices, as defined in ORS
215.203(2)(c), or accepted forest practices on nearby lands devoted
to farm or forest use.
DCC 18.16.050(G)(1)(a)(2) - The proposed nonfarm dwelling will not
Title 18 - Non -Farm Dwellings
materially alter the stability of the overall land use pattern of the
area, In determining whether a proposed nonfarm dwelling will alter
the stability of the land use pattern in the area, the County shall
consider the cumulative impact of nonfarm dwellings on other lots
or parcels in the area similarly situated, by applying the standards
under Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-033-0130(4)(a)(D), and
whether creation of the parcel will lead to creation of other nonfarm
parcels, to the detriment of agriculture in the area.
DCC 18.36.040(A) - The proposed use will not force a significant
change in, or significantly increase the cost of, accepted farming or
Title 18 - Forest Template
forest practices on agricultural or forest lands.
Dwellings
DCC18.36.040(B) - The proposed use will not significantly increase
fire hazard or significantly increase fire suppression costs or
significantly increase risks to fire suppression personnel.
Title 18 - Conditional Housing
Approvals
DCC 18.128.015(A) - The site under consideration shall be
• Planned Unit and Cluster
determined to be suitable for the proposed use based on the
Subdivisions (111110,
following factors:
MUA10, Terrebonne)
1, Site, design and operating characteristics of the use,
• Manufactured Home Park
2. Adequacy of transportation access to the site; and
(Terrebonne, Tumalo,
3. The natural and physical features of the site, including, but
Rural Service Centers)
not limited to, general topography, natural hazards and
natural resource values.
• Recreational Vehicle Park
(Terrebonne, Tumalo,
B. The proposed use shall be compatible with existing and
Rural Commercial)
projected uses on surrounding properties based on the factors
• Multifamily Dwellings
listed in DCC 18.128.015(A).
(Terrebonne, Tumalo,
Rural Service Centers)
DCC 18.84.080(D) - Subject to applicable rimrock setback
Title 18 - Goal 5 Resource
requirements or rimrock setback exception standards in DCC 18.
Protections (Sensitive Bird
84.090(E), all structures shall be sited to take advantage of existing
and Mammal Combining
vegetation, trees and topographic features in order to reduce visual
Zone, Wetland/Riparian
impact as seen from the designated road, river or stream. When
Protections, Landscape
more than one nonagricultural structure is to exist and no
Management Corridors,
vegetation, trees or topographic features exist which can reduce
Wildlife Inventories, Surface
visual impact of the subject structure, such structure shall be
Mining, Cultural Resources)
clustered in a manner which reduces their visual impact as seen
from the designated road, river, or stream.
-3-
IV. RURAL ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND OTHER CODE CHANGES
ORS 197.307(4) also requires that any new County Code relating to housing have clear and objective
standards. Any new code adopted not meeting this requirement will potentially be subject to facial
challenge. This impacts two in -process code updates:
• Accessory Dwelling Units - Staff is working with Legal Counsel to update draft code language
to incorporate clear and objective requirements for rural accessory dwelling units (ADUs).
• 2023 Mule Deer Update -This amendment was designed with clear and objective standards,
due to a similar clear and objective requirement in OAR 660-023-0050(2) for Goal 5 resources.
V. ALTERNATIVE STANDARDS
Clear and objective standards have the potential to reduce developer and community uncertainty on how
regulations will be applied to a project. Properly implemented, these standards can reduce the likelihood
and viability of appeals to land use decisions. However, they also can limit a County's ability to use
discretion to respond to special circumstances related to wildlife and floodplain protections, compatibility
to adjoining uses, or novel situations. Fortunately, the clear and objective requirements of ORS 197.307(4)
and OAR 660-023-0050(2) each allow Counties to adopt an alternative subjective code pathway when a
clear and objective code pathway is also available. However, Staff anticipates increased time and effort
will be required to design, adopt, defend, and maintain multiple code approval pathways.
VI. ACTIONS UNDERTAKEN AND FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES
To date, staff has coordinated with Association of Oregon Counties (AOC) to track and discuss this issue.
As described above, it is unclear if House Bill 3197 will be signed this year and, under this bill, if Counties
will have a two-year window to update local code provisions. While legislative changes may be possible
in the short 2024 Legislative Session, there are presently no legislative concepts that have been raised
outside of House Bill 3197 (2023).
Regardless, meeting clear and objective requirements imposes significant demands on Counties in the
form of regulatory uncertainty, increased likelihood of land use appeals, cumbersome code audits and
updates, and anticipated legal challenges to those updates. The possibility of reconciling statutory
requirements and Goal 5 resource protections would likely require significant restructuring of the
associated local code provisions through robust public processes.
As we await the outcome of HB 3197, staff recommends the Board begin considering responses to these
issues, which include but are not limited to:
1. Engage AOC and Central Oregon's legislative representatives to support a legislative concept for
the 2024 Legislative Session that limits ORS 197.307(4) to:
o UGBs and/or;
0
o Areas zoned for residential uses outside of UGBs, clear and objective standards apply when a
county is not implementing regulatory programs that address Goal 5 (Wildlife) and/or Goal 7
(Natural Hazards) consistent with their Comprehensive Plan.
2. Prioritize amendments to County Code to comply with ORS 197.307(4) upon completion of the
Comprehensive Plan Update, Tumalo Community Plan Update, Transportation System Plan
Update, Mule Deer Winter Range Inventory, and Rural ADU amendments. Emerging capacity is
anticipated in fall 2023. Other discretionary projects identified in the Planning Division's FY
2023/24 Work Plan, including processing applicant -initiated text amendments and quasi-judicial
plan amendment, zone change applications would likely be placed on hold due to staffing
constraints.
-5-
v"(E S CpG2,�
E
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2023
SUBIECT: Work Session on Senate Bill 391 - Rural Accessory Dwelling Units Legislative
Amendments
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The first of two required public hearings concerning local provisions for rural accessory
dwelling units as identified in Senate Bill 391 was held by the Deschutes County Planning
Commission (Commission) on September 22, 2022. During this work session, staff will
provide an overview of the proposed amendments, recent state legislative changes,
comments received on the proposal to date, and recommendations from the Commission.
Staff will seek further direction from the Board concerning next steps on the proposed
amendments, including future hearing dates.
BUDGET IMPACTS:
None
ATTENDANCE:
Kyle Collins, Associate Planner
Will Groves, Planning Manager
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Kyle Collins, Associate Planner
Will Groves, Planning Manager
DATE: May 31, 2023
SUBJECT: Senate Bill (SB) 391 Work Session - Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Legislative
Amendments
1. OVERVIEW
The Board of County Commissioners (Board) will conduct a work session on June 5, 2023 concerning
local provisions for rural ADUs as identified in Senate Bill (SB) 391' (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
Planning Commission (Commission) on September 22, 20222. The Commission held deliberations on
October 27, 20223 and the recommendations from that meeting are discussed herein and within
provided attachments. Additional sections describe recent state legislative changes associated with
SB 644, which broadly affect rural ADU standards.
Attached to this memorandum are:
• Staff Report and Draft Amendments (Attachment 1)4
Memo Summarizing Planning Commission Recommendations, Public Comments, and Agency
Comments (Attachment 2)
• Memo Summarizing Anticipated Property Eligibility for Rural ADU Development (Attachment
3)
1 https://olis oregonlegislature gov/liz/2021 R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/S130391/A-Engrossed
z See Deschutes County Planning Commission September 22, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-I 7
3 See Deschutes County Planning Commission October 27, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-21
4 Within the proposed amendments, added language is shown underlined and deleted shown as strikethrough.
II. BOARD DECISION POINTS
Given recent state legislative changes, staff requests direction from the Board on the following
matters:
• Per recent legislative changes to SB 391, should staff initiate a new PAPA notice to DLCD to
capture all edits now incorporated in the proposed amendments?
o Anew PAPA notice would restart the ADU adoption process and allow for additional public
comment opportunities at subsequent public hearings.
o DLCD staff has provided feedback that they believe a new PAPA is not required to capture
the minor edits to the original amendments. However, staff notes there is an unknown
level of legal vulnerability associated with not reinitiating the adoption process.
• Should the Commission be given an additional opportunity to review the modified
amendments and provide feedback?
o Primarily, SB 644 removes the connection between the Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk
associated with SB 762 and the development of local ADU standards. Additional changes
have been included to establish clear and objective standards for rural ADU development.
The Board should determine if these changes warrant additional review by the
Commission.
• Should staff proceed with the initial PAPA timeline and begin scheduling a public hearing
before the Board?
o Per DCC 22.12.020(A), staff will need a minimum of 10 days prior to any scheduled
hearing to provide formal public notice.
III. RECORD
The full record is available for inspection at the Planning Division and at the following website:
https://www.deschutes.or /g adu.
IV. STATE REGULATIONS
SB 391 and SB 644 contain 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:
Page 2 of 7
Table 1: SB 391 - Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit Standards
Eligibility
Restrictions
Applies to Rural Residential (RR10), Multiple Use Agricultural (MUA10), Urban Area
1. Rural Residential
Reserve (UAR-10), Suburban Residential (SR 2.5), and Westside Transect (WTZ) zones.
Exception Areas,
Minimum Lot Size, and
0
Lot or parcel must be at least two (2) acres in size.
Dwelling Requirements
0
One (1) single-family dwelling must be sited on the lot or parcel.
2. Existing Dwelling
•
The existing single-family dwelling is not subject to an order declaring it a nuisance
Nuisance
or pending action under ORS 105.550 to 105.600.
3. ADU Sanitation
The ADU must comply with all applicable laws and regulations relating to
Requirements
sanitization and wastewater disposal and treatment.
4. ADU Square Footage
The ADU cannot include more than 900 square feet of useable floor area.
Requirements
5. ADU Distance
0
The ADU is required to be located no farther than 100 feet from the existing single -
Requirements
family dwelling.
6. ADU Water Supply
•
if the ADU is relying on a domestic well, no portion of the lot or parcel can be within
Requirements
new or existing ground water uses restricted by the Water Resource Commission.
'
A county may require that an ADU be served by the same water supply source or
7. ADU Water Supply Source
water supply system as the existing single-family dwelling, provided such is allowed
Option
by an existing water right or a use under ORS 537.545 (exempt uses).'
