Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-08-25 - Planning Commission MinutesCommunity Development Department J Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925 (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ MINUTES DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION DESCHUTES SERVICES CENTER 1300 NW WALL STREET, BEND, OREGON, 97701 AUGUST 25, 2011 —5:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chair Merle Irvine. Members present were, Ed Criss, Todd Turner, Richard Klyce and James Powell, Absent: Vice Chair Chris Brown and Bill Rainey. Staff present were Nick Lelack, Planning Director; Peter Gutowsky, Principal Planner; and Sher Buckner, Administrative Secretary. II. PUBLIC COMMENTS Tony Aceti submitted documents for the Planning Commissioners' consideration. III. PUBLIC HEARING, continued: PA -11-3, Regional Economic Opportunity Analysis — Peter Gutowsky, Principal Planner. Peter gave a PowerPoint recapping the project. Commissioner Powell asked about acreages that were held/set aside for this program and about concerns regarding dividing larger parcels into smaller parcels. Peter said the policies have not changed. Karen Swirsky of DLCD provided a letter which supports this effort and the adoption of the REOA, but which also underscores the protection of sites and maintenance of their intended use. There was also concern about bringing in large lots for industrial sites; cities can essentially bring these in to fulfill their 20 -year needs and add another employment category to their portfolios. This is additive and would not affect areas like Juniper Ridge. Public Comments: Ted Scholer testified that Page 26 of the original proposal needed some revisions in terms of La Pine. They have gone through that and would like to propose changes to that page. La Pine has a state -certified shovel -ready site. It is well suited for REOA, and challenges with the water and sewer districts have been resolved. They feel confident that those will be incorporated into City services. The State of Oregon certified as shovel -ready 80 -plus acres and 20 have been set aside for BioGreen's plant. The industrial site is available, neighborhood sites are available for many options. MidState's current capacity is more than adequate as are water and sewer for new industry. These sites are on County land. They are an enterprise zone with the airport. La Pine is well connected with Eugene, Quality Services Performed With Pride Klamath County, major highways and the main line of the railroad. Housing costs are low, and La Pine has a large labor pool. It is hub of Central Oregon's vacation paradise. Challenges would be the sewer and water districts and the Transportation System Plan update not yet being completed. Pam Hardy commented that 1000 Friends has not switched directions as might be inferred from the PowerPoint. They have always supported efforts at regional cooperation to improve economic opportunities. This, however, does not mean they agree with every element of the outcome. They have submitted letters pointing out significant problems which have not been addressed. A necessary question is whether to bring in large lots and this has never been addressed. A study recently came out within the last week which looks at data on long-term economic welfare and the types of businesses in those communities. One of the key measurements was individual incomes of residents living in those counties. The businesses making the most difference were those with 5-10 employees. When you got over 500 employees, you saw wage stagnation and a depressive effect on the economy. The study also looked at whether companies of various sizes were locally or externally owned, and it was found that locally owned companies recirculated their dollars much more than larger companies. If there is a need to bring larger, non -locally owned companies into our region this should be looked at, but it may be detrimental in the long term. Small corporations add more jobs and large corporations have been shedding them. If we had implemented this plan ten years ago and added larger corporations to our area, during the last recession we would have had more layoffs than we actually experienced. 1000 Friends supports economic development, and if there is contradictory evidence to the above, someone should raise it. Commissioner Criss asked about areas with mixed small and large businesses - does this combination present a better opportunity for jobs? He and Pam discussed the Bay Area and changes in its economic structure. Commissioner Powell asked if Pam was arguing against the creation of large industrial lots based on a perception of economic outcomes, or whether 1000 Friends be willing to look at them if they were for large businesses requiring a lot of land but not necessarily many employees. Pam said that large lots do not necessarily equal large employers. In Portland, the biggest employers are in the downtown office buildings - thousands of people per acre compared to something like FaceBook. If we are trying to attract companies that simply use large amounts of land, we should just say that. Industries such as data centers employ fewer people per acre. There is a risk that perhaps one day it will become cheaper to move that industry overseas. They are not wedded to the region the way someplace like Les Schwab is — they are here because of tax breaks, cheaper water, etc. The economics give us a reason to take a better look at this. The data shows that the creative class of the generation does not want to live in a sprawling environment — if we want to compete on a global scale for the movers and shakers, those who bring stability, it is not clear that this is the best way to go. She would be interested in reviewing data that opposes hers. Michael Williams of Business Oregon said that he certifies sites for