HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 012 - Bend UGB - 1st ReadingDeschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 -Fax (541) 385-3202 -www.deschutes.org
AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT
For Board Business Meeting of April 24, 2013
DATE: April 15, 2013
FROM: Kevin Harrison CDD x-1401
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
Consideration of first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 2013-012, amending the City of Bend's
urban growth boundary (UGB) to include a 12.44-acre property.
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS DATE? No
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
The Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Central Oregon applied for a comprehensive plan map
amendment to include their property at the corner of Skyliners Road and Skyline Ranch Road within
the City of Bend's UGB (See: County file no. PA-12-6).
The County Hearings Officer held a public hearing on January 30, 2013 and rendered a decision
approving the amendment on March 1,2013. That decision is now finaL Pursuant to DCC
22.28.030(B), the Hearings Officer has the authority to make the decision and, since no appeal has been
filed, the Board shall adopt the Hearings Officer's decision without additional argument or testimony
before the Board.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
None.
RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED:
Move first reading by title only of Ordinance No. 2013-012.
ATTENDANCE: Kevin Harrison, Principal Planner
DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS:
Planning Division; Legal Counsel.
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division
P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
MEMORANDUM
To: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
From: Kevin Harrison, Principal Planner
Date: March 22,2013
Re: Adoption of Ordinance No. 2013-012; County file no. PA-12-6.
BACKGROUND
The Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Central Oregon applied for a comprehensive plan map
amendment to include their 12.44-acre property within the City of Bend's urban growth
boundary (UGB). The property is located at the southeast comer of the intersection of
Skyliner's Road and Skyline Ranch Road, on the west side of Bend. The purpose of the
amendment is to allow the applicant to construct a church on the site and utilize city water and
sewer services.
Amendments to the UGB are a joint city/county function. To that end a joint city/county public
hearing was held before the Hearings Officer on January 30, 2013. The Hearings Officer
approved the application by a decision dated March 1,2013. Pursuant to DCC 22.28.030(B),
the decision of the Hearings Officer is the final decision of the county and the Board must
approve the comprehensive plan change without further argument or testimony. The City
Council will be following their own procedures to complete their process. Typically, the Board
has opted to follow the City's lead in a UGB amendment.
SCHEDULE
The City Council will be conducting a hearing on this matter on April 3, 2013. This item is
scheduled for the Board's work session on April 15, 2013, at which time I can brief you on the
city's progress and determine a date for adoption of Ordinance No. 2013-012. A copy of the
ordinance and all exhibits is attached for your benefit. Please feel free to contact me with any
questions or concerns.
Quality Seruices Performed with Pride
REVIEWED
-V
LEGAL COUNSEL
For Recording Stamp Only
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance Amending Deschutes County *
Code Title 23, the Deschutes County Comprehensive * ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
Plan, to amend the Urban Growth Boundary for the *
City of Bend.
WHEREAS, the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Central Oregon applied for a Comprehensive Plan
Amendment to Deschutes County Code ("DCC") Title 23, to amend the Urban Growth Boundary for the City of
Bend; and
WHEREAS, after a duly noticed public hearing, on January 30, 2013, the Deschutes County Hearings
Officer approved the comprehensive plan map amendment; and
WHEREAS, because no appeal was filed, the Board of County Commissioners ("Board") did not
initiate review of the application and the decision does not require an exception to the goals or concern lands
designated for forest or agricultural use, pursuant to DCC 22.28.030(B), the Board must approve the
comprehensive plan change to include the subject property inside the Urban Growth Boundary for the City of
Bend; and
WHEREAS, Deschutes County Ordinance 2000-017 ordained the Plan Map to be a component of Title
23 and, therefore, any amendment to the Plan Map is an amendment to Title 23;
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS
as follows:
Section 1. AMENDMENT. DCC Title 23, Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Map, is amended
to change the Urban Growth Boundary for the City of Bend to include certain property described in Exhibit "A"
and depicted on the map set forth in Exhibit "B", with both exhibits attached and incorporated by reference
herein.
Section 2. AMENDMENT. DCC Title 23, Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan is amended to read
as described in Exhibit "C", attached and incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined and
deleted language set forth in strilcetnrol:lgH.
Section 3. FINDINGS. The Board adopts as its findings in support of this decision, the Decision of
the Hearings Officer, attached as Exhibit "D" and incorporated by reference herein.
PAGE 1 OF 2 -ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
/II
Section 4. AMENDMENT. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 5, Supplemental
Sections, is amended to read as described in Exhibit "E," attached hereto and by this reference incorporated
herein, with new language underlined and language to be deleted in striketbroagh.
Dated this ___of ____" 2013 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
ALAN UNGER, Chair
TAMMY BANEY, Vice Chair
ATIEST:
Recording Secretary ANTHONY DeBONE, Commissioner
Date of 1st Reading: __day of ____--', 2013.
Date of 2nd Reading: __day _____, 2013.
Record of Adoption Vote:
Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused
Alan Unger
Tammy Baney
Anthony DeBone
Effective date: __day of ____-', 2013.
PAGE 2 OF 2 -ORDINANCE NO. 2013-012
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Tract 'E' of Skyliner Summit at Broken Top -Phase 11, as per the plat thereof, recorded August 12, 2004,
in Volume 2004, Page 48218, Deschutes County, Oregon, Official Records, located in the Southwest
Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 17 South, Range 11 East, Willamette
Meridian;
Together with;
All that portion of Parcel 3 of Partition Plat 2006-23, recorded May 2, 2006, in Volume 2006, Page
30472, Deschutes County, Oregon, Official Records; located in the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter of Section 36, Township 17 South, Range 11 East, Wlllamette Meridian, more particularly
described as follows:
All that portion of said Parcel 3 lying northerly of the following described line;
Beginning at the intersection of the west line of said Parcel 3(also being the east line of Skyline Ranch
Road), and the south line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 36;
Thence South 89°38'30" East 861.82 feet along said south line of said Southwest Quarter of the
Southwest Quarter of said Section 36, to the northwesterly line of Tract '0', Skyllner Summit at Broken
Top -Phase 11, as per the plat thereof, recorded August 12, 2004, in Volume 2004, Page 48218,
Deschutes County, Oregon, Official Records.
Page 1 of 1-EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
Subject Property
17·11-36-00·00500
Urban Growth Boundary
expansion Area
Page 1 of 1
Exhibit "B" of
Ordinance 2013-012
Legend
__Subject Property 17-11-36-00-00500
D ®
Bend Urban Growth Boundary
1
Chapter 23.01 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
23.01.010. Introduction.
A. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2011-003 and
found on the Deschutes County Community Development Department website, is incorporated by
reference herein.
B. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance
2011-027, are incorporated by reference herein.
C. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance
2012-005, are incorporated by reference herein.
D. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance
2012-012, are incorporated by reference herein.
E. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance
2012-016, are incorporated by reference herein.
F. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance
2013-002, are incorporated by reference herein.
H. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance
2013-007, are incorporated by reference herein.
The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance
2013-012.
(Ord. 2013-012 &2, 2013; Ord. 2013-002 §1, 2013; Ord. 2012-016 §1, 2012; Ord. 2012-013 §1, 2012;
Ord. 2012-005 §1, 2012; Ord. 2011-027 §1 through 12,2011; Ord.2011-003 §3, 2011)
Click here to be directed to the Comprehensive Plan (http://www.deschutes.org/compplan)
Page 1 of 1 -EXHffiIT C TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
DECISION OF DESCHUTES COUNTY HEARINGS OFFICER
FILE NUMBER: PA-12-6
APPLICANTI
PROPERTY OWNER: Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Central Oregon
P.O. Box 428
Bend,Oregon 97709
APPLICANT'S AGENTS: Duncan Brown
61487 S.W. Elder Ridge Street
Bend, Oregon 97702
Greg Winterowd
Winterbrook Planning
310 W Fourth Avenue, Suite 1100
Portland, Oregon 97204
REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of a comprehensive plan
amendment to expand the Bend Urban Growth Boundary to
include a 12.44-acre property zoned Urban Area Reserve for the
purpose of establishing an institutional use (house of worship and
related facilities) on the property, and to obtain city sewer service.
STAFF REVIEWER: Kevin Harrison, Principal Planner
HEARING DATES: January 30 and February 6,2013
RECORD CLOSED: February 6,2013
I. APPLICABLE STANDARDS & CRITERIA:
A. Title 22 of the Deschutes County Code, the Deschutes County Procedures Ordinance
I. Chapter 22.28, Land Use Action Decisions
B. Title 23 of the Deschutes County Code, the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
1. Chapter 4, Urban Growth Management
*Section 4.2, Urbanization Policies
C. Bend Area General Plan
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
D. Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS)
1. Chapter 197, Comprehensive Land Use Planning Coordination
* ORS 197.298, Priority of Land to Be Included Within Urban Growth
Boundary
E. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), Chapter 660
1. Division 4, Interpretation of Goal 2 Exceptions Process
2. Division 12, Transportation Planning
3. Division 15, Statewide Planning Goals
4. Division 24, Urban Growth Boundaries
II. FINDINGS OFFACT:
A. Location: The subject property does not have an assigned address. It is located at the
southeast comer of the intersection of Skyliners Road and Skyline Ranch Road in Bend,
and is further identified as Tax Lot 500 on Deschutes County Assessor's Map 17-11-36
and Tax Lot 400 on Assessor's Map 17-11-36CC.
B. Zoning and Plan Designation: The subject property is located outside the Bend Urban
Growth Boundary (UGB) but within the Bend city limits. It is zoned Urban Area Reserve
(UAR-IO), and is designated Urban Area Reserve by the Bend Area General Plan Map.
C. Site Description: The subject property is 12.44 acres in size and irregular in shape. It
slopes from northwest to southeast. Vegetation consists primarily of ponderosa pine and
western juniper trees, bitterbrush, rabbit brush, and native grasses. There are scattered
rock outcroppings on the site. The property is undeveloped. However, there is a dirt trail
on the northern property boundary parallel to Skyliners Road, and another trail along the
western property boundary parallel to Skyline Ranch Road.
D. Surrounding Land Uses: The subject property is bounded on the north by Skyliners
Road, a designated arterial road, and on the west by Skyline Ranch Road, a designated
collector road. To the east is residential development within Skyliner Summit at Broken
Top Phase II planned development. To the north across Skyliners Road is Northwest
Crossing, a planned mixed-use development that includes single-family residences,
commercial uses and schools. To the west is scattered residential development within the
Highlands at Broken Top subdivision. To the south is undeveloped land located primarily
within the Tetherow Destination Resort.
E. Property History: The subject property has a somewhat unusual history. It was formerly
located within the Bend city limits and UGB and was zoned Urban Standard Density
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 2 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
Residential (RS).) In 1999 the subject property was removed from the UGB and rezoned to
UAR-to as part of the development of the Skyliners Summit at Broken Top planned
development? The implementing ordinances indicate the subject property was removed
from the UGB to create an equal exchange ofland to be included in and excluded from the
UGB. However, the implementing ordinances did not adjust the Bend city limits to exclude
the subject property so it remained within the city limits although outside the UGB.3
In 2006, the subject property became part of Parcel 3 of Partition Plat 2006-23 consisting
of 22.7 acres. The partition separated Parcel 3 from its parent parcel which became part
ofthe Tetherow Destination Resort. 4
In 2012 the applicant Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Central Oregon (hereafter
"applicant" or "Fellowship") acquired the subject property through a donation. The
applicant obtained city approval of a lot line adjustment to reconfigure the subject
property to its current size and shape. 5 The property line adjustment was reviewed by the
city and county by mutual agreement.
F. Procedural History: In February of 1998, the county and the city entered into a joint
management agreement (JMA) to handle land use applications, including UGB
expansions, for property located within the Urban Area Reserve adjacent to the Bend
UGB. Pursuant to this agreement, both the city and county have processed this
application as a quasi-judicial land use application. The city's and county's applications
were referred to the same hearings officer for decisions, and the decisions will be
reviewed by the Bend City Council (council) and the Deschutes County Board of
Commissioners (board) at public meetingsihearings before adoption of implementing
ordinances to enact the U GB expansion.
The subject county application was submitted on December 10, 2012 and was accepted as
complete on January to, 2013. A joint public hearing on the city and county applications
was scheduled for January 30, 2013. The hearing was opened and continued on the record
to February 6, 2013 due to the Hearings Officer's illness. At the continued public hearing,
the Hearings Officer received testimony and evidence on both the city and county
applications, and closed the evidentiary record. The applicant waived submission of final
1 The boundaries ofthe Bend city limits and Bend UGB are the same.
2 County Ordinance No. 98-031; Bend Ordinance No. NS-171S; County File Nos. CU-94-131IPA-94
6/ZC-94-7.
3 Robert Brell, representing the Cascade West Neighborhood Association, submitted an electronic mail
message dated January 26, 2013, questioning whether the removal of the subject property from the UGB
was subject to any "agreements or conditions." The Hearings Officer has reviewed the ordinance
effecting the 1999 UGB amendment and finds no such agreements or conditions.
4 County File Nos. MP-06-1, MA-06-7.
5 City File No. PZ-12-26S.
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 3 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
argument pursuant to ORS 197.763. Therefore, the record closed on February 6, 2013.