8. ADU / Metolius Area of
Critical State Concern 1
No portion of a lot or parcel can be within a designated area of critical state concern.
Limitations
9. ADU Setback
0
The ADU is required to have adequate setbacks from adjacent lands zoned Exclusive
Requirements
Farm Use (EFU) or Forest Use.
10. ADU / Wildland-Urban
•
The lot or parcel must comply with the rules of the State Board of Forestry under
Interface Requirements
ORS 477.015 to 477.061.
11. ADU / Outside Wildland-
0
If the ADU is not subject to ORS 477.015 to 477.061 (i.e. outside of the newly -defined
Urban Interface (WUI)
wildland-urban interface), it must have defensible space and fuel break standards as
Area Requirements
developed in consultation with local fire protection service providers.
•
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 identified as high or extreme risk are required to comply with the Oregon
12. ADU / Statewide Wildfire
residential specialty code relating to wildfire hazard mitigation for the mapped area
Map Requirements
(R327.4).
Per SB 644, prior to release of the statewide wildfire risk maps, all ADUs, regardless
of future risk classification, are required to comply with the Oregon residential
specialty code relating to wildfire hazard mitigation (R327.4).
13. ADU Adequate Access
and Evacuation for
0
Local regulations must ensure the ADU has adequate access for firefighting
Firefighting
equipment, safe evacuation and staged evacuation areas
Requirements
5 https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_537.545
Page 3 of 7
Eligibility
Restrictions
14. ADU Occupancy
ADUs cannot be allowed for vacation occupancy, as defined in ORS 90.100.
Requirements
15. ADU Land Division
0 If an eligible property with an ADU is divided, the single family dwelling and ADU
Requirements
cannot be situated on a different lot or parcel.
16. ADU / Additional Units
A second ADU is not allowed.
.
V. 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 I Draft County Interpretation
• Means the living space area of the accessory dwelling unit included within the
surrounding insulated exterior walls, exclusive of garages, carports, decks and porch
covers. All portions of accessory dwelling units that do not meet the definition of
Useable Floor Area "usable floor area" shall not be improved with the following:
o Kitchen, kitchenette, or other cooking facilities;
o Sleeping quarters; and/or
o Facilities for washing and/or drying laundry.
• A unit must be located no farther than 100 feet from the existing single family
100-Foot Siting Distance 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 4 of 7
Undefined SB 391 Standard Draft County Interpretation
• "Safe evacuation plan" means an identifiable route on a right(s)-of-ways 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" means a continuous, minimum 20-foot width right-of-way,
Adequate Access and connecting an accessory dwelling with a fire protection service provider. The right-
of-way must be improved and composed of an all-weather surface including asphalt,
Evacuation for Firefighting concrete, or gravel, but excluding cinders and other aggregate materials.
Requirements
o Alternatively, property owners may demonstrate adequate access by providing
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.
The following items describe supplemental development standards recommended by Community
Development staff to ensure safe operations for any ADUs constructed within Deschutes County.
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 in this specific geographic area. 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 Commission recommendation
and discussion memo (Attachment 2).
Additional Dwelling Units
Due to concerns regarding failing treatment systems and groundwater impacts, the Onsite
Wastewater Division recommends limiting properties constructed with ADUs from all future
residential dwelling development, including additional ADUs, medical hardship dwellings, and
temporary dwellings within recreational vehicles or similar uses. The draft amendments as presented
include this provision. Further details are included as part of the attached Commission
recommendation and discussion memo (Attachment 2).
VI. WILDFIRE STANDARDS
Senate Bill 762
Certain properties in rural Deschutes Countywill likely be subjectto newwildfire mitigation measures
as approved under SB 762.6 One of the primary pieces of SB 762 is the creation of a comprehensive
6 SB 762 (2021)
Page 5 of 7
Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk to guide new wildfire regulations for development. The initial risk map
was made available on June 30, 2022.' However, based on significant concern from citizens and
interest groups through the state, the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) withdrew the initial risk
map to provide more time for additional public outreach and refinement of risk classification
methodologies. At this time, it is unclear when ODF anticipates releasing new risk maps.
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,
per direction from County Legal Counsel (discussed in detail during a November 14, 2022 work
session with the Board'), the specific language of SB 391 originally mandated that no properties
would be eligible for rural ADUs, despite adoption of County standards which approve said use within
the County Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinances, until such time as a new iteration of a
Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk is formally released by ODF.
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 Statewide Map of
Wildfire Risk 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
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.
Senate Bill 644
SB 644 was recently passed by the Oregon State Legislature9. SB 644 effectively decouples the
Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk from the adoption of any local rules allowing rural ADUs. During any
interim period where a local jurisdiction has adopted rules allowing rural ADUs and prior to the
release of the final risk map, any constructed ADUs will be subject to the home hardening building
codes as described in section R327 of the 2021 Oregon Residential Specialty Code.
SB 644 does not alter the original defensible space standards of SB 762. At the urging of County Legal
Counsel and to provide for clear and objective standards, staff has proposed supplemental
defensible space rules for all ADU development which occurs prior to adoption and release of the
Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk. The proposed defensible space standards are based on existing rules
within the Forest Use Zones (F1 and F2) and would be effectively removed after final adoption of the
final risk map.
' https://oregonexpIorer.info/tools
8 See Board of County Commissioners November 14, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https•//www deschutes.org/bcc/page/board-county-commissioners-meeting-71
9 https://olis oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2023Rl/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB644/Enrolled
Page 6 of 7
VI1. NEXT STEPS
As discussed above, the Board will need to make a decision on the following points:
• Per recent legislative changes to SB 391, should staff initiate a new PAPA notice to DLCD to
capture all edits now incorporated in the proposed amendments?
• Should the Planning Commission be given an additional opportunity to review the modified
amendments and provide feedback?
• Should staff proceed with the initial PAPA timeline and begin scheduling a public hearing
before the Board?
At the conclusion of the meeting, the Board can:
• Set a date for a future Board public hearing; or
• Select an alternative hearing date based on new Commission review or PAPA submittal
Attachments:
1. Staff Report and Draft Amendments
2. Memo Summarizing Planning Commission Recommendations, Public Comments, and Agency
Comments
3. Memo Summarizing Anticipated Property Eligibility for Rural ADU Development
Page 7 of 7
FA, roW�l
FILE NUMBER:
247-22-000671-TA
STAFF REPORT
APPLICANT: Deschutes County Community Development
117 NW Lafayette Avenue
Bend, Oregon 97703
PROPERTY
OWNER: N/A
REQUEST: Pursuant to Senate Bills (SB) 391 and 644, 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
1. 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
11. BASIC FINDINGS:
A. Senate Bill 391
On June 23, 2021, the Oregon Legislature adopted Senate Bill (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.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/202lRl/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB391
117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005
1 (541) 388-6575 @cdd@deschutes.org @ 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. Senate Bill 644
On May 8, 2023, the Oregon Legislature adopted Senate Bill (SB) 644, which amends requirements
relating to wildfire hazard mitigation for development of accessory dwelling units on lands zoned
for rural residential use.3 Prior to adoption of SB 644, counties were required to wait for final
adoption of the State Map of Wildfire Risk from the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF) as
identified in SB 7624 prior to adoption of any local administering rural ADU standards. SB 644
decouples adoption of the Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk from the adoption of any local rules
allowing rural ADUs. During any interim period where a local jurisdiction has adopted rules allowing
ADUs and prior to the release of the final risk map, any constructed ADUs will be subject to the
home hardening building codes as described in section R327 of the 2021 Oregon Residential
Specialty Code.
C. 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.s 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.
2 House Bill 3012 (2017).
3 https://olis oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2023Rl/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB644/Enrolled
4 https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/liz/2021 R1/Downloads/MeasureDocument/SB762/Enrolled
5 SB 1533 (2022) corrected broken links in SB 762 related to wildfire mapping.
247-22-000671 JA Page 2 of 43
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 and SB 644. 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
SB 391 Section 2(2)(c) requires one single-family
DCC 18.116.370(B)(1) and DCC
Single Family Dwelling
dwelling to be located on the lot or parcel.
19.92.160(B)(1) are consistent with
SB 391.
SB 391 Section 2(b) requires that the lot or parcel
DCC 18.116.370(B)(2) is consistent
is not located within an area designated as an
with SB 391. Redmond's Urban
Urban Reserve Area
urban reserve as defined in ORS 195.137. In
Reserve Areas is not near lands
Deschutes County, the Redmond Urban Reserve
zoned in Title 19, therefore it is not
Area is the only urban reserve that meets this
cited in DCC 19.92.160.
definition.
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
Pursuant to DLCD, Acknowledged
residential use" means land that is not located
nonresource plan amendments
Nonresource Lands
inside an urban growth boundary as defined in
and zone changes from Exclusive
ORS 195.060 (Definitions) and that is subject to an
Farm Use (EFU) to RR-10 or MUA-
acknowledged exception to a statewide land use
10 are eligible for an ADU.
planning goal relating to farmland or forestland
and planned and zoned by the county to allow
residential use as a primary use.
SB 391 Section 2(2)(i) requires that no portion of
DCC 18.116.370(B)(3) is consistent
the lot or parcel is within a designated area of
With SB 391. The Metolius Area of
Areas of Critical State
critical state concern. Areas of critical state
Critical State Concern is not near
Concern
concern are generally defined in ORS 197.405 and
lands zoned in Title 19, therefore it
apply to the Metolius Area of Critical State
is not cited in DCC 19.92.160.
Concern in ORS 197.416.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(4) and DCC
19,92.160(B)(2) are consistent with
SB 391.
Minimum Lot Size
SB 391 Section 2(2)(b) requires the subject lot or
DCC 18.116.370(B)(4) requires a
parcel be at least two acres in size.
p
minimum lot or parcel to be at
least 5 acres in size south of
Sunriver due to groundwater
protection.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(5) and DCC
SB 391 Section 2(2)(m)(A) requires that the ADU
19.92.160(B)(3) are consistent with
Setbacks
has adequate setbacks from adjacent lands
SB 391. Both require a minimum
setback of 100 feet between the
zoned for resource use.
ADU and adjacent EFU and Forest
Use zoned (F-1, F-2) properties.