industrial purposes. They have certified 70 sites since 2004 and have seen some jobs created. He feels the completion of the REOA follows a similar process across the rest of the U.S. It will make our inventories more competitive and lead to land efficiencies down the road. The U.S. is currently manufacturing more goods now than 30 years ago, although employment has shrunk. We are building more with less people, so we still need the sites. The consultant for the REOA used well-documented methods. He feels the regional focus is great — most studies seem to look at the regional transportation structure, ability to provide education, etc., on a smaller scale. He received many phone calls from people who wanted sites certified after reading about Prineville and FaceBook. He teaches a course in market analysis for real estate and cycles are long — much longer than most people think. It takes much more time to come out of a downturn than people want to recognize. Business cycles are five to ten years and usually driven by one or two industries. Roger Lee of EdCo testified that he has worked with non-profits in economic development for many years. He feels that 1000 Friends' opinion/perspective has turned out to be a minority. The fact remains that the REOA recommendation is to adopt something that is not about specific agendas but a collaborative effort to identify how Oregon can play in a larger field. He spoke about EdCo and COIC's plans and feels we have a well rounded strategy. Forty percent of the 72 companies they are working with are local. Washington County has the highest per capita employment in the state, an example of the fact that even if only a few companies start up they can employ many people. Larger companies can produce spinoffs as a direct result of people who worked for them or because of related industries. Smaller companies are our bread and butter in this area, but do we want to exclude large-lot users? We have been doing that for 12 years — there is no place for them to locate. EdCo is currently working on two projects for large lots. We shouldn't pass on the possibility of large-lot industries just because one group doesn't want them. Commissioner Powell wondered if EdCo would be able to work with groups like 1000 Friends. EdCo will be in a very critical role — can they listen to citizens who have concerns? Roger responded that they try not to have collisions as it's not good business. They support the State's land use policies which have greatly benefited some communities. He would not have worked in Oregon for 20 years if he didn't support them. We have worked on this for 18 months and it is disappointing to hear that someone opposes this now when they did not in the beginning of the process, but EdCo tries to keep doors open. Peter Gutowsky suggested that, since some people want to provide written testimony, we keep the written record open for seven days and continue the hearing to the September 8 meeting for deliberation. Nick said that if the Commissioners voted to re-open the record, notice would need to be provided to everyone who has submitted something to date, and we would need to keep the record open longer than seven days. Motion: Commissioner Turner motioned to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Klyce. Motion passed. Motion: Commissioner Turner recommended to adopt PA-11-3 and forward it to the Board. Seconded by Commissioner Klyce. Discussion: Commissioner Criss felt that we cannot make decisions on what the market may do five years from now. This proposal is not a giant land grab and is fairly conservative. Commissioner Powell asked about Item No. 8 on page 8, regarding a Memo of Understanding (MOU) where 9, 10, and 11 apply to cities. If we vote to forward this as is, should those be part of the Memo? Commissioner Klyce wondered if staff could recommend a course of action. Peter said that the intent of Policies 9, 10 and 11 (which are not part of the MOU) is really just to underscore obligations under state law. Each city will need to craft a holding zone to match its own economic objectives. Commissioner Powell asked whether, if a large parcel is brought in under these policies, we would be comfortable that it will be used for the intended purpose. Nick said that DLCD staff have been clear that 3 any UGB amendment or zone change will need to be for an intended purpose. Commissioner Klyce asked if we need to amend the motion to add what Mr. Schuler proposed. Commissioner Powell thought he was countering some points of the analysis. Peter said he thought that La Pine had submitted new information about its strengths and weaknesses. Staff could insert a footnote on Page 26 recognizing new information was available, such as the City taking over water and sewer. Commissioner Powell said he was very uncomfortable with modifying a document that was created by a committee. Could staff incorporate this as new findings in a staff report to the Board? Peter said we may need to coordinate with legal counsel as to the best way to recognize this information. Motion: Commissioner Turner amended his motion to direct staff to incorporate proposed revisions to the La Pine section on page 26 in a manner suitable to County legal counsel. Seconded by Commissioner Klyce. Discussion: Nick mentioned that the proposed revisions were developed at a regional forum and some of the ideas were captured on flip charts. Some communities proposed revisions throughout the process. Commissioner Powell said he would be against the motion on that basis — it is important to maintain the integrity of the report as amended, and this should be added in the staff findings. Commissioner Criss felt we would just be updating information and would not be significantly changing anything. Peter said that on Page 25 there is a footnote stating that the information is a snapshot. But Jerry