Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-03-28 - Planning Commission MinutesSES 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 MARCH 28, 2013 — 5:30 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER Meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Vice Chair Chris Brown. Members present were James Powell, Todd Turner, Ed Criss, Hugh Palcic and Matt Lisignoli. Absent: Chair Bill Rainey. Staff present were Nick Lelack, Planning Director; Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner; Will Groves, Senior Planner; and Sher Buckner, Administrative Secretary. Minutes of March 14, 2013 were approved. 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. 111. PUBLIC HEARING: Planning Division Work Plan 2013-2014 — Nick Lelack, Planning Director. Nick discussed the work plan, and Commissioner Criss and Nick discussed unincorporated communities — in Deschutes River Woods (DRW), this only includes an area around the store. Commissioner Powell and Nick considered staff reductions related to the work plan. Public Testimony Melissa Steinbach showed a map of DRW and the surrounding area. Vice Chair Brown asked about a population count, and Melissa said the 2010 census was a little over 5,000. She received information from American Title of 4,000+, and there are over 1,000 people per square mile. Woodside Ranch is maybe 580; DRW is about 3.83 square miles. River Bend Estates is not included in that. Jackie Pennoek testified about the history of DRW and their desire for a community plan. Commissioner Powell asked about the vision for a community plan — are covenants desired, rules that people abide by, etc. Jackie said there are quite a lot of issues in DRW, and they Quality Services Performed zvith Pride need help from governmental agencies. She sees problems such as zoning and needed road improvements. Tim Breedon also spoke about DRW and said there is no open space for bike trails, etc. There are easements along the canal, but they run across people's properties. There are accesses to recreational areas at the south end. One of the continuing issues is access via Baker Road. They would like to keep development heading towards a residential area, not industrial or commercial. The area south of the railroad tracks would be a good industrial area and would not require another access from Baker Road. DRW also needs natural gas. Right now the locals burn trash, wood, whatever they can get. Gas would be a great improvement and would benefit the citizens greatly. Greg Houton and Joyce Faltus testified and said they shared an identical land use issue at Crooked River Ranch, which is split into Deschutes and Jefferson counties. There is a problem with the number of livestock per usable acre and conditions for animals are really bad. Joyce said the biggest problem is that Deschutes County residents are not recognized unless they pay homeowners' association dues. They live next door to 14 horses on 3 usable acres and have to stay indoors. Jefferson County has all kinds of rules and they say they will start looking into Deschutes County codes. The CCNRs should include the area as a whole, not Jefferson vs. Deschutes. Joyce has two potential neighbors building homes now who are rethinking whether they want to move there due to the smell. She is concerned about the waste from the animals seeping into their well. There are no farms. Greg agreed about the odor and said he and his wife cannot go outside without smelling horse manure. Something has to be done — maybe an amendment to the Code allowing one horse per acre - Jefferson is unlimited. Commissioner Turner asked Nick about properties located in Deschutes County. Don't Deschutes County rules apply? Nick said yes — their Board is primarily controlled by Jefferson County, but the land use rules depend on where the land is located. Commissioner Turner and Nick discussed the timing of the annual report draft. Vice Chair Brown asked about the Commissioners' roles with livestock limits and animal abuse complaints, and about carryover projects and the regulations on dock construction. Are we spending time on something we have no say about? Will Groves said there are a set of rules in the floodplain code relating to the construction of docks, but they are outdated. Other departments such as Fish & Wildlife do not have the ability to enforce the codes and have been unwilling to enforce things they would like to see, such as the use of untreated wood and surfaces that will let in light. The County gives a conditional use permit for docks and gets comments from the Department of State Lands and Fish & Wildlife. FEMA requires the County to issue permits, so we are where the buck stops. We have gotten as many as ten requests a year, now around five. The Army Corps only gets involved with certain types of large projects. Commissioner Turner suggested closing the oral record this evening. Commissioner Powell asked about public health rules for problems with animals and insects, and Nick said he would look into them; we could leave the written record open until April 16. Motion: Commissioner Turner motioned to close the oral record and leave written open until April 16. Seconded by Vice Chair Brown. Motion passed. 