247-22-000671-TA Page 3 of 43
Topic
SB 391 Requirements
Comment
DCC 18.116.370(B)(6) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(4) are consistent with
SB 391.
SB 391 Section 2(2)(0 limits the size of the ADU to
Usable floor area is defined as,
ADU Size
900 square feet of useable floor area.
"the area of the accessory dwelling
unit included within the
surrounding insulated exterior
walls, exclusive of garages,
carports, decks and porch covers."
DCC 18.116.370(B)(7) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(5) are consistent with
SB 391.
SB 391 Section 2(2)(g) requires the ADU to be
Both require the ADU be located
Distance from Dwelling
located no farther than 100 feet from the single
no farther than 100 feet from the
family dwelling.6
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.
SB 391 Section 2(2)(e) requires the ADU to comply
DCC 18.116.370(B)(8) and DCC
Sanitation and
with applicable sanitation and wastewater
19.92.160(B)(6) are consistent with
Wastewater
regulations.
SB 391.
SB 391 Section 2(2)(j) requires the lot or parcel be
DCC 18.116.370(B)(9) and DCC
Fire Protection District
served by a fire protection service provider with
19.92.160(B)(7) are consistent with
Service
professionals who have received training or
SB 391.
certification described in ORS 181A.410.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(10) and DCC
19.92.160(B)(8) are consistent with
SB 391.
SB 391 Section 2(2)(m)(B) requires that the ADU
Access and Evacuation
has adequate access for firefighting equipment
Both require certification of access
and safe evacuation and staged evacuation areas.
by the applicable fire protection
district and that there are
evacuation plan and authorized
staged evacuation areas.
SB 1533 Section 5(2)(k) requires that if the lot or
DCC 18.116.370(B)(12) and (13),
parcel is in an area identified on the statewide
and DCC 19.92.160(B)(10) and (11)
map of wildfire risk described in ORS 477.490, as
are consistent with SB 391,
Wildland Urban Interface
within a WUI with a high to extreme risk
Consistent with SB 644, the code
(WUI) Defensible Space
classification, the lot or parcel must comply with
sections identify alternatives for
Requirements
any applicable minimum defensible space
properties wishing to develop
requirement for wildfire risk reduction
rural ADUs prior to and after the
established by the State Fire Marshal under ORS
adoption of the State Map of
476.392.
Wildfire Risk identified in SB 762.
6 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
DCC 18.116.370(B)(12) and (13),
SB 762 Section 12 requires that if the lot or parcel
and DCC 19.92.160(B)(10) and (11)
is in an area identified on the statewide map of
are consistent with SB 391,
Wildland Urban Interface
wildfire risk described in ORS 477.490, as within a
Consistent with SB 644, the code
(WUI) Fire Hardening
WUI with a high to extreme risk classification, the
sections identify alternatives for
ADU must comply with R327 (fire hardening
properties wishing to develop
standards) in the Oregon Residential Specialty
rural ADUs prior to and after the
Code.
adoption of the State Map of
Wildfire Risk identified in SB 762.
SB 391 Section 2(2)(d) requires that the ADU
DCC 18.116.370(B)(14) and DCC
Nuisance
complies with applicable sanitation and
19.92.160(B)(12) are consistent
wastewater regulations.
with SB 391.
SB 391 Section 2(4)(a) and (b) preclude a
Subdivision and Other
subdivision, partition or other division of the lot
DCC 18.116.370(B)(15) and DCC
Accessory Dwelling
or parcel so that the existing single-family
19.92.160(B)(13)are consistent
Unit Limitations
dwelling is situated on a different lot or parcel
with SB 391.
than the ADU; and precludes construction of an
additional ADU on the same lot or parcel.
DCC 18.116.370(B)(16) and DCC
SB 391 Section 2(5) allows a county to require that
19.92.160(B)(14) are consistent
the ADU be served by the same water source or
with SB 391.
water supply system as the existing single-family
dwelling. If the ADU is served by a well, the
While not requiring the same
Water Supply
construction of the ADU shall maintain all
water source, DCC
setbacks from the well required by the Water
18.11 6.370(B)(1 6) and DCC
Resources Commission or Water Resources
19.92.160(B)(14) require setbacks
Department.
from the well to be maintained
from an ADU.
SB 391 Section 2(6) recognizes that a single family
dwelling and an ADU are considered a single unit
DCC 18.116.370(B)(18) and DCC
Water Right Exempt Use
and therefore do not require a groundwater
1 9.92.160(B)(1 6) are consistent
permit from the Oregon Water Resources
with SB 391.
Department.'
DCC 18.116.370(B)(19) and DCC
SB 391 Section2(3) prevents an ADU from being
19.92.160(B)(17) are consistent
Vacation Occupancy
used for vacation occupancy as defined in ORS
with SB 391.
90.100.
Both require a restrictive covenant
be recorded to ensure compliance.
7 Deschutes County does not contain any critical groundwater areas as defined by the Water Resources Commission.
247-22-000671 JA Page 5 of 43
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.
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.
247-22-000671-TA Page 6 of 43
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.
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.
247-22-000671-TA Page 7 of 43
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 Appendix which is attached to this
document.
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 912 tax lots between 2 and 4.99 acres and 387 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 and those constructed prior to adoption of the State Map of Wildfire Risk, will be required to
comply with Oregon Residential Specialty Code (R327) to fire harden the ADU and coordinate with
the Oregon State Fire Marshal or local fire protection districts 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.
247-22-000671-TA Page 8 of 43
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) 763.
The potential lots for a rural ADU are geographically spread out:
• Bend area: 3,876 lots
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.
247-22-000671-TA Page 9 of 43
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
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 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.
247-22-000671 JA Page 10 of 43
Appendix A: ESEE Analysis Document to
File No. 247-22-000671-TA
247-22-000671-TA Page 11 of 43
Deschutes County Community Development
August 16, 2022
247-22-000671-TA Page 12 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
Chapter4: Impact Areas.......................................................................................................... 19
Chapter5: ESEE Analysis......................................................................................................... 20
Chapter6: 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 13 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),
Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10), and Westside Transect Zones (WTZ). 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.
Setback Protections: 100-foot structural setback from the ordinary high water mark
(OHWM) of rivers and streams.
247-22-000671-TA Page 14 of 43
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 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.$ Deschutes County is amending the MUA-10, RR-10, SR 2.5, UAR-10 and WTZ 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, UAR-10 and WTZ 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
a OAR 660-023-0250(3)(b)
• DCC Chapter 19.12, Urban Area Reserve Zone
• DCC Chapter 19.20, Suburban Low Density
Residential Zone
• DCC Chapter 19.22, Westside Transect Zone
247-22-000671-TA Page 15 of 43
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
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." 9 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 S:
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.
9 OAR 660-023-0040(1)
247-22-000671 JA Page 16 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.10 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
10 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 MUM 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 17 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 18 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-10 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
Personal use airstrip
Agricultural uses
Golf course
Single family dwelling or
Type 2 or 3 Home occupation
manufactured home
Destination resorts
Harvesting a forest product
Planned developments
Class I and II road or street projects
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 19 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
subject to land division standards
Bed and breakfast inn
RR-10
Class III road or street project
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'." 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.
" OAR 660-023-0040(4)
247-22-000671 JA Page 20 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 21 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.
Table 4: Number of Affected Non -Federal Properties in Impact Area 12
Zone
Deer Migration
Deer Winter
Elk
Multiple Use Agricultural Zone
0
9
0
Rural Residential Zone
1,293
446
39
Total
1,293
455
39
12 See footnote #8.
247-22-000671-TA Page 22 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 S. 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 23 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 local 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 24 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.
In some parts of the county, mule deer populations have declined up to 70% since 2000 as a result
of human caused habitat reduction, fragmentation, and disturbance on winter range. 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 recreationa lists.
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
Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat. Based on previous testimony
from ODFW, mule deer populations have declined up to 70% since 2000. Their testimony identified
other elements contributing to reductions in mule deer populations tied to human caused habitat
reduction, fragmentation, and disturbance on winter range.
247-22-000671-TA Page 25 of 43
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 Elk
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.
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.
247-22-000671 JA Page 26 of 43
Scenario (8) 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 testimonyfrom 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.
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.
247-22-000671-TA Page 27 of 43
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
impacts due to the potential loss of wildlife habitat stemming from the possible removal of habitat
areas and construction 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
247-22-000671-TA Page 28 of 43
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 recreationa lists.
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 recent testimony from ODFW, mule deer populations have declined up to 70% since 2000.
Their testimony identified other elements contributing to reductions in mule deer populations tied
to human caused habitat reduction, fragmentation, and disturbance on winter range.
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 29 of 43
Chapter 6: ESEE Decision
660-023-0040(5): Develop a program to achieve Goal S. Localgovernments 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 are both a social and economic issue that outweighs the other ESEE consequences.
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 limit the number of affordable housing
opportunities. Therefore the County is choosing scenario (a) which will allow the use fully
notwithstanding the possible impacts on the resource sites.
Table 5: ESEE Factors
Support habitat
Support
Support
Preserves Rural
functions
Affordable
Recreational
Character
Transportation
ESEE Factors
(Environmental,
Housing
Economy
(Social,
(Energy)
economic,
(Social,
(Economic,
economic)
social)
economic)
Social)
Prohibit conflict
0
_
0
0
0
(No code change)
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 non discretionary requirement, such as a requirement that grading not occur beneath
the dripline of a protected tree, or...
Deschutes County has determined that allowing ADUs within the MUA-10 and RR-10 zones and
within the Deer Migration Corridor, Deer Winter Range, and Significant Elk Habitat should be
allowed fully, notwithstanding the possible impacts on the inventoried resources. 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
Flood Plain
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Resource
Relationship
Ordinances
Floodplain zone recognized as
Major conflicts are
program to achieve the goal to
removal of riparian
conserve fish habitat (Ordinance
vegetation, fill and
Nos. 88-030, 88-031, 89-009).
Ordinance Nos.
Fish Habitat
removal activities
86-018, 86-053,
(Inventory — Ord.
within the bed and
Others include: fill and removal
86-018, 86-05,
No. 92-041, page
Yes
banks of streams or
permits, wetland removal
88-030, 88-031,
18; creeks, rivers
wetlands,
regulations, hydro prohibitions,
89-009, 92-040,
and lakes)
hydroelectric, rural
rimrock setbacks, 100' setback
92-041
residential
from OHW, conservation
development and
easements and restrictions on
water regulation
boats and docks.