Johnson is the author. Commissioner Powell felt that we do not have the right to change someone else's report. Vote: Motion passed IV. PUBLIC HEARING: TA 11-2, Proposed Ordinance 2011-018 to Amend DCC Section 17.48, to Correct Errors, Omissions and Inconsistencies Relating to Design and Construction Standards in the County's Subdivision & Partition Ordinance — George Kolb, Interim Road Dept. Director. George summarized the proposal. Commissioner Powell asked about the change in drainage relative to driveways, from roadway into the public right-of-way — what is that about? George said that usually, when they look at a development, they tell a developer that drainage has to be kept on the property; public drainage has to be kept public. If property slopes down the road, drainage has to be retained before it hits the road. Motion: Commissioner Turner motioned to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Klyce. Motion passed. Motion: Commissioner Turner motioned to approve TA -11-2 and send it on to the Board. Seconded by Commissioner Klyce. Motion passed. V. WORK SESSION, continued / RECOMMENDATION: South County Local Wetland Inventory — Peter Gutowsky, Principal Planner. Peter summarized the proposal. A notice has been sent to all property owners who are mapped based on the new inventory. Commissioner Criss and Jevra Brown from the Department of State Lands discussed wetland delineations. Commissioner Powell and Jevra discussed park notification of some applications. Commissioner Criss asked if the Army Corps of Engineers is involved with any of the application processing. She said that applicants only need to fill out one form for both agencies and each reviews it. DEQ would also be involved if erosion control is an issue. Commissioner Criss wondered about fish habitat, for which there is a separate application, and whether it affects other property owners. Jevra said that this cannot affect a downstream neighbor's property. If there is harm, a civil action might be involved; but DSL does have some authority and recourse to require the applicant to make some adjustments to a project. Commissioner Klyce wondered when the two private individuals would get involved with prosecution or whether DSL is able to help with enforcement. She said DSL does have compliance authority, but she is not sure about the extent of their enforcement powers. Motion: Commissioner Criss motioned to recommend to the Board that they adopt the LWI. Seconded by Commissioner Powell. Motion passed. VI. WORK SESSION. continued: Proposal for Event Venue Text Amendments — Nick Lelack, Planning Director. Nick and the Commissioners discussed correspondence received and procedures. Commissioner Klyce asked if the appeal from Oregonians in Action regarding the home occupation has been decided yet, and Nick said he has not heard of a decision. The last he heard was that it should be this month sometime. Commissioner Turner said that he felt the references to home occupations and private parks need to be pulled out completely. He finds the references to conditions for adjacent property owners, which are referenced in different ways, are not correct because the activities can affect more people than just adjacent property owners. He also would like to see the recommendation include coming back before the Planning Commission as part of the process. Commissioner Criss asked Commissioner Turner if he felt public input should be included as part of the conditions, and Commissioner Turner said he felt it should be pulled out. One example is "the activity area shall meet the following minimum setback requirements... unless all owners consent in writing at the time of application...... All it should indicate is that minimum setback requirements must be met. Commissioner Klyce agreed except for a solar structure which interferes with the setback and the adjacent property owner agreeing to that, or something with similar circumstances. Chair Irvine asked Nick how that would work — if a neighboring property owner says it's okay to have an event within a certain distance, the event is planned and then the ownership of the property for the event changes? Nick said if it is a conditional use permit, it runs with the land. If the permit is for an agritourism type of event, it would need to be renewed. Commissioner Klyce said he would like to see what happens with the appeal. Commissioner Powell said he thought that we started this discussion looking at ways to enhance agricultural interests or to preserve the integrity of those lands; and if that is our intent, we can use some flexibility and our own set of guidelines so that a permit does not become irrevocable to land owners of any affected parcels. The way this is drafted pushes us beyond the restrictions of private parks, and there may be a larger pushback against events if it goes too far. Commissioner Powell asked Commissioner Klyce about the rationale for private parks. Commissioner Klyce said the issue for him is that the State rules for home occupations are pretty flexible and it doesn't matter whether you are dealing with irrigated or non -irrigated farmland. The difficulty with home occupations is the interpretation of what constitutes a building, so he would like to find out what the appeals court has to say. Commissioner Powell asked Commissioner Criss about noise impacts if an event is totally inside — is it practical to do outside events without amplification? Commissioner Criss said a noise ordinance would define a certain noise level at a certain distance. In many cases people talk to their neighbors and work it out. In Deschutes County, all you have to do is hear noise and you can complain — it doesn't have to be at a certain level, just audible. He also has no problem with wineries having events and wonders why this cannot be done on a licensing basis with specific requirements. If