2 IV. DELIBERATIONS: TA -13-1, Amend Deschutes County Code 18.04 and 18.113 to Change the Ratio of Overnight to Residential Units in Destination Resorts — Will Groves, Senior Planner. Will mentioned that the Board would like to hear the related item on Title 19 separately. Commissioner Turner said he has worked on projects in Eagle Crest and Pronghorn as an architect in the past but is not working with them currently. There were no conflict of interest challenges. Commissioner Powell said he has no difficulty with the applicant or Caldera Springs, but he is concerned about the text amendment. He is currently on the side of not supporting it, because the County has bent over backwards for the applicant over the years that the entity has been in existence, both in terms of the timing of building overnight units, allowing some flexibility into what constitutes an overnight unit, and in changing the vehicles which assure the economic commitment on the part of the development itself. Commissioner Powell does not see any of this changing, whether this goes through or not. Commissioner Palcic said he sees the ratio as one additional bar that exists to make someone really think before they apply for a destination resort. Lowering the bar puts more pressure on the conceptual master plan. Commissioner Criss said he has some problems with the proposal — as we reduce rentals we seem to be going against the original intent of the ratio. This would allow changing of master plans already in place with the current ratio. When destination resorts are built, developers get Goal 11 exceptions and whatever they need to build. Vice Chair Brown wanted the rules to be clear, applicable and fair for all. Some of these destination resorts are in place, and will they come back for revisions if this goes through — will they change their master plans? This is an economic decision and that is not a bad thing. Just because the state says it's okay does not mean it's okay for us, too. Deschutes County has its own set of circumstances. He would vote yes at this time. Commissioner Powell confirmed with Nick that the 50 overnight units have to be built first. Commissioner Lisignoli confirmed with Nick that developers can still build to the 2:1 ratio, even if it changes to 2.5:1. Commissioner Palcic asked what happens if they can't build 50 first, and point to economic conditions as the reason? Things continue to change. Commissioner Turner said that with the direct involvement he has had with the resorts, the difference of the ratios makes no difference in their quality or the overall impact on the areas around them. This current scenario may even decrease impacts on the area. Decreasing overnight housing decreases traffic, and destination resorts are a true economic engine for this county. Commissioner Powell said EDCO makes these points but we also have a legacy here. Most of the people who move to central Oregon, according to EDCO, come to Sunriver, not Pronghorn; and that is what motivated them to buy houses in the area. There is the question of whether to put resources into a resort community or into something like the Big Look. He understands the economic engine and taxes, but this is what drove people out of places like Aspen — the workers couldn't live there. This is a policy question and not just a text amendment. Commissioner Turner said he respects that duality. He knows a number of people in the Portland area with vacation homes in Sunriver and does not see that as bad. He is more concerned about urban sprawl than a destination resort that is master planned and scrutinized. Commissioner Palcic and Vice Chair Brown discussed whether the 2.5 change is negligible and the use of resources from visitors versus permanent residents — whether we are decreasing overnight units or increasing permanent units. Commissioner Palcic gave an example of a 3 developer taking a risk, which the current ones all have, and now we are being asked to throw a life raft to them, in some respects. Entrepreneurs throughout the ages have all taken risks. Commissioner Lisignoli felt that we need to accommodate developers to survive. Commissioner Palcic felt we may be singling out one industry when others need help, too. Commissioner Criss said that we have the most destination resorts of any county in the state. We do want them to successful, but if we have so much of an impact with all of these homes — an area back east was built out to 20% part time residents and 80% full time, which ended up swapped and had a huge impact. Commissioner Palcic said he is trying to figure out how this benefits the community at large. Commissioner Turner asked if there had been any arguments or testimony in opposition. Will mentioned Paul Dewey's letter on both proposals and the concern about these functioning as rural subdivisions. Vice Chair Brown felt this will not change the building capacity of the property. Commissioner Powell spoke about transportation impacts and that they can build as many overnights as they want — they just can't currently go below 2:1. The current ratio is an economic barrier that has to be crossed in order to have another destination resort. If you lower that barrier, are we encouraging more resorts? When you saturate an area, and if the true economic incentive comes from young entrepreneurs who would like to use outside amenities, and you saturate that with tourists, will the locals move somewhere else, like what is happening in Aspen? Vice Chair Brown felt that it was a different type of area — Deschutes County is much more spread out and varied. Commissioner Criss and Will discussed the maximum density per acre. Commissioner Palcic commended Commissioner Powell on his starting of the discussion. Motion: Commissioner Turner motioned to forward TA -13-1 to the Board with a recommendation of approval. Seconded by Vice Chair Brown. Vote was tied. Commissioner Powell noted that Chair Rainey, who is not here this evening, was in favor of the amendment. Commissioner Turner said he would like to make it clear that members of the Commission who testify before the Board or other groups in Salem are representing themselves and not the Planning Commission. Will indicated that the Board will hear TA -12-3 on April 15. V. PLANNING COMMISSION AND STAFF COMMENTS Nick mentioned the reception for candidates for County Administrator next week. VI. ADJOURN There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Z tfullyAsumaitted ckn Administrative Secretary The video record of this meeting can be located at: http://deschutes.granicus.comNiewPublisher.php?view—id=5 4