Floodplain zone recognized as a
program to achieve the goal to
protect deer winter range
Major conflicts are
(Ordinance Nos. 88-030, 88-031,
Deer Winter Range
dwellings, roads, and
89-009).
(Inventory — Ord.
dogs. Activities which
Ordinance Nos.
No. 92-041, page
cause deterioration of
Others include Wildlife Area
88-030, 88-031,
22; Metolius,
Yes
forage quality and
Combining Zone. Requires 40-acre
89-009, 92-040,
Tumalo, North
quantity or cover are
minimum lot size for all new
92-041, 92-042,
Paulina, and Grizzly
conflicting uses.
residential land divisions.
92-046
ranges identified by
Fences which impede
Underlying zoning in most of the
ODFW
safe passage are also
deer winter range is: EFU, Forest,
a conflicting use.
and Floodplain. These zones
provide for large lot sizes and limit
uses that are not compatible with
farm or forest zones.
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
Deer Migration
Major conflicts are
land divisions in the RR-10 zone in
Corridor
dwellings, roads, and
the Bend/La Pine migration
(Inventory — Ord.
dogs. Fences which
corridor (92-042). A 20-acre parcel
Ordinance Nos.
No. 92-041, page
Yes
impede safe passage
is the minimum size required for a
92-040, 92-041,
26; Bend -La Pine
are also a conflicting
cluster development. Siting and
92-042, 92-046
migration corridor
fencing standards also apply in the
identified by ODFW)
use.
ration deer migration corridor. Migration
g g
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.
247-22-000671-TA Page 32 of 43
Inventoried
Flood Plain
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Resource
Relationship
Ordinances
Wildlife Area Combining Zone was
recognized as the only program to
achieve the goal to protect the elk
habitat.
Major conflict is the
It was amended to require a 160-
loss of habitat due to
acre minimum lot size for areas
increased residential
identified as significant elk habitat.
densities in the
Siting standards are required to
habitat areas.
minimize conflicts of residences
Elk Habitat
Increased human
with habitat protection.
Ordinance Nos.
(Inventory - Ord.
disturbance can cause
88-030, 88-031,
No. 92-041— page
Yes
conflict with elk. The
Underlying zoning in the elk habitat
89-009, 92-040,
32; identified by
use of land which
areas is either Floodplain, Forest, or
92-041, 92-042,
USFS and ODFW)
necessitates the
Open Space and Conservation.
92-046
removal of large
These resource zones restrict high
amounts of vegetative
density residential development
cover can also alter
and prohibit industrial and
-
the quality of elk
commercial uses.
habitat.
* Some lands are zoned RR10,
including lots that are split zoned
with flood plain. They are already
parcelized, preventing future land
divisions.
Land use or
To achieve the goal to conserve
development
antelope habitat, uses conflicting
Antelope Habitat
activities which would
with antelope habitat are limited to
(Inventory — Ord.
result in the loss of
the Wildlife Area Combining Zone.
Ordinance Nos.
No. 92-041— page
No
habitat, and animal
In antelope range, the minimum lot
92-040, 92-041,
38; identified by
harassment and
size is 320 acres. Except for rural
92-042, 92-046
ODFW)
disturbance
service centers, the antelope
associated with
habitat is zoned EFU or F1.
human activity.
Nest sites are found in
Forest, EFU and Open
Space and
Habitat for
Conservation zones.
Sensitive Birds
Uses that could
(inventory -Ord.
conflict with the
No. 92-041— page
habitat site are
41 and Table 5;
surface mining,
identified by ODFW,
residential use,
The Sensitive Bird and Mammal
Ordinance Nos.
ODF, OSU, Oregon
No
recreation facilities,
Combining Zone achieves the goal
92-040, 92-041,
Natural Heritage
roads, logging, and air
to protect sensitive bird sites.
92-042, 92-046
Data Bases).
strips.
The area required
Any activity which
for each nest site
would disturb the
varies between
nesting birds,
species.
including .intensive
recreational use or
removal of trees or
247-22-000671-TA Page 33 of 43
Inventoried
Flood Plain
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Resource
Relationship
Ordinances
vegetation could
conflict with the
habitat site.
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
(UPDATE-
the nest from conflict varies
Inventory - Ord. No.
between species. It's called
94-004 —pages 3 to
"sensitive habitat area."
Ordinance Nos.
140 Site specific
No
See above.
94-004, 94-005
ESEE analysis and
Note: Northern bald eagle, osprey,
and 94-021
decisions follow
golden eagle, prairie falcon, and
each site.
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.
Floodplain zone recognized as
program to achieve the goal to
Waterfowl Habitat
Future resort and
conserve waterfowl habitat
(Inventory — Ord.
vacation home
(Ordinance Nos. 88-030, 88-031,
No. 92-041— page
development, human
89-009).
56; includes all
activity associated
rivers, streams,
lakes and perennial
with recreation along
Others include: fill and removal
Ordinance Nos.
wetlands and ponds
rivers and lakes,
permits, wetland removal
86-018, 86-054,
identified on the
timber -cutting around
regulations, rimrock setbacks, 100'
86-056, 88-030,
1990 US Fish and
Yes
sensitive habitats, fill
setback from OHW, conservation
88-031, 89-009,
Wildlife Wetland
and removal of
easements, restrictions on boats
g2-040, 92-041,
material in wetlands
and docks, landscape management,
92-0492-04
Inventory Maps;
and within the bed
state and federal scenic water
,
92-046
ODFW provided lists
and banks of rivers
regulations. In addition, the Forest
of all bird species;
and streams, and
and EFU zones require large
Co/City of Bend
removal of riparian
minimum lot size which limits the
River Study
vegetation are
potential density of development in
provides additional
conflicting uses.
the areas adjacent to many of the
information)
rivers, streams, wetlands, and
ponds used for waterfowl habitat.
247-22-000671-TA Page 34 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Pheasant and quail
are affected
whenever agricultural
For all of the upland game birds
land is taken out of
except sage grouse, the habitat is
.production through
adequately protected by the
Upland Game Bird
urban sprawl, road
existing EFU and Forest zoning and
Habitat
construction,
the provisions to protect wetlands
(Inventory -Ord.
industrial
and riparian areas to achieve the
No, 92-041—page
development and
goal of protecting upland game
60; ODFW did not
other land clearing
birds.
identify critical
activities.
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
impact. Fence row,
habitat.
04, 92-041, 92-
game birds is
woodlots, and riparian
042, 92-046
dispersed
vegetation are
Note: conflicts with sage grouse are
throughout the
constantly being
limited by EFU zoning with a 320
county in riparian,
removed at the
acre minimum parcel size.
forest, agricultural,
expense of upland
Sensitive Bird and Mammal
and rangeland
bird use.
Combining Zone pertaining to sage
areas)
grouse and leks have been
Chapter of
repealed due to LCDC enacted rules
County/City of Bend
in OAR 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
Flood Plain
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Resource
Relationship
Ordinances
Furbearer habitat is adequately
protected by the existing EFU and
The conflicting uses
Forest zoning and the provisions to
are those activities or
protect farm use and forest zoning,
Furbearer Habitat
development which
and the provisions to protect
(Inventory — Ord.
would degrade or
wetlands and riparian areas to
Ordinance Nos.
No. 9page
destroy habitat, or
achieve the goal to protect
65; ODFW FW has not
disturb the animals
furbearers.
86-018, 86-
identified any
Yes
causing them to
053,86-054, 86-
specific habitat sites
relocate.
The farm and forest zones require
056, 88-030, 88-
other than riparian
large minimum lot sizes and many
031, 89-009, 92-
and wetland areas
Conflicts between
uses are permitted only as
040, 92 041
that are critical for
furbearers and other
conditional uses. The measures to
the listed species.
land uses are minimal
protect riparian and wetland
in the county.
habitat are detailed in this plan in
the Riparian and Wetland Habitat
section.
Caves located in EFU
Habitat Areas for
zones. Uses permitted
Townsend's Big-
in those zones that
Eared Bats
could conflict with the
(Inventory — Ord.
habitat site are
Program to achieve the goal is
Ordinance No.
No. 92-041— page
69; identified by
No
surface mining,
Sensitive Bird and Mammal
92-041 and 042
recreation facilities
Combining Zone
ODFW, ODF, OSU,
including golf courses
Oregon Natural
and destination
Heritage Data
resorts, roads,
Bases)
logging, and air strips.
UPDATE - Inventory
Habitat areas for Townsend Bats,
—Ord. No. 94-004 —
adopted in No. 92-041 is repealed
pages 140 to 155
and replaced and further amended
Ordinance Nos.
Site specific ESEE
No
See above.
in Exhibit 2. The ESEE for
94-004 and 94-
analysis and
Townsend's big -eared bats is
021
decisions follow
amended for additional bat sites in
each site.
Exhibit 3.
247-22-000671 JA Page 36 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
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.
Floodplain zone recognized as
program to achieve the goal to
Structural
conserve wetland and riparian
Wetlands and
development in
habitat (Ordinance Nos. 88-030, 88-
Ordinance Nos.
Riparian Areas
wetlands or riparian
031, 89-009).
86-018, 86-054,
(Inventory — Ord.
Yes
areas would reduce
the habitat and the
Others include: fill and removal
86-0, 88-030,
No. 92-041—page
use of the structure
permits, wetland removal
88-031, 89-009,
73; identified on
could cause conflicts
regulations, hydro prohibitions,
92-040, 92-041,
USFWS NWI)
such as harassment or
100' setback from OHW,
92-045
disturbance or wildlife
conservation easements,
dependent on the
restrictions on boats and docks,
habitat. Cutting of
and landscape management,
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.
247-22-000671-TA Page 37 of 43
Inventoried
Resource
Flood Plain
Relationship
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Ordinances
Conflicting uses:
Locating septic
systems in riparian
Riparian Areas inventory and ESEE
UPDATE — Riparian
area could cause
analysis adopted by Ordinance No.
inventory— Ord.
pollution of ground
92-041 is deleted and replaced by
No. 94-007;
and surface water
an inventory and ESEE contained in
Significant riparian
systems, The potential
Exhibit A.
for this conflict
habitat is located in
depends on the
three areas:
characteristics of the
New parcels meeting the minimum
lot size in the resource zones (EFLI,
Area within 100' of
soil.