Because the application involves a quasi-judicial comprehensive plan amendment, pursuant
to Section 22.20.040(D) of the Deschutes County Code the application is not subject to the
150-day period for issuance ofa final local land use decision under ORS 215.427.
G. Proposal: The applicant requests approval of a plan amendment to expand the Bend
UGB to include the 12.44-acre subject property in order to establish an institutional use
(house of worship and related facilities including outdoor activity areas), and to obtain
city sewer service. The applicant's burden of proof states that if the UGB expansion is
approved the applicant intends to construct a facility including a 350-seat sanctuary, 90
space parking lot, office space, fellowship hall with kitchen, educational and library
facilities, and outdoor space for meditation, a community garden, and outdoor activities
and gatherings. This use is permitted conditionally in the UAR-l 0 Zone. No development
application was submitted concurrently with this plan amendment request. 6
H. PubliclPrivate Agency Comments: The Planning Division sent notice of the applicant's
proposal to a number of public and private agencies and received responses from: the
Deschutes County Property Address Coordinator and Transportation Planner; and the
City of Bend Planning, Engineering, and Fire Departments. These comments are set forth
verbatim at pages 3-4 of the staff report and/or are included in the record. No comments
were received from: the Deschutes County Road Department; the City of Bend Planning,
Engineering, and Public Works Departments; the Bend Metro Park and Recreation
District; or the Department of Land Conservation and Development (D LCD). 7
I. Public Notice and Comments: The Planning Division mailed individual written notice
of the applicant's proposal and the initial public hearing to the owners of record of all
property located within 250 feet of the subject property. The record indicates this notice
was mailed to 32 property owners as well as to the Century West Neighborhood
Association (CWNA). In addition, notice of the initial public hearing was published in
the Bend "Bulletin" newspaper, and the subject property was posted with a notice of
proposed land use action sign. As of the date the record in this matter closed, the city and
county had received several comments from members of the public and the CWNA in
response to these notices. In addition, two members of the public testified at the
continued public hearing.
J. Lot ofRecord: The subject property is a legal lot ofrecord having been created as Parcel
6 Members of the public who commented on the application questioned why the applicant did not request
approval to rezone the subject property from UAR-IO to RS. The applicant's burden of proof states no
zone change was requested because its proposed use is permitted in the UAR-tO Zone, and because of the
cost of the zone change application and potential additional infrastructure associated with development
under the more dense RS zoning.
7 Because the county and city applications were reviewed jointly by the Hearings Officer, I am
considering all comments submitted into the record by agencies and members of the public to have been
submitted for both applications.
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 4 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
3 of Partition Plat 2006-23, and subsequently reconfigured to its current size and shape
through a property line adjustment (Bend File No. PZ-12-265).
III. CONCLUSIONS OFLAW:
In order to approve the applicant's requested expansion of the Bend UGB to develop its
proposed facility, the Hearings Officer must find the proposal complies with UGB expansion
approval criteria found in statutes, statewide planning goals and guidelines and their
implementing administrative rules, the county's and city's comprehensive plans, and the
county's land use procedures ordinance. The relevant approval criteria are addressed below.
A. Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines, Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR)
Chapter 660, Division 15
1. OAR 660-015-000, Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines #1 Through #14
Goal 1: Citizen Involvement
To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be
involved in all phases of the planning process.
FINDINGS: During this UGB expansion process, public notice has been provided by both the
city and county to affected agencies, property owners and neighborhood associations in the
surrounding area. As noted in the Findings of Fact above, the county both mailed and published
notice of the proposal and the initial public hearing. The applicant conducted a public meeting as
required by the city's development code about which all property owners and recognized
neighborhood associations within 500 feet of the site were notified (Appendix G to applicant's
burden of proof). The city and county held a joint public hearing before the Hearings Officer,
and there will be separate meetingslhearings before the council and board before the UGB
expansion is effected through the adoption of implementing ordinances. Therefore, the Hearings
Officer finds Goal 1 is met.
Goal 2: Land Use Planning
To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision
and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions
and actions.
FINDINGS: In accordance with Goal 2, the applicant submitted an application to both the
county and city to expand the UGB. The applicant submitted a detailed burden of proof that
provides an adequate factual base to enable both jurisdictions to make an informed decision
regarding the proposed expansion. Therefore, the Hearings Officer finds Goal 2 is met.
Goal 3: Agricultural Lands
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 5 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
To preserve and maintain agricultural lands.
Goal 4: Forest Lands
To conserve forest lands.
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds these goals are not applicable to the applicant's
proposal because the subject property is not identified as either agricultural or forest land on the
city's and county's comprehensive plan maps.
Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces.
FINDINGS: Goal 5 resources are identified in the county's acknowledged comprehensive plan.
There are no identified Goal 5 natural or cultural resources on the subject property. The Hearings
Officer finds the proposed UGB amendment will have no impact on open space or scenic views.
Therefore, I find Goal 5 is met.
Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state.
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds the proposed UGB expansion will have no effect on the
quality of air, water and land resources. The staff report states, and I agree, that maintaining and
improving the quality of such resources will be assured through enforcement of state and local
regulations at the time of development of the subject property. In addition, the proposed UGB
expansion would allow any development on the subject property to be connected to the city's
water and sewer facilities, thereby protecting water resources. Therefore, I find Goal 6 is met.
Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards
To protect people and property from natural disasters and hazards.
FINDINGS: The record indicates there are no areas within the subject property that are
identified as subject to flooding or landslide activity. The wildfire hazard for the property is the
same as other properties on the west side of Bend. Future development of the subject property
within the Bend UGB will allow connection to the city's water system, and the applicant has
demonstrated there is adequate water supply and pressure to meet the city's fire flow
requirements. In addition, because the property is located within the city limits, it is served by
the Bend Fire Department which submitted comments in support of the applicant's proposaL The
applicant's burden of proof states it has received a grant to reduce wildfire hazard through brush
thinning and removal of low-hanging tree limbs, and that inclusion of the subject property in the
UGB will result in development-related vegetation maintenance that will decrease wildfire
hazard both on the property and in the surrounding area. For these reasons, the Hearings Officer
finds Goal 7 is met.
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 6 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
Goal 8: Recreational Needs
To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where
appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including
destination resorts.
Goal 9: Economic Development
To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities
vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens.
Goal 10: Housing
To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
FINDINGS: The staff report states, and the Hearings Officer agrees, that in light of the
relatively small size of the subject property, and the specific need addressed by the proposed
UGB expansion, Goals 8, 9, and 10 are not relevant to this quasi-judicial plan amendment
application.
Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services
To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and
services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development.
FINDINGS: The record indicates there are existing water and sewer lines serving the adjacent
Skyliner Summit at Broken Top Phase II development, located along N.W. Perlette Lane.