something is violated, the license is yanked. Nick said that Deschutes County Code does allow commercial events every four months. If they are over a certain threshold, 500 people, they are considered mass gatherings. Holding over four events per year would trigger a land use permit, and the question is what permit to get, based on the zoning. Our first request was in 1990 and it was denied, so we have since interpreted that events are not allowed unless we either amend the Code or someone applies for a private park conditional use permit. Crook County has approved this. Commissioner Klyce asked about the permitting process for SB960 — Nick said that it would be a limited use rather than a conditional use. It only runs with the owner and it has to be subject to all the compatibility standards. Commissioner Klyce felt that we should revisit the noise ordinance and have a hard and fast number, whether law enforcement agrees to enforce it or not. They are public servants. Commissioner Turner was also concerned about events being permitted to last 72 hours. Commissioner Klyce felt that the whole consideration of events reflects a social change — people do not always get married in churches any more. Deschutes County needs to broaden its economic base. We need to figure out a way for this to happen that is realistic with a fair fee structure, that any complaints filed are legitimate, etc. He would like to staff to prepare information about complaints received. Nick .and Commissioners Klyce and Turner discussed costs versus revenue. Commissioner Turner mentioned that wineries can only have 25% of their total income generated from events, but we are not discussing that type of limit on agricultural property. Nick mentioned that in SB960, events have to be tied to an agricultural use. Commissioner Criss emphasized that legitimate complaints need avenues and should be heard. If there is parking all over the place, that needs to be dealt with. He was at a party last week where someone four miles away had it shut down due to noise. Commissioner Klyce spoke about events defining the culture of the area. Chair Irvine asked if the other Commissioners wanted to keep the private park and home occupation options alive. Commissioner Klyce said yes — we do not know enough at this point to rule anything out. It would be nice to wrap this up for the Board, but we need to find out about the appeal and what the fee structure under SB960 might be. Commissioners Turner, Powell and Chair Irvine were concerned about a permit running with the property. Commissioner Klyce asked if we could make a modification to home occupations so the permits don't run with the property. Nick said we could consider it, and it is not prohibited under State law. Commissioner Powell spoke about the possibility of anyone hanging up a shingle for events. It may not be a good idea to open the barn door that wide at this point. We can change it in the future if we can come up with a mechanism that works and rules that people will abide by. He said he has difficulty with private parks at this time. We do not have a good definition for these at the State level. He would tend to look at private parks in a much narrower framework. Some parcels on 0 EFU that are located near highways may be reasonable areas to consider because they would have less traffic and noise impacts, for example. Commissioner Klyce mentioned that one of the functions of the roads in the County is to support commerce. Commissioner Powell said we need to consider the state of the roads and lack of monies to repair them. Just because you want to have an event at the end of a County road doesn't mean the County has to widen the road to accommodate it. Commissioner Turner said he attends some fundraisers, sometimes 3-400 people in a nice big barn but with code violations everywhere — not enough exits, no fire suppression equipment, etc. They are nice venues but very far from what he deals with as a designer of buildings and what is required. Commissioners Klyce and Powell discussed noise and building standards. Chair Irvine felt there had been consensus that any permits not run with the land. Commissioner Klyce felt there had been consensus that they would like to find a reasonable way to permit events. Nick and the Commissioners discussed getting approval from neighbors for events and setback issues. Commissioner Criss asked about permits being tied to the land and present owner/s. Chair Irvine clarified that the Commissioners agreed that permits would be tied to each individual owner. Commissioner Powell felt there is value in having discussions between neighbors. The Commissioners discussed whether this proposal should come back to them after going to the Board. The Commissioners suggested a joint work session with the Board in their meeting room. Commissioner Powell asked if there should be an opportunity for neighbors to comment on an application. Commissioner Klyce agreed, and Nick added that all land use decisions require public notification now. Nick also spoke about costs involved in anything that is appealable such as hearings officer's fees. Private parks by State law are conditional use permits and are evaluated based on individual characteristics. Public health and safety issues were discussed. Commissioner Klyce added that in the draft the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. are mentioned, and it doesn't look like an overnight party is not allowed. VII. PLANNING COMMISSION & STAFF COMMENTS The potential of holding the next meeting in South County to further discuss the South County Plan was considered as well as a joint meeting with the Board. Nick discussed the upcoming meeting on Monday in Sisters regarding traffic plans. VIII. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Respec fully submitted,, / ULA 5 uc ne Administrative Secretary 7