Forest, non -exception flood plain)
OHW of an
Locating structural
will not cause an increase in
inventoried stream
development in
residential density that would
or river;
conflict with riparian habitat
riparian areas can
values.
reduce the habitat
Area adjacent to an
and the use of
inventoried river or
structures could cause
In RR10, MLIA-10, and Floodplain
stream and located
conflicts such as
zones found adjacent to
within a flood plain
harassment or
inventoried riparian areas, the
Ordinance Nos.
mapped by FEMA
Yes
disturbance of wildlife
creation of new 10 acre parcels
94-007
and zoned
dependent on habitat.
would not significantly increase the
Floodplain by the
overall density of residential use
county (Deschutes
Recreational use of
adjacent to riparian areas because
River, Little
the areas where new parcels could
Deschutes River,
the riparian area
be created, with the exception of
Paulina Creek, Fall
including boat landing
Tumalo Creek, are already divided
River, Indian Ford
areas, formal and
into lots considerably smaller than
Creek, Tumalo
informal trails, and
10 acres.
Creek, Squaw
camping areas can
(Whychus) Creek,
alter soil composition
program to achieve Goal 5 for
and Crooked River
and cause destruction
Riparian Habitat: fill and removal
of vegetation.
regulations to protect wetlands,
Area adjacent to a
Increase in density of
100' setback from OHW, Floodplain
river or stream and
residential lots in or
zone (regulates docks too),
inventoried as a
adjacent to riparian
Landscape Management zone,
wetland on the NWI
areas could result in a
Conservation easements, State
decrease of habitat
Scenic Waterway
effectiveness because
of disturbance to
wildlife.
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
Wetlands Inventory and ESEE
conflicts such as
analysis adopted by Ordinance No.
harassment or
92-041 is deleted and replaced by
disturbance of wildlife
an inventory and ESEE contained in
dependent on the
Exhibit B, Wetlands.
habitat.
UPDATE — Wetland
Program to achieve Goal 5 for
Inventory— Ord.
Inv ntory
Draining wetlands for
Wetland Habitat:
Ordinance Nos.
,Exhibit
Yes
agriculture of other
94-007
B — inventory is NWI
development
. Fill and removal
(Ord. No. 92-04S)
purposes destroys the
regulations to protect
hydrological function
wetlands
of the wetland and
0 100' setback fi•orn OHW
alters the habitat
• Flood plain zone (regulates
qualities that certain
docks too)
wildlife depend on.
• 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
Programs for resource protection
Areas * Little
include the zoning of the property,
Deschutes River / '
the provisions of the flood plain,
Deschutes River
wetlands and the river corridor.
Confluence
(Inventory - Ord.
The implementing measures which
No. 92-052, Exhibit
Resort and vacation
protect and regulate development
B, Page 1;
home development,
in the confluence area are: EFU
Ordinance Nos.
identified by
recreational
zoning, Floodplain zoning,
86-018, 86-054,
Oregon Natural
Yes
useslivestock grazing,
conservation easements, and fill
86-056, 88-030,
Heritage Program);
and fill and removal in
and removal permits.
88-031, 89-009,
Analysis of Pringle
wetlands are
92-040, 92-041,
Fails and Horse
conflicting uses.
The confluence area is located in
92-045
Ridge Research
the undeveloped open space area
Areas, West
of the Sunriver development
Hampton Butte and
(Crosswater). 80% of the property
Davis Lakes
is retained as open space.
excluded b/c
they're on federal
Today, zoning is Floodplain and
land and/or not
Forest Use.
related to flood
plains.
Landscape
Management
Uses conflicting with
Rivers and Streams
open space and scenic
(Inventory — Ord.
resources along the
No. 92-052, Exhibit
designated Landscape
C, Page 3;
Management rivers
identified by state
and streams include
and federal wild
land management
Program for resource protection
and scenic
activities that result in
includes: Floodplain zone and
Ordinance Nos.
corridors; and
habitat loss or
restrictions, fill and removal
86-0 , 86-053,
within 660' of OHW
development within
permits, wetland removal
86-054 , 86-056,
of portions of
Yes
river or stream
regulations, hydro prohibitions,
88-030, 88-031,
Deschutes River,
corridors which would
rimrock setbacks, conservation
89-009, 92 033,
Little Deschutes
excessively interfere
easements, restrictions on boats
93-034
River, Paulina
with the scenic or
and docks, and landscape
Creek, Fall River,
natural appearance of
management.
Spring river, Tumalo
the landscape as seen
Creek, Squaw
from the river or
(Whychus) Creek,
stream or alteration
and Crooked River
of existing natural
not on the state or
landscape by removal
federal scenic
of vegetative cover.
designations)
247-22-000671-TA Page 40 of 43
Inventoried
Flood Plain
Conflicts
Comments
Relevant
Resource
Relationship
Ordinances
Conflicting` uses with
the open space and
scenic values of the
land adjacent to the
inventoried lakes
Lakes and
include development
Reservoirs
which would cause a
Conflicting uses around Tumalo
(Inventory Ord.
loss of open space or
Reservoir are specifically limited by
No. gExhibit
,
a decrease in the
Title 18.48, Open Space `
Ordinance No.
0; includes
e 10;
C, Page
No
aesthetic and scenic
Conservation Zone and a 100
91-020
Upper Tumalo
resources, and land
setback for any structure from
Reservoir;
management
OHW.
remaining are on
activities resulting in
federal land
the removal of natural
vegetation which
provides wildlife
habitat and scenic
value.
Program for resource protection
State Scenic
includes:
Waterways and
See County / City of
Floodplain zone and restrictions, fill
Ordinance Nos.
Federal Wild and
Bend River Study and
and removal permits, wetland
86-018, 86-053,
Scenic Rivers
Yes
1986 River Study Staff
removal regulations, hydro
86-054, 86-056,
(Inventory —Ord.
Report. Both
prohibitions, rimrock setbacks,
88-030, 88-031,
No. 92-052, Exhibit
referenced in Ord. 92
conservation easements,
89-009, 92-033,
E, Page 1;
005, Exhibit E.
restrictions on boats and docks,
93-034
and landscape management.
Wilderness Areas,
Areas of Special
Concern, Energy
Sources (Ord. No
92-052), and
Groundwater
No
N/A
N/A
N/A
Resources (Ord. No.
94-003) not
analyzed because
they're on federal
land or don't relate
to flood plains.
247-22-000671-TA Page 41 of 43
Attachment 2 - Inventory Site Maps
247-22-000671-TA Page 42 of 43
Exception Area Taxlots Meeting ADU Criteria - Elk Range
1"_A
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 111111979
Amended by Ord. 91-002 §6 on 21611991
Amended by Ord. 91-005 §18 on 31411991
Amended by Ord. 91-020 51 on 512911991
Amended by Ord. 91-038 §1 on 913011991
Amended by Ord. 93-001 §1 on 112711993
Amended by Ord. 93-043 §4 on 812511993
Amended by Ord. 94-008 §10 on 61811994
Amended by Ord. 2001-016 §2 on 312812001
Amended by Ord. 2001-039 §2 on 1211212001
Amended by Ord. 2004-002 §3 on 412812004
Amended by Ord. 2019-009 §1 on 91312019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §1 on 91312019
Amended by Ord. 2023-00x §x on (dote!
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 III 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 111111979
Amended by Ord. 91-005 §§30 & 31 on 31411991
Amended by Ord. 91-020 §1 on 512911991
Amended by Ord. 93-043 §8 on 812511993
Amended by Ord. 94-008 §12 on 61811994
Amended by Ord. 2001-016 §2 on 312812001
Amended by Ord. 2001-039 §5 on 1211212001
Amended by Ord. 2004-002 §7 on 412812004
Amended by Ord. 2019-009 §2 on 91312019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §2 on 91312019
Amended by Ord. 2023-00x §x on [date]
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 4ngte- Angtistoric home. For the
P-urposes of DCC Title 18, the term "auxiliary" shall be sLnonymous 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. "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.
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
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 anew 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.
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.
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 91312019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §3 on 91312019
Amended by Ord. 2023-00x §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 existi single-family dwelling or manufactured home. For the
purposes of DCC Title 18, the term "auxiliary" shall be synonymous with the terms
"incidental and subordinate to."
2. "Adeguate access" means a continuous, .nimum 20-foot width riEht-of-w y,
connecting an accessory dwellingwith,a fire�rotection service provider. The right of-
way must be improved and composed of an all-weather surface including asphalt
concrete, or gravel, but excluding cinders and other areate materials.
3. "Living Space" means space within an accessory dwelling unit that m be utilized for
livin sleeng� eating1 cooking bathing, washing and sanitation purposes.
4—"Right-of way" means either a public road maintained by the countya private road with
a public access easement, a public road maintained bra road _[an
unmaintained road.
5. "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.
6. "Safe evacuation plan" means an identifiable route do a rif;ht(s)-of ways from the rural
accessory dwellingunit to the staged evacuation area.
"Single-family dwelling" or "manufactured home" means a residential structure
designed as a residence for one famiand sharinno common wall with another
residence of any_type.
4._._ ",. to e� d evacuation area" means a public or private location that occupants of the rural
accessory dwelling unit may evacuate to reorganize.
9. "Useable floor area" means the living space of the accessorsdwellin unit included
within the
of earaees. carports. decks and
porch covers: All portions of accessor�dwellin units that`do not meet the definiti
"useable floor area" shall not be iMRroved withthefollowing:
a. Kitchen, kitchenette, or other cooking facilities;
b. ;Sleepingguarters; andJor
c. Facilities for washing_andor drying laundry
10. "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 21S
and 22S and Ranges 9E 10E and 11E the minimum lot or parcel size must be at least
five acres in size.
num setback of 10(
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 The accessory dwelling unit receives approval from a sewer authority or Deschutes
County Environmental Soils for onsite wastewater disposal and treatment.
9. The lat or parcel is served bra fire protection.seryice provider with_professionals who
have received trainingor certification described in ORS 181A.410.