Appendix C to the applicant's burden of proof includes a sewer and water analysis performed by
the city that concludes water and sewer service are available and adequate for the institutional
use proposed by the applicant. In addition, because the property is within the city limits it will be
served by the Bend Fire Department which submitted comments in support of the applicant's
proposal. As noted in the Findings of Fact above, the subject property abuts existing
transportation facilities, including Skyliners Road, a designated arterial, Skyline Ranch Road, a
designated collector, and N.W. Perlette Lane, a designated local road. For these reasons, the
Hearings Officer finds Goal 11 is met.
Goal 12: Transportation
To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system.
FINDINGS: Goal 12 is implemented by the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) found in OAR
660-012. Among other things, this rule requires the city to prepare and adopt a Transportation
System Plan (TSP) as part of its comprehensive plan. The record indicates the Bend Urban Area
TSP was adopted October 11, 2000. In addition, in general applicants for plan amendments must
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 7 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
demonstrate compliance with the TPR. However, OAR 660-024-0020( d) provides that where, as
here, the subject property is zoned as urbanizable land i.e., UAR-10 -the applicant's proposed
use is permitted conditionally in the UAR-10 Zone, and the applicant does request a change to
the property's zoning from UAR-10, the proposed UGB expansion is exempt from review under
the TPR. For these reasons, the Hearings Officer finds Goal 12 is met.
Goal 13: Energy Conservation
To conserve energy.
FINDINGS: As discussed in the findings below, the applicant's application and burden of proof
state the subject property was chosen, in part, because of its proximity to the residences of
current Fellowship members, therefore facilitating a reduction in energy used traveling to and
from the proposed facility. In addition, the record indicates the subject property has a substantial
southern exposure that will permit solar access in the design of new buildings. For these reasons,
the Hearings Officer finds Goal 13 is met.
Goal 14: Urbanization (amended effective April 28, 2005)
To provide for orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban use, to accommodate
urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure
efficient use ofland, and to provide for livable communities.
UrbanGrowthBoundaries
Urban growth boundaries shall be established and maintained by cities, counties and
regional governments to provide land for urban development needs and to identify and
separate urban and urbanizable land from rural land. Establishment and change of urban
growth boundaries shall be a cooperative process among cities, counties and, where
applicable, regional governments. An urban growth boundary and amendments to the
boundary shall be adopted by all cities within the boundary and by the county or counties
within which the boundary is located, consistent with intergovernmental agreements,
except for the Metro regional urban growth boundary established pursuant to ORS
chapter 268, which shall be adopted or amended by the Metropolitan Service District.
LandNeed
Establishment and change of urban growth boundaries shall be based on the following:
1. Demonstrated need to accommodate long-range urban population, consistent with a
20-year population forecast coordinated with affected local governments; and
FINDINGS: The city has adopted coordinated population projections. Based upon these
projections, the city identified the need to provide housing, employment opportunities, public
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 8 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
facilities, streets and roads, schools, parks or open space, and other institutional facilities for an
additional 38,515 residents expected by 2028.
2. Demonstrated need for housing, employment opportunities, livability or uses such
as public facilities, streets and roads, schools, parks or open space, or any
combination of the need categories in this subsection (2).
FINDINGS: The city and county are engaged in a legislative process to update it's the Bend
comprehensive plan and UGB and has prepared an analysis of future residential land needs,
including related supportive development such as schools, parks, and institutional uses. The city
inventoried all residential lands within the UGB (17,695 acres). The city found that
approximately 15 percent of the inventoried residential lands are developed with institutional
uses other than schools and parks, and 2,909 acres were determined to be either vacant or
available for redevelopment (See Draft Bend Area General Plan Chapter 5: Housing and
Residential Lands). In the city's land need analysis for its comprehensive plan update, it
concluded that 442 acres of additional land would be needed for institutional uses to
accommodate the 20-year planning horizon (See: Bend Findings in Support of UGB Expansion,
Table 111-14).
In determining need, local government may specify characteristics, such as parcel size,
topography or proximity, necessary for land to be suitable for an identified need. Prior to
expanding an urban growth boundary, local governments shall demonstrate that needs
cannot reasonably be accommodated on land already inside the urban growth boundary.
FINDINGS:
Need for New Facility
The applicant's burden of proof describes the need for its new facility as follows:
"The Fellowship is presently renting the Old Stone Church located on Franklin
Avenue [in downtown Bend] for its services and activities. In recent years there
has been significant membership growth, and the sanctuary with its seating
capacity ofapproximately 150 is no longer large enough to meet congregational
needs. Holiday and other significant services often attract more congregants than
seats. Critically, the Old Stone Church, a protected historic building, has no
ADA-accessible bathrooms, classrooms, or staff office space. Also, adequate
onsite or nearby parkingfor motor vehicles and bicycles is not available. "
Characteristics of Land Needed for New Facility
The applicant's burden of proof described the characteristics ofland needed for its proposed new
facility as follows:
"Several years ago the Fellowship recognized the need for larger facilities and
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 9 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
formed a committee charged with assessing future needs. Ten-year projections
based on both population growth of the Bend area and Fellowship growth
indicate an increase in membership from 167 at present to 448 (Appendix D). A
site that would accommodate not only short and intermediate range projections,
but also allow for future expansion beyond the ten-year time period was the
optimal solution. A building fund was started and, through a generous gift from
an anonymous donor, the Fellowship has been able to implement the plan for a
new home.
Required Fellowship Site Development and Location Characteristics
In addition to the need for a larger sanctuary for the projected increase in
membership, facilities to support existing and future Fellowship activities and the
mission of the Unitarian Universalist church in general, are needed. A vision
workshop was held to identify and rank desired Fellowship activities, physical
needs to support those activities, and conceptual design suggestions for a site
development (notes found in Appendix E). Committees were formed to detail
specific needs (site location, site deSign, building design, financing, etc.) and site
location and development criteria were developed. Following is a brief list (not
necessarily in order of importance) of the more important requirements for site
selection:
• Central location for existing Fellowship members. Many members are
located on the west side ofBend, making a west side location desirable.
• Room for expansion. The site will need to be large enough to
accommodate not only the short and intermediate needs of the Fellowship
(ten years), but allow room for future expansion as the Fellowship grows
and expands in its service to the surrounding community. A minimum of
ten acres, and preferably more, are needed to accommodate long term
development ofbuildings and outdoor activities.
• Safe and convenient access by all transportation modes. Direct access to
major streets (arterials and collectors) and convenient connections to
Highway 97 for out-ol-town members is required. Existing or planned
pedestrian facilities and designated bicycle paths for nearby members is a
high priority. The site should be easily accessible to the surrounding
community. Nearby existing or potential bus routes are highly desirable.
• Adequate parking for both motor vehicles and bicycles. Minimum
required motor vehicle parking for the 350-seat sanctuary is almost 90
vehicle spaces, requiring approximately one acre alone. With nearby
members walking or bicycling, covered bicycle parking is a priority.
• In or adjacent to a residential neighborhood. The Fellowship should be
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 10 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
part ofthe neighborhood fabric for convenient access and to be part ofthe
residential community. A commercial setting is not appropriate and is not
supportive of the Fellowship covenant or goals of service to the
community.
• Sanctuary with seating for at least 350. Based on the projected
membership increase over the next ten years, minimal seating will need to
be 350.
• Church employee offices. Several offices and small meeting, storage, or
related rooms are requiredfor business functions ofthe Fellowship.
• Fellowship hall with kitchen and storage facilities. This will provide an
activity space for a variety offunctions without having to compromise the
design and use ofthe sanctuary.
• Education facilities including classrooms and storage. These facilities
will not only serve youth programs, but will also support adult education
classes and discussions, as well as meeting space for small groups.
• Library. A quiet space for reading and contemplation.
• Peaceful and quiet. Although there is a need for convenient access, a site
should be located in a quiet and peaceful setting for contemplative
outdoor mediation and activities.
• Natural beauty. The site should reflect the Unitarian belief in the beauty
of nature and respect for the environment. Where possible, utilizing and
showcasing the existing natural elements in the development is important.
• Sustainability. The site as well as the proposed Fellowship buildings must
meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability offuture
generations to meet their own needs. Specifically, solar access is a high
priority, as is access via walking, bicycling, and existing and potential
public transit.
• Outdoor spaces. The site should allow for outdoor activities including
youth recreation, picnicking, outdoor meeting space, meditation and
contemplation areas, wildlife refuge, and potential for a garden. It should
be large enough to accommodate community uses on occasions.
• Visual experience. The site must be attractive to the casual passer-by, a
first-time visitor, and member or site user, and reflect the Unitarian values
and beliefs. The site must be large enough so that parking, utilities, and
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 11 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
storage buildings are screened.
• Developable in the short tenn. The site must have adequate streets, sewer,
and water services available or able to be extended so that development
can occur as soon as land use approvals are given in response to the
growing Fellowship and commitments to donors.
Based upon these requirements and the size of the building necessary to
accommodate the anticipated congregants at worship service, a minimum site size
often acres is needed. "
Alternative Sites Evaluation Process
The applicant's burden of proof describes its search for suitable sites meeting its identified need
and site characteristics in relevant part as follows:
"The Fellowship initially investigated numerous vacant and developed sites
throughout the Bend area, working through realtors and individually. Generally,
available developed sites within the City were considered too small to allow for
even modest growth or were sold before an adequate study of site benefits could
be completed. A list of 23 vacant sites greater than 10 acres in size (a size
considered the minimum to accommodate the required site characteristics listed
above) and within the existing UGB were reviewed. Because of zoning (public
facilities, industrial and surface mining zones do not allow a place of worship),
proximity to membership, adjacency to a residential neighborhood, access to
sewer, convenient transportation routes, insufficient road and pathway
improvements, and lack of solitude and/or natural amenities, it was concluded
that none of the sites met the required site characteristics discussed above. A
more detailed analysis ofindividual sites is contained in Appendix F.
With elimination of the 23 vacant sites within the UGB, the Fellowship
investigated sites outside of the UGB but within the Urban Area Reserve. Most
did not meet the more important locational criteria: convenient access to
Fellowship members; direct access from other than local residential street; safe
and convenient access for bicycles and pedestrians; availability to public transit;
availability to services; and ability to be developed within the near term.
However, two sites that met most of the general locational and development
criteria were identified for consideration (Figure 7). One site (SE-l) is outside of
the city limits and UGB but within the UAR, and the other is inside the city limits
and UAR but outside of the UGB (Skyliners). A more thorough analysis of site
characteristics measured against Fellowship requirements was completed
(Appendix F).
i
1
j Site SE-1, located south ofBear Creek Road east ofthe city limits, was eliminated
because of distance from Fellowship members, lack of visibility, potential
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 12 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
problems with services extension, and limited accessibility (no existing or short
term potential for pedestrian, bicycle or public transit facilities, and poor access
from Highway 97). The Skyliners site [the subject property] was the preforred site
because of its location relative to the Fellowship membership, accessibility from
the surrounding neighborhood and City as a whole, size for both near-term and
long-term expansion opportunities, and natural amenities. "
Based on the foregoing analysis and conclusions, the applicant argues that available land within
the existing UGB either is too small (less than 10 acres) or does not meet the applicant's
locational and development criteria, and therefore land outside the existing UGB must be
considered. The applicant's proposed UGB amendment would provide 12.44 acres toward
meeting the city's identified need for 442 additional acres for institutional uses that cannot be
accommodated within the existing UGB.
The staff report states, and the Hearings Officer concurs, that the applicant has demonstrated a
land need for the proposed UGB expansion. The adequacy of the applicant's alternative sites
analysis is discussed in detail in the findings below under OAR 660-24-0060.
Boundary Location
The location of the urban growth boundary and changes to the boundary shall be
determined by evaluating alternative boundary locations consistent with ORS 197.298 and
with consideration of the following factors:
FINDINGS: This criterion requires an evaluation of alternative boundary locations consistent
with ORS 197.298. This discussion is detailed below.
1. Efficient accommodation of identified land needs;
FINDINGS: The purpose of the proposed UGB expansion is to provide suitable land for the
applicant's proposed institutional use (place of worship and related facilities). The subject
property, because of its size, location within the city limits and adjacent to the UGB, would have
access to required urban infrastructure including roads, water and sewer service. Additionally, it
is located adjacent to residential development and is proximate to Fellowship members'
residences. For these reasons, the Hearings Officer finds the proposed UGB amendment is an
efficient accommodation of identified land needs.
2. Orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services;
FINDINGS: As discussed in the findings above, urban infrastructure and public facilities and
services are available to the subject property, including city water and sewer service and fire
protection. The subject property has frontage on, and direct access to, Skyliners Road (an
arterial), Skyline Ranch Road (a collector), and N.W. Perlette Lane (a local street). Since the
property is already within the city limits it is served by the Bend Fire Department which
submitted comments in support of the applicant's proposal. With respect to impacts on
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 13 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
transportation facilities, the applicant's proposed UGB amendment will not change the subject
property's current U AR -10 zoning, and therefore, as discussed in the findings above, compliance
with the TPR is not required. The staff report states, and the Hearings Officer agrees, that traffic
impacts associated with the proposed institutional use will be evaluated by the city in its future
conditional use and site plan review process.