10 The accessory dwellihunit provides for the follcwin
a. Adequate access:
i. The accessor dwellinunit has adequate access as_defined in DCC 18 116.370,
0
ii. Written certification from a fire protection service vovider with professionals
who have received training or certlfication describedin ORS 1.81A.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 stied evacuation area that the
occupants of the rural accessoy dwelling unit ma evacuate to the staff
evacuation area.
11. The lot or parcel and accessor dwelling unit comply with rules of the State ROard of
Forestry under ORS 477.015, 477.025 and 477.027.
12. If statewide wildfire risk mates described in OR5 477.490 have been approved, the
followin. requirements shall apol_:
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 building code
standards as described in section R327 of the Oregon Residential Specialty Code;
b. Defensible space standards:
i. For extreme and high wildfire risk classes in the wildland-urban interface that
are identified pursuant to ORS 477.490J the minimum defensible space rules
established by the State Fire Marshal as described in ORS 476.392 shall apply,
o r;
ii. If the accessorydwellin& unit is not subject to ORS 477.015, 477.025 and
477.027:
1. The minimum defensible space rules established by the State Fire
Marshal as described in CARS 476.392 shall apply, on
2. The accessory dwelling unit has defensible space and fuel break
standards as developed in consultation with local fire protection service
providers.
13. If statewide wildfire risk maps described in ORS 477.490 have not been approved the
followin r eguirements shall apply:
ildfire hazard miti
_ > described in section I
of the Ore an Residential eaaIty Code.
b. Defensible space standards:
i. The owners shall construct and maintain the following firebreaks on land
surrounding the accessory dwelling unit on land that is owned or controlled by
the owner:
1. Primary kirebreak. Prior to use aarimary irebreak not less than 10
feet wide, shall be constructed containing nonflammable materials. This
may include lawn, walkways, drivewa s gavel borders or other similar
materials
2. Secondary Firebreak. A secondary firebreak of not less than 20 feet
wide shall be constructed outside the primary fiu rebreal<. This firebreak
need not be bare Eround, but can include a lawn ornamental shrubbery
or individual or groups of trees separated by a distance equal to the
diameter of the crowns adjacent to each other, or 15 feet,w,hichever is
greater. All trees shall be pruned to at least eight feet in height. Dead
fuels shall be removed
3. Fuel Break. A fuel break shall be maintained, extending a minimum of
100 feet in all directions around the secondary.firebreak. Individual and
gaups of trees within the fuel break shall be separated a distance
equal to the diameter of the crowns adjacent to each other,or 15 feet,
whichever is greater. Small trees and brush rowing underneath IarRer
trees shall be removed to prevent spread of fire up into the crowns of
the lamer trees. All trees shall be pruned to at least eight feet in height.
Dead fuels shall be removed. The fuel break shall be completed prior to
the beginning of the coming fire season:
4. IVo portion of a tree or another vegetation shall extend to within 15
feet of the outlet of a stovepipe or chimney, or;
5. The accessory dwelrm 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 farce) with an accessary dwelling unit approved under this section is ineligible
for:
a. A subdivision,
artition, other division of the lot or parcel, or a lot line adiusst_ment
where the result of such application would be to situate the existing single-famiy
dwelling on a different lot or parcel than the accessofdwelling unit.
b. Placement or construction of any additional accessory dwelling unit or any other
permanent or temporary structure or dwelling_unit designed or used for residential
purposes.
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. A letter confirming that fhe upplie_r of water is "W_illinRand Able to Serve" the ADU,. be
provided if the ADU is to be served by any water source other than an onsite domestic
well
18 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).
19 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)(1W
and consistent with ORS 90.100.
HISTORY
Ado tp gd by Ord. 2023-00x §x on jdatel
CHAPTER 19.12 URBAN AREA RESERVE ZONE UAR-10
19.12.020 Permitted Uses
19.12.020 Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted:
A. Farm uses as defined in DCC Title 19.
B. Single-family dwelling.
C. Home occupation 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. Day care center facilities subject to site review, DCC 19.76 and DCC 19.88.160.
F. Farm stands subject to DCC 19.76 and DCC'19.88.290.
G. Historic Accessory_ Dwelling Units, subject to DCC 19.92,150.
H. Residential Accessory Dwelling Units, subject to DCC 19.92.160
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. PL-11 on 711111979
Amended by Ord. 88-042 §4 on 1211911988
Repealed & Reenacted by Ord. 90-038 §1,2 on 101311990
Amended by Ord. 91-001 §2 on 112811991
Amended by Ord. 2008-014 §3 on 313112008
Repealed & Reenacted by Ord. 2009-002 §1,2 on 211112009
Amended by Ord. 2019-009 §4 on 91312019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §4 on 91312019
Amended by Ord. 2023-00x §x on (datel
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 711111979
Amended by Ord. 88-042 §6 on 1211911988
Repealed & Reenacted by Ord. 90-038 §1,2 on 101311990
Amended by Ord. 91-001 §4 on 112811991
Amended by Ord. 93-018 §3 on 511911993
Repealed & Reenacted by Ord. 2009-002 §1,2 on 211112009
Amended by Ord. 2019-009 §5 on 91312019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §5 on 91312019
Amended by Ord. 2020-001 §20 on 412112020
Amended by Ord. 2020-010 §9 on 71312020
Amended by Ord. 2023-00x §x on [datel
CHAPTER 19 22 WESTSIDE TRANSECT ZONE; WTZ
19.22.020 Permitted Uses
19.22.020 Permitted Uses
The following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright:
A. Single-family dwelling.
B. Home occupation subject to DCC 19.88.140.
C_Other accessory uses and accessory buildings and structures customarily appurtenant to a
permitted use subject to DCC 19.92.020.
D. Residential Accessory Dwelling Units, subiect to DCC 19.92.160.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2019-001 §8 on 411612019
Amended by Ord. 2023-00x §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, SR-2 %2, And WTZ 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 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 anew 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 91312019
Recorded by Ord. 2019-009 §6 on 91312019
Amended by Ord. 2023-00x §x on fdatel
19.92.160 Residential Accessory Dwelling Units In UAR-10, SR-2 %, And WTZ 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
p f err Title 19 the term "-uxiliar�hall be s` non mows with the terms
ur oses aI D - 1 , 6 .�v
"incidental and subordinate to."
2. "Adequate access" means a continuous minimum 20-foot width right-of-way,
connecting an accessory dwellingwith afire_ protection servic_ e provider. The right-of-
waymust be improved and composed of an all-weather surface including asphalt,.
concrete,or gravel but excluding cinders and other aggregate materials.
3. "Giving Space" means space within an accessary dwelling unit that may be utilized for
�livin ,sleeping, eaUM cooking, bathing washing rp and sanitation puoses.
4. "Right-of-way" means either a public road maintained bV the county, a private road with
a public access easement, a public road maintained bra road district, or an
unmaintained road.
5. "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.
6. "Safe evacuation plan" means an identifiable route on a rights)-of-wa s fy rom the rural
accessory dwelling unit to the staffed evacuation area.
7. "Single-famiiy dwelling or "manufactured home" means a residential structure
designed as a residence for one family and sharing no common wall with another
residence of anytype.
f3. "Staged evacuation area" means a public or private location that occupants of the rural
accessory dwelling unit may evacuate to reor ar7ize.
9. "Useable floor area" means the living space of the accessory unit included
within the -surrounding insulated exterior walls, exclusive of t;ara es carports decks and
porch covers. All op rtions of accessor dwelling units that do not meet the definition of
"useable floor area" shall not be im roved with the following:
a. Kitchen, kitchenette, or other cooking facilities-
b.
Sleep y, quarters; and or
c. Facilities for washing arid or dry &lawn
10. "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 Drinci al residence;
b. The occupant has a primal 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, SR-2 %,
or WTZ, provided:
1. _ One single-family dy weiiin i s sited on the ioc 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
Wwmaccessory 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 dwellin�to the nearest
part of the useable floor area of the accessory dwelling unit.
6. The accessory dwelling unit receives approval from a sewer authors or Deschutes
County Environmental Soils for onsite wastewater disposal and treatment.
7. The lot or parcel is served by a fire protection service provider with professionals who
have received training or certification described in ORS 181A.410.
8. The accessory dwellingunit provides for the following:
a. Adequate access:
i. The accessory dwelling unit has adequate access as defined in DCC 18,116.370,
o r;
ii. Written certification from a fire rotection service provider with professionals
Who have received training or certification described in ORS 181A.410,on a
form prepared Ll DE schutes County, that access to the property meets
minimum fire district requirements to provide e_meTeqcy 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 accessqLV dwelling unit r�ay evacuate to the staffed
evacuation area.
9. The lot or parcel and accessory dwelling unit comply with rules of the State Board of
Forestr under ORS 477.015 477.025 and 477.027.
10. If statewide wildfire risk maps described in ORS 477.490 have been approved, the
following requirements shall apply:
a. For extreme and high wildfire risk classes in the wildland-urban interface that are
ident'fledursuant to ORS 477.490 the wildfire hazard miti€;ation building code
standards as described in section R327 of the Oregon Residential Specialty Code;
b. DefenSibie Space standards:
i. For extreme and high wildfire risk classes in the wildland-urban interface that
are identified pursuant to ORS 47.7 490, the minimum defensible space rules
established by the State Fire Marshal as described in ORS 476.392 shall_gp,p>y,
or;
ii. If the accessory dwellinunit is not subject to ORS 477.015, 477.025 and
477.027:
1. The minimum defensible space ....rules .established by.the State Fire
Marshal as described in ORS 476.392 shall apply. or:
2. The accessordwelling unit has defensible space and fuel break
standards as developed in consultation with local fire protection service
11. If statewide wildfire risk maps described in ORS 477.490 have not been approved the
followM'gj�t requirements apply:
a. The wildfire hazard mitigation building code standards as described in section R327
of the Oregon Residential Specialty Code.
b. Defensible space standards:
L The owners shall construct and maintain the following firebreaks on land
surrounding the accessadwelling unit on land that is owned or controlled by
the owner:
1. Primate _Firebreak. Prior to use, a primary firebreak t less than 10
feet _wLide,,_shall be constructed containing nonflammable materials. This
may include lawn, walkwa s drivew::1VQ, gravel borders or other similar
materials.
2. Secg�ndary��Fi-ak. r _t� A secondary firebreak ofnotless than 20 feet
wide shall be constructed outside the primary firebreak. This firebreak
need not be bare Rround, but can include a lawn, ornamental shrubbery
or individual or=oqpLqf trees separated by-g_di�stance equal to the
diameter of the crowns adjacent to each other or 15 feet whichever is
greater . All trees shall be pruned to at least eight feet in height. Dead
fuels shall be removed
3. Fuel Break. refuel break shall be maintained extending a minimum of
100 feet in all directions around the secondary firebreak. Individual and
groups of trees within the fuel break shall be separated by a distance
�equal to the diameter to each other, or 15 feet,
whichever is greater. Small trees and brush growjjn_g underneath larger
trees shall be removed to prevent spread of fire into the crowns of
uaL--
the larger trees. All trees shall be pruned to at least eight feet in hei ht.
Dead fuels shall be removed. The fuel break shall be completed prior to
the beginning of the coming fire season;
L. _ No portion of a tree orany other vegetation
feet of the outlet of a stovepipe or chimney,
5. 'The accessory dwelling unit has defensible space and fuel break
standards as developed in consultation withlo
cal(�al fire protection service on sere
L _�_ _ _ _
prqv i (Le Es.
12. The existing sin � y dwelling _property _pn the lot or parcel is not subject to an
order declaring it a nuisance or sub i nR subject to a eLndL action under ORS 105.550 to
_?_gDy_p
105.600.
13. A lot or parcel with an accessory dwelling unit approved under this section is inelible
for:
a. _ A subdivision, aartition, other division of the lot or parcel or a lot line adjustment
where the result of such application would be to situate the existing single -fames
dwelling on a_different lot or parcel than the accessory dwelli. np unit.
b. Placement or construction of any additional accessory dwelling unit or any other
permanenlling unit designed or used far residential
purposes.
14. If the accessory dwelling unit is served by a well�the construction of the accessory
dwelli unit shall maintain all setbacks from the well required by the Water Resources
Commission or Water Resources Department.
15. A letter confirming that the supplier of water is "Willinand Able to Serve" the ADIJ be
provided if the ADU is to be served by water source other than an onsite domestic
well
16. An existing single-family dwelling and an accessory dwelling unit allowed under this
section are considered a single unit for the purposes of calculating rg pUna water right
exemptions under ORS 537545(I
17. The applicant shall sign and record with the County Clerk, prior to the issuance of a
buildin permit, a restrictive covenant statin an accessor dwellin unit allowed under
this section cannot be used for vacation occupancy, as defined in DCC 19 9.160(A)(10)
and consistent with ORS 90.100.
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2023-00x §x on fdate7
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 (13)(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;
e:f. In all zones, a permit for a Historic Accessory Dwelling Unit as defined in DCC
18.116.350 or a Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit as defined in DCC 18.116.370.
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
(13)(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 (13)(2). If an applicant is applying for a
permit listed in subsection (13)(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 (13)(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 (I3)(2).
HISTORY
Adopted by Ord. 2017-015 §3 on 111111979
Amended by Ord. 2023-OOx §x on (date]
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Kyle Collins, Associate Planner
Will Groves, Planning Manager
DATE: May 31, 2023
SUBJECT: Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Legislative Amendments - Planning Commission
Recommendations, Public Comments, and Agency Comments
Staff has prepared amendments concerning local provisions for rural ADUs as identified in Senate
Bill (SB) 391' (file no. 247-22-000671-TA). Staff submitted a 35-day PAPA notice to DLCD on August 17,
2022. A public hearing was held with the Planning Commission (Commission) on September 22,
20222. The Commission held deliberations on October 27, 20223. The recommendations, public
comments, and agency comments from that process are discussed herein.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEDATIONS
As noted above, 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. Many of these recommendations correspond with staffs initial draft
amendments while others would require new language and modifications to the proposed
amendments:
• 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
' httbs://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/lz/2021R1/Downloads/Measu reDocument/SB0391/A-Engrossed
z See Deschutes County Planning Commission September 22, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-1 7
3 See Deschutes County Planning Commission October 27, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-21
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 staffs 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 staffs 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 Statewide
Map of Wildfire Risk has been released by the Oregon Department of Forestry (ODF).
o This recommendation was made prior to adoption of SB 644 and the corresponding
impacts on SB 391 and the Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk.
o SB 644 effectively decouples the Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk from the adoption of any
local rules allowing rural ADUs. During any interim period where a local jurisdiction has
adopted rules allowing ADUs and prior to the release of the final risk map, any constructed
ADUs will be subject to the home hardening building codes as described in section R327
of the 2021 Oregon Residential Specialty Code.
• 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
Page 2 of 6
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
SB 762 mapping and wildfire mitigation efforts received a majority vote recommending delay of the
proposed amendments. Should the Board elect to follow the Commission's recommendation to delay
adoption of the proposed amendments until release of the final Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk by
ODF, it is unclear when these maps will be formally released and may significantly delay adoption of
any local ADU standards.
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.
II. WRITTEN TESTIMONY & DISCUSSION
To date, a total of sixteen (16) comments from members of the public have been received by staff
concerning the initially 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
Page 3 of 6
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.
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 the Board:
• Delaying the amendment process until final versions of the Statewide Map of Wildfire Risk
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.
III. PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING TESTIMONY & 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.
Page 4 of 6
• 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.
IV. AGENCY COMMENTS & 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 particularly pertinent:
Deschutes County Environmental Soils Division
Due to concerns regarding failing treatment systems and groundwater impacts, the Onsite
Wastewater Division recommends the following:
• Increasing the minimum lot or parcel size for rural ADUs to be at least five (5) acres in size in
this specific geographic area. 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.
Limiting properties constructed with ADUs from all future residential dwelling development,
including additional ADUs, medical hardship dwellings, and temporary dwellings within
recreational vehicles or similar uses.
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:
• The siting and fencing standards of Deschutes County Code (DCC)18.884 be maintained for all
rural ADU development in the WA Combining Zone.
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.
• Access to properties should utilize existing roads and driveways for all rural ADU
development.
https://deschutescounty municipalcodeonline com/book?type=ordinances#name=CHAPTER 18.88 WILDLIFE AREA COMB
INING ZONE; WA
Page 5 of 6
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 could
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 above and within the attached Recommendation
Matrix (Attachment 1), 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.
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Recommendation Matrix
Page 6 of 6
c
O
m v v o o
E
c m
o
w
�
a c
0
o
v ' u
OJ
0
U p E!-C v M
m O u Q
Q tw
O
E
m 6
c
CL
0 m a
O O 'SY-
L .f.]
O :L' in m
Y
CL v-
O
+'
Q
N
>
fo
M m .�
h0 0 E c L OQj
bb
O
p v
N
_
m aL+ O al 2 E co y L
E _
u E" m v c c
v
N
O
Q
E
N O 'E - O
E t0 6. N C
C O
O
O
m
_ vOi
E -0 E v ai 0OD
lu C_
Y L
c m c 6
c cu
>
ma 0 m E o o 9 E
0 c
y —
:E
° o
X o 0
a V
v
W V V- to O Q L K
K O 'O
a �
O
m
�O p t �' N
m o ++
.
Y 3
u
Y
•c
O
c � w cc
O
E d
••;
mm
ON b0 Q C
C b m
C Q
m
0 N m
L ✓
Y
C
__ c N
m m 0 w
d
rn ti
v 0 O
O
M y Y O
w— y O
E
m Z D n. v� ° Ln
vm Y a Ln
o 3 0 4
E
oY30 0
t 000
a.
°am o
u
^ N
u . � =
E
Y o :0
v% o o< t E
o
�0m�° emu°
w mom�o
•in
O. c Z
u ti~ a0
a) O
C
m vi
m
E
O a
`+'
O ++ 'O N cc C
_+ u c
N E OM
0 al
C E a
G
C
o m
v= c
v c`
m
m
by
O YO
d
p N C Y c
•C
N
m
= o
O m C
O C 7 m
.fl T Y -0 'O 'n
rs
O
c m —a
a �aom bD
E Z mu
p
Yov
m e o c E
.°
o c E
E C o c E
3 v m ¢O� o
0 °o o
a= s E
0/ N O
p O_ Q u
_
D Q
E al u
bA u
c c
Q O
a,
m
o °
—
3 0
v
O
aim
�r.c
oa N
v O
Y
::•`
c�
vL.-
ea
e v
v •:° 6 ao
c m
O
T p ,c
c
c _
N
E�
Vf
>oo a
@ v
O
al
Q Ol m
u u „�- T
O —
C
O
L t O
L a) m
�
a
m
m
O u
d
QQ c n.
y
y u"i �
Q
r a
!so N
.O
`�
Q
C n. 'O
=O n'
OU (
p C E N
2 0
Q N
Lir V1 mCL
0 0 o a
3 0
0 0
3 0 v
o
o c
V)m m `o
xSa
x�°
K
2
0
E
E
0
a,
z
u
Lf�
Q
Z
O
a
Z
CW
C
V
W
w
Z
O
LA
5G
G
O
U
Q
Z_
Z
Q
J
a
v ❑ ra o o
❑❑ `o > >
76 _
o Q o P m
o 3
c J J
L n - °
N m 3 J o 0 a1 S. >'
C v 6 O Q
a m m o E
o n. E o '^ o
a v v
o y a/ O .a .�- i7 .N C c
w E v m u °_ o J
m .� o ai c 'a
o E
O. c
C C d J al
.c v c Hymn
v v o
c .- m m ..- 'a ` =o V
'� Q L v L Oo O C
al
Y y
obi E
v v v
..E m
m E £ a oa a oo :
a 3 v c U v J
>
.Y
o �`v a s -°
E m N O J p
c u° a a v ou c m v E v L
C N m> C v a J m a
c
O`
LZ L m> m pq '� D_ Q
°> as 3 c
m
v m �+ i m E m C C E c❑ al m
v
.� '
v N L E o LL' ° Q❑
m ai _ v Y
aj Q �n a - a a, a
a m v E m` v °
4
v .° 3
a o E m 3 v o o c o c
V u u
w v m c —° Y° (u
v v c 00 o Yo @ E° v ac E N° � o f
E
y
a
❑ c v o> J E J E
a E a Q E w a
a E £
> N c u c a v E o u c o o N
a� � no s a ° u° ❑ n�� a N o c o. '-
° °
c 5 o 'E c o
N C .E N N v
v c. c@ ❑ c m v 4 m o
v m m o n
Q X ~O N lJ -6 u U" c_
d
=❑ ui al C N❑ a ❑ a
'�
m m m J
ra _C N al al m N C L ° c O Q
c c E oo nn c❑ c❑
11q ❑ al ❑
v w > v
o c v vmi
u c ai E o eu a> a E
L O_ ° a c f0 °' a) (y0 i m Y O
io c o
o
w o
3 a' a/ c -O L i
aL+
O J 'm > -o J J
p al X al O` Q) O`
-o
.Ua > w
m J m L acj
o Ql .n > '� c '6> ba O > N u
N N O C c N al >
-o a ❑
a m vi
c-I N f+•1 4
¢ m o .E
u m w a v❑ a`
ci N f+1 V
a
a
y o
y
N
Jo =
J
` o m
j N Y
o C7 �
`J m E
.cc
E
� ovto
mi m
O
a/
(0
C N m tu/1 0. V7
m ❑ c V �
o
a aJ � ri
Gl
u U C N Ii E
=
a' C� 'O o
E
m J o. �n o
c ai 'm Ln
o. o J ti N c
cc o
ao c
o
O
y
` o y v
mc1L-Y Eh
a G n
oC
E N°❑� E
E
•� v E
n E
o
°
J a c b u
m E c c o
E E Y u°
E o
._ w v cJa c
Q ' c
E
v -o
v m
u rR m
`
a1 Q ai m
CO d
C
N J 'C >,
Q N
C
C V= N N a a
` I N C
5 v° a a a
o a E c a
E
°
$x E N p E
o o
n' us
m m o
J a, a v o c
oo u u
` E
2
w
❑❑ m C7 ❑
a m u°
c
O
L
d
•L
u
m
m
m
N
al
c
0
z
al
c
0
z
f6
N
c
O yr N
+ Y
m J 3
H
ul
m
a
L
E u
p
i j,
u n•
.v N CO
` n,
c5.
J m U1
N
C (j
O. C
E f0 J
N m
c✓
L C aa'-+
j
Y N m 0_ z O
'a
O
Q 3voua
W a) m
o° mw m m mz
a
m
'E'
0
0- CL
vi
C 7�
a)(°a)
0 .2 > m o-C u
—
c E
.0 2
z .- - CL mc 0) M -
oatm.,-cMo.<-t
-i�
.2 <u o a,
0
0 E
0'
(u 0
> 0
I
o
u cr vcc
w T
ow
=3 0 46
E
'o
.Lo
2
E
. 1. oc
0
-v; -C
—0
E
E
US
oa--
E
0
-, .CL
-000moo-F,
0
c
c m CL 0 0
u
w
E
0 -0 0
m 'D
of
E -a
CL
E D
to 0 w 0
c 2 u t5au u
11
a lr_ 0 > -0
Ln
> 2 E 'E I v;
c 0 E :3 C? s c v W
E 0,,, �6 - c -a bp 7>2
m E 0 , 0.:2 CML 0 0 w w 0 w m 0
m m E m
'E'
vC 0 E 'm cw
'D aj 0 u 0 �u 1>1 8
-2
-0 in w UM .0.
q, :2 46 a- a)
c,L w -
3: m m
C 2 .2 -0 �D
-2 W -0 C) Vo > D w w - m .2
0'
up u w wu
a) u -z ' s s -. -. 'm :01 t
cm w
to
if
C,
> > > 0
aj c
o a, a) w
_'c m E m u
m .0
c:
27
E -a' iB a,
-0
I cr
o E O m
a
0
E
E
u
T
y m
�
o .:
Q C C
E 0'0 ona �¢
0 Cla
N :°
1- O' � = a0.+ —
0
1]a a) L b0 � � to
0 ,O U fa pp
> m v:- ? c
C L c 0 U
=F 3� �vo
a c
0 Op o is Y
3 N -o .�
>_
c E o >_ u
a 0 0 u� Q
O
N�C C r
a,T
>T 0 t6 c-,= a
U c al 1p
C
C
0 0 '- vc U a o N
a v °p N p
-
C C N O
.di
O. @ b4 'U '� O N
N u C
v
OCi
v E c ajv0CC
o
-
O
vN
0c Ey
X. av
Cr a,
vQ
pq
o v 3o
ua a s
o 0
a a,o> o
= —
o
^
06 a Q o v v u
o_ v u c
a axi 3 ou o a o a 0)¢
1-4 N
c u >> °N° o
�
a1
o
a
3
c
O
v ¢
Y a
C
N
a
c
m
H
m N p
E
3 U tD
ano
E
u
v N O
a
> O
E '- A'
•N
E C U
C a N U
N_
a •C
O C
to a c c
E
a 3 c
s 0 c
E
a>i v m
a m
O
is u
a
T
N V T
r
m n a
Q c
2 0 aci
E
_00 O o a
c E
a
o -NI
s 3 0
c o o
0 o v
o m 0) 0
>
T p
0 p
r-I
a)
C
u y O
u -
O
Oo u
�
c c
Mrn
>,
N a
ca
V1
O
E 7 0 V
T pa C
c C C D
V
O _ O Q
o
0
u u
3
z
Q a o
N u N•
(V c
a)✓
_
C
a,
V
75
O O W C
v'=i�O
av 3
�
o,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Kyle Collins, Associate Planner
Will Groves, Planning Manager
DATE: May 31, 2023
SUBJECT: Rural Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Legislative Amendments - Anticipated Property
Eligibility
Staff has prepared amendments concerning local provisions for rural ADUs as identified in Senate
Bill (SB) 391' (file no. 247-22-000671-TA). Staff submitted a 35-day PAPA notice to DLCD on August 17,
2022. A public hearing was held with the Planning Commission (Commission) on September 22,
20222. The Commission held deliberations on October 27, 20223.
I. 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), Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10), and Westside Transect (WTZ) 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.
https://olis.oregonlegislature.gov/iiz/2021RI /Down loads/M easu reDocu ment/SB0391 /A-E ngrossed
Z See Deschutes County Planning Commission September 22, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https://www..deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-1 7
3 See Deschutes County Planning Commission October 27, 2022 Agenda for more information:
https://www.deschutes.org/bc-pc/page/planning-commission-21
• 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 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 The Commission recommends that all properties within the Westside Transect 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
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 The Commission recommends a 5-acre minimum parcel size in southern Deschutes
County for ADU development.
Attachments:
1. Map of Potentially Eligible Properties
Page 2 of 2
Parcels Meeting Initial Criteria for Rural ADUs per SB 391
Redmonc
Bend
N'.\Custom\Cou my\CDD\Planning\Kyl.Coll ins\S6391 _R,I,dIADl1
F lramnsisnvr�I
June 5, 2023
RE: Support for Heart of Oregon Corps Campus Campaign's Grant Application
Dear Potential Funder,
We are writing in support of the Heart of Oregon Corps grant application in support of the new campus.
Heart of Oregon Corps has been a vital part of the Central Oregon Community for over 20 years,
providing vocational training and continuing education to young adults ages 16-24. Through their
WORK, EARN, LEARN model of their six programs, they strive to create pathways out of poverty for
youth and encourage their self-sufficiency.
Their new campus under development in Redmond, Oregon will not only enhance Heart of Oregon
Corps operations as an organization, but it will also greatly increase the breadth and richness of the
workforce development programs offered to youth in our community. Consolidating Heart of Oregon
Corps resources into a centralized hub will create a youth centered campus that not only meets the
needs of the program, but it will also provide a connective campus atmosphere for youth on a
workforce trajectory, similar to their counterparts who go into higher education.
We support Heart of Oregon Corps grant application and strongly encourage your funding support of
this important project.
Thank you for your consideration,
The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
Anthony DeBone Patti Adair Phil Chang
Chair Vice Chair Commissioner
1300 NW Wall Street Bend, Oregon 97703
(541) 388-6572 board@deschutes.org ®www.deschutes.org
vZ E S Co
�
BOARD OF
COMMISSIONERS
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING
2:00 PM, MONDAY, DUNE 5, 2023
Allen Room - Deschutes Services Building - 1300 NW Wall St - Bend
(541) 388-6570 1 www.deschutes.org
AGENDA
MEETING FORMAT: In accordance with Oregon state law, this meeting is open to the public and
can be accessed and attended in person or remotely, with the exception of any executive session.
Members of the public may view the meeting in real time via YouTube using this link:
http://bit.ly/3mminzy. To view the meeting via Zoom, see below.
Citizen Input: The public may comment on any topic that is not on the current agenda.
Alternatively, comments may be submitted on any topic at any time by emailing
citizeninput@deschutes.org or leaving a voice message at 541-385-1734.
When in -person comment from the public is allowed at the meeting, public comment will also be
allowed via computer, phone or other virtual means.
Zoom Meeting Information: This meeting may be accessed via Zoom using a phone or computer.
• To join the meeting from a computer, copy and paste this link: bit.ly/3h3ogdD.
• To join by phone, call 253-215-8782 and enter webinar ID # 899 4635 9970 followed by the
passcode 013510.
• If joining by a browser, use the raise hand icon to indicate you would like to provide public
comment, if and when allowed. If using a phone, press *6 to indicate you would like to speak and
*9 to unmute yourself when you are called on.
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, call (541) 388-6572 or
email brenda.fritsvold@deschutes.org.
CALL TO ORDER
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 oryou may leave a brief voicemail at 541.385.1734.
AGENDA ITEMS
2:00 PM Consideration to increase solid waste franchise fees from three percent to
five percent to fund nuisance abatement compliance
2. 2:15 PM Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 197.307(4) "clear and objective" standards for
rural residential housing
3. 2:35 PM Work Session on Senate Bill 391 - Rural Accessory Dwelling Units Legislative
Amendments
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.
4. Executive Session under ORS 192.660 (2) (e) Real Property Negotiations
ADJOURN
June 05, 2023 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING Page 2 of 2