3. Comparative environmental, energy, economic and social consequences;
FINDINGS: The applicant's burden of proof addresses the environmental, economic, social and
energy consequences that would result from the proposed UGB expansion, summarized as
follows.
Environmental: As discussed in the findings above, there are no identified Goal 5 resources on
the subject property. The property also does not contain any significant natural features such as
wetlands, waterways or rimrock. There are no identified natural hazards present at the site, other
than wildfire, which would be present to the same extent throughout the west side of Bend.
Development of the subject property with a place of worship is possible without the proposed
UGB amendment because it is a use pennitted in the UAR-IO Zone, but inclusion within the
UGB would allow the use to be connected to city's sewer system, therefore eliminating the need
for what could be a large on-site sewage disposal system with its attendant risk of adverse
environmental consequences.
Energy: The subject property is not known to contain energy resources such as known deposits
of oil and natural gas, or geothennal resources. The property has a southern aspect which will
allow for solar access for future buildings. The property is adjacent to existing transportation
facilities and to the homes of many Fellowship members, thus providing opportunities for
reduced energy usage in travel to and from the property.
Economic: Since development of the property with a place of worship is possible without
amending the UGB, it is difficult to discern a distinct economic advantage from development of
the subject property instead of another site. However, the UGB amendment would allow the
Fellowship to stop paying rent at its current site and to grow in membership and activities which
could provide an economic benefit to the Fellowship and the community.
Social: The statewide planning goals define "social consequences" as:
The tangible and intangible effects upon people and their relationships with the
community in which they live resulting from a particular action or decision.
A tangible effect from the proposed UGB expansion would be increased traffic in this particular
part of Bend following development of the applicant's proposed place of worship. An intangible
effect could include a sense of loss of open space by neighbors. However, the applicant argues
the UGB expansion will facilitate development of religious, cultural, social, and educational
opportunities to the nearby residential areas and the community as a whole, and that, in general,
churches are complementary to residential areas and the overall community.
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 14 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
Based on the above analysis from the applicant's burden of proof, the Hearings Officer finds the
applicant has demonstrated the comparative environmental, energy, economic and social
consequences of the proposed UGB amendment have been adequately considered.
4. Compatibility of the proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural and
forest activities occurring on farm and forest land outside the UGB.
FINDINGS: As discussed above, the subject property is not located near agricultural or forest
activities or farm or forest land. Rather, the property is surrounded primarily by residential uses
within subdivisions, planned developments, and a destination resort Therefore, the Hearings
Officer finds the proposed UGB expansion and ultimate use of the property for a place of
worship will not adversely impact farm and forest land outside the UGB.
UrbanizableLand
Land within urban growth boundaries shall be considered available for urban development
consistent with plans for the provision of urban facilities and services. Comprehensive
plans and implementing measures shall manage the use and division of urbanizable land to
maintain its potential for planned urban development until appropriate public facilities
and services are available or planned.
FINDINGS: As discussed above, the subject property can be efficiently served by all necessary
public facilities and services.
Unincorporated Communities
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds this criterion is not applicable because the subject
property is not located within an unincorporated community.
Single-Family Dwellings in Exception Areas
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds this criterion is not applicable because no single-family
dwellings are proposed.
Rural Industrial Development
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds this criterion is not applicable because no industrial
development is proposed.
Guidelines
FINDINGS: This section of Goal 14 outlines factors to be considered when planning for the
initial UGB creation and expansion of an existing UGB. The staff report states, and the Hearings
Officer agrees, that these guidelines were intended to be applied to legislative UGB
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA·12·6
Page 15 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
1
establishment and amendment, and not to site-specific, quasi-judicial UGB expansion
applications such as the subject application. I find that interpretation is supported by the fact that
OAR 660-024-0040(3), discussed in the findings below, expressly allows UGB expansion to
address a specific need, such as that requested by the applicant. Therefore, I find these guidelines
do not apply to the applicant's proposal.
Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions, the Hearings Officer finds the applicable
provisions of Goal 14 are met by the applicant's proposal.
Goa115: Willamette River Greenway.
Goal 16:EstuarineResources.
Goal 17:Coastal Shorelands.
GoaI18:BeachesandDunes.
Goal 19:0cean Resources.
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds these goals are not applicable to the applicant's
proposal because the subject property is not located within the Willamette Greenway, and does
not possess any estuarine areas, coastal shorelands, beaches and dunes, or ocean resources.
For the foregoing reasons, the Hearings Officer finds the applicant's proposed UGB expansion
satisfies the applicable statewide planning goals.
B. Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 197, Comprehensive Land Use Planning
Coordination
1. ORS 197.298, Priority of Land To Be Included Within Urban Growth
Boundary
(1) In addition to any requirements established by rule addressing
urbanization, land may not be included within an urban growth
boundary except under the following priorities:
(a) First priority is land that is designated urban reserve land
under ORS 195.145, rule or metropolitan service district action
plan.
(b) If land under paragraph (a) of this subsection is inadequate to
accommodate the amount of land needed, second priority is
land adjacent to an urban growth boundary that is identified
in an acknowledged comprehensive plan as an exception area
or nonresource land. Second priority may include resource
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 16 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
land that is completely surrounded by exception areas unless
such resource land is high-value farmland as described in ORS
215.710.
FINDINGS: As noted in foregoing findings, Goal 14 requires the proposed UGB expansion to
be consistent with ORS 197.298. Although the subject property is designated as Urban Area
Reserve on both the city's and County's comprehensive plans, these lands were not designated
as such pursuant to ORS 195.145. Rather, they were designated prior to implementation of
ORS
195, and therefore the city does not have any "first priority" lands as defined in Subsection (l)(a)
of this statute that are available for the proposed need-specific UGB expansion. The subject
property is considered an exception area and therefore is categorized as "second priority" land,
which is the highest priority land available. For these reasons, the Hearings Officer finds the
applicant's proposal satisfies the requirements ofORS 197.298.
C. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), Chapter 660, Land Conservation and
Development Commission
I. Division 4, Interpretation of Goal 2 Exception Process
a. Section 660-004-00 I 0, Application of the Goal 2 Exception Process to
Certain Goals.
* * *
(l)(d) Goal 14 "Urbanization" as provided for in the applicable
paragraph (1)(c)(A), (B), (C), or (D) ofthis rule:
* * *
(C) When a local government changes an established urban
growth boundary applying Goal 14 as amended April 28, 2005,
a goal exception is not required unless the local government
seeks an exception to any of the requirements of Goal 14 or
other applicable goals.
FINDINGS: As discussed in the findings above, the county has applied Goal 14 as amended
April 28, 2005. And inasmuch as the applicant is not seeking a goal exception, no goal exception
is required for approval of the proposed UGB expansion.
2. Division 12, Transportation Planning
a. Section 660-012-0060, Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
(I) Where an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged
comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation would
significantly affect an existing or planned transportation
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
Page 17 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
facility, the local government shall put in place measures as
provided in section (2) of this rule to assure that allowed land
uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and
performance standards (e.g. level of service, volume to capacity
ratio, etc.) of the facility. A plan or land use regulation
amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it
would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or
planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction
of map errors in an adopted plan);
(b) Change standards implementing a functional
classification system; or
(c) As measured at the end of the planning period
identified in the adopted transportation system plan:
(A) Allow land uses or levels of development that
would result in types or levels of travel or access
that are inconsistent with the functional
classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility;
(B) Reduce the performance of an existing or
planned transportation facility below the
mInImUm acceptable performance standard
identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Worsen the performance of an existing or
planned transportation facility that is otherwise
projected to perform below the minimum
acceptable performance standard identified in
the TSP or comprehensive plan.
(2) Where a local government determines that there would be a
significant effect, compliance with section (1) shall be
accomplished through one or a combination of the following:
(a) Adopting measures that demonstrate allowed land uses
are consistent with the planned function, capacity, and
performance standards of the transportation facility.
(b) Amending the TSP or comprehensive plan to provide
transportation facilities, improvements or services
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 18 of31
EXHIBIT 0 TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
adequate to support the proposed land uses consistent
with the requirements of this division; such
amendments shall include a funding plan or mechanism
consistent with section (4) or include an amendment to
the transportation finance plan so that the facility,
improvement, or service will be provided by the end of
the planning period.
(c) Altering land use designations, densities, or design
requirements to reduce demand for automobile travel
and meet travel needs through other modes.
(d) Amending the TSP to modify the planned function,
capacity or performance standards of the
transportation facility.
(e) Providing other measures as a condition of development
or through a development agreement or similar funding
method, including transportation system management
measures, demand management or minor
transportation improvements. Local governments shall
as part of the amendment specify when measures or
improvements provided pursuant to this subsection will
be provided.
FINDINGS: As discussed in findings elsewhere in this decision, under OAR 660-024-0020(l)(d)
the proposed UGB amendment is exempt from review under the TPR because the proposed
amendment will not change the zoning of the subject property. Therefore, the Hearings Officer finds
the proposed amendment will not significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility.
3. Division 24, Urban Growth Boundaries
a. Section 660-024-0000, Purpose and Applicability
(1) The rules in this division clarify procedures and requirements
of Goal 14 regarding local government adoption or amendment
ofan urban growth boundary (UGB).
* * *
(3) The rules in this division are effective April 5, 2007, except as
follows:
(a) A local government may choose to apply this division
prior to April 5, 2007;
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 19 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
(b) A local government may choose to not apply this
division to a plan amendment concerning the evaluation
or amendment of a UGB, regardless of the date of that
amendment, if the local government initiated the
evaluation or amendment of the UGB prior to April 5,
2007;
FINDINGS: These rules became effective April 5, 2007. The applicant's proposed UGB
amendment was submitted to the county on December 10, 2012. Therefore, the Hearings Officer
finds these rules apply.
b. Section 660-024-0020, Adoption or Amendment of a UGB
(1) All statewide goals and related administrative rules are
applicable when establishing or amending a UGB, except as
follows:
(a) The exceptions process in Goal 2 and OAR 660, division
4, is not applicable unless a local government chooses to
take an exception to a particular goal requirement, for
example, as provided in OAR 660-004-0010(1);
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds this rule is not applicable to the applicant's proposal
because the applicant is not seeking a goal exception.
(b) Goals 3 and 4 are not applicable;
FINDINGS: Based on this paragraph, Goals 3 and 4 are not applicable.
(c) GoalS and related rules under OAR 660, division 23,
apply only in areas added to the UGB, except as
required under OAR 660-023-0070 and 660-023-0250;
FINDINGS: As discussed in the findings above, there are no Goal 5 resources identified on the
subject property, and the Hearings Officer has found no GoalS resources will be impacted by the
proposed UGB expansion.
(d) The transportation planning rule requirements under
OAR 660-012-0060 need not be applied to a UGB
amendment if the land added to the UGB is zoned as
urbanizable land, either by retaining the zoning that
was assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary or by
assIgnmg interim zoning that does not allow
development that would generate more vehicle trips
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 20 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
than development allowed by the zoning assigned prior
to inclusion in the boundary;
FINDINGS: As discussed above, the subject property is currently designated Urban Area
Reserve and zoned UAR-tO, and therefore it constitutes urbanizable land. The applicant
proposes that the property's current zoning be retained. Therefore, the Hearings Officer has
found OAR 660-012-0060 is not applicable to this proposed UGB amendment.
(e) Goal 15 is not applicable to land added to the UGB
unless the land is within the Willamette River
Greenway Boundary;
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer has found Goal 15 is not applicable because the subject
property is not located within the Willamette River Greenway Boundary.
(1) Goals 16 to 18 are not applicable to land added to the
UOB unless the land is within a coastal shore lands
boundary;
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer has found Goals 16 to 18 are not applicable because the
subject property is not located within a coastal shorelands boundary.
(g) Goal 19 is not applicable to a UGB amendment.
FINDINGS: Based on this paragraph, Goal 19 is not applicable to the applicant's proposal.
(2) The UGB and amendments to the UGB must be shown on the
city and county plan and zone maps at a scale sufficient to
determine which particular lots or parcels are included in the
UGB. Where a UGB does not follow lot or parcel lines, the map
must provide sufficient information to determine the precise
UGB location.
FINDINGS: The applicant submitted several maps showing the property proposed to be added
to the UGB. The Hearings Officer finds these maps provide sufficient information from which
the precise UGB location can be determined, therefore satisfying this criterion.
c. Section 660-024-0030, Population Forecasts
(1) Counties must adopt and maintain a coordinated 20-year
population forecast for the county and for each urban area
within the county consistent with statutory requirements for
such forecasts under DRS 195.025 and 195.036. Cities must
adopt a 20-year population forecast for the urban area
consistent with the coordinated county forecast, except that a
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 21 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
metropolitan service district must adopt and maintain a 20
year population forecast for the area within its jurisdiction. In
adopting the coordinated forecast, local governments must
follow applicable procedures and requirements in ORS
197.610 to 197.650 and must provide notice to all other local
governments in the county. The adopted forecast must be
included in the comprehensive plan or in a document
referenced by the plan.
FINDINGS: The staff report states, and the Hearings Officer agrees, that the adoption and
maintenance of a coordinated 20-year population forecast as required by this paragraph relates to
legislative UGB expansions rather than to site-specific quasi-judicial expansions. Nevertheless,
the record indicates that, in conjunction with the city, the county adopted a coordinated
population forecast through 2025 on September 8, 2004 (County Ordinance No. 2004-12).
d. Section 660-024-0040, Land Need
(1) The UGB must be based on the adopted 20-year population
forecast for the urban area described in OAR 660-024-0030,
and must provide for needed housing, employment and other
urban uses such as public facilities, streets and roads, schools,
parks and open space over the 20-year planning period
consistent with the land need requirements of Goal 14 and this
rule. The 20-year need determinations are estimates which,
although based on the best available information and
methodologies, should not be held to an unreasonably high
level of precision.
FINDINGS: The record indicates the city and county currently are engaged in a legislative UGB
amendment process that includes an evaluation of all of the above-referenced needs. The
applicant's burden of proof states delays in completing this legislative UGB expansion process
have necessitated the filing of this quasi-judicial, site-and need-specific UGB expansion request.
As discussed below, Subsection (3) of this section authorizes applications for such quasi-judicial
need-specific UGB expansions.
(2) If the UGB analysis or amendment is conducted as part of a
periodic review work program, the 20-year planning period
must commence on the date initially scheduled for completion
of the appropriate work task. If the UGB analysis or
amendment is conducted as a post-acknowledgement plan
amendment under ORS 197.610 to 197.625, the 20-year
planning period must commence either:
(a) On the date initially scheduled for final adoption of the
amendment specified by the local government in the
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 22 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
initial notice of the amendment required by OAR 660
018-0020; or
(b) If more recent than the date determined in subsection
(a), at the beginning of the 20-year period specified in
the coordinated population forecast for the urban area
adopted by the city and county pursuant to OAR 660
024-0030, unless ORS 197.296 requires a different date
for local governments subject to that statute.
FINDINGS: In a previous decision concerning a request for a site-specific quasi-judicial
amendment to the Bend UGB,8 this Hearings Officer held this criterion did not apply because the
application was for a quasi-judicial UGB amendment and not as part of periodic review work
program. The Hearings Officer adheres to that holding here and finds this criterion does not
apply to the applicant's proposal.
(3) A local government may review and amend the UGB in
consideration of one category of land need (for example,
housing need) without a simultaneous review and amendment
in consideration of other categories of land need (for example,
employment need).
FINDINGS: The applicant requests a quasi-judicial, site-and need-specific UGB amendment
pursuant to this subsection.
(4) The determination of 20-year residential land needs for an
urban area must be consistent with the adopted 20-year
coordinated population forecast for the urban area, and with
the requirements for determining housing needs in Goal 10,
OAR 660, division 7 or 8, and applicable provisions of ORS
197.295 to 197.314 and 197.475 to 197.490.
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds this criterion does not apply because the proposed UGB
expansion is not for the purpose of meeting residential land needs.
(5) Except for a metropolitan service district described in ORS
197.015(14), the determination of 20-year employment land
need for an urban area must comply with applicable
requirements of Goal 9 and OAR 660, division 9, and must
include a determination of the need for a short-term supply of
land for employment uses consistent with OAR 660-009-0025.
Employment land need may be based on an estimate of job
growth over the planning period; local government must
8 Bend-La Pine Schools (Miller Elementary), PA-07 -5.
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 23 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
provide a reasonable justification for the job growth estimate
but Goal 14 does not require that job growth estimates
necessarily be proportional to population growth.
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds this criterion is not applicable because the applicant's
proposed quasi-judicial UGB amendment is not for the purpose of meeting employment land
needs.
(6) The determination of 20-year land needs for transportation
and public facilities for an urban area must comply with
applicable requirements of Goals 11 and 12, rules in OAR 660,
divisions 11 and 12, and public facilities requirements in ORS
197.712 and 197.768. The determination of school facility needs
must also comply with ORS 195.110 and 197.296 for local
governments specified in those statutes.
FINDINGS: The applicant's proposal's consistency with Goals 11 and 12 is addressed in detail
in the findings above. ORS 197.712 and 197.768 require an analysis of general public facilities
such as sewer and water to be included in city and county comprehensive plans. Both the city's
and county's plans include this required analysis.
e. Section 660-024-0050, Land Inventory and Response to Deficiency
(1) When evaluating or amending a UGB, a local government
must inventory land inside the UGB to determine whether
there is adequate development capacity to accommodate 20
year needs determined in OAR 660-024-0040. For residential
land, the buildable land inventory must include vacant and
redevelopable land, and be conducted in accordance with OAR
660-007-0045 or 660-008-001 0, whichever is applicable, and
ORS 197.296 for local governments subject to that statute. For
employment land, the inventory must include suitable vacant
and developed land designated for industrial or other
employment use, and must be conducted in accordance with
OAR 660-009-0015(3).
FINDINGS: As discussed above, the only need identified and evaluated in this quasi-judicial
UGB expansion request is the need for land to accommodate an institutional use Le., a place of
worship and related facilities. As also discussed above, the city and county currently are
undertaking a legislative process to expand the Bend UGB which will include the inventory and
analysis necessary to ensure a 20-year land supply for all other needs.
(6) When land is added to the UGB, the local government must
assign appropriate urban plan designations to the added land,
consistent with the need determination. The local government
must also apply appropriate zoning to the added land
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 24 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
consistent with the plan designation, or may maintain the land
as urbanizable land either by retaining the zoning that was
assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary or by applying
other interim zoning that maintains the land's potential for
planned urban development until the land is rezoned for the
planned urban uses. The requirements of ORS 197.296
regarding planning and zoning also apply when local
governments specified in that statute add land to the UOB.
FINDINGS: As discussed above, the subject property is zoned UAR-1O and has a plan
designation of Urban Reserve Area. Since places of worship are a conditional use in the UAR-1O
Zone, no zone change is required or requested.
f. Section 660-024-0060, Boundary Location Alternatives Analysis
(1) When considering a UGB amendment, a local government
must detennine which land to add by evaluating alternative
boundary locations. This detennination must be consistent
with the priority of land specified in ORS 197.298 and the
boundary location factors of Goal 14, as follows:
(a) Beginning with the highest priority of land available, a
local government must detennine which land in that
priority is suitable to accommodate the need deficiency
detennined under 660-024-0050.
FINDINGS: The subject property is designated Urban Area Reserve which is exception land. As
discussed above, although Urban Area Reserve land is classified as "second priority," it is the
highest priority land available for siting the applicant's proposed place of worship and related
facilities. Therefore, the Hearings Officer finds the applicant's proposal satisfies these
requirements.
(b) If the amount of suitable land in the first priority
category exceeds the amount necessary to satisfy the
need deficiency, a local government must apply the
location factors of Goal 14 to choose which land in that
priority to include in the UGB.
FINDINGS: As discussed above, there are no "first priority" lands available for the applicant's
proposed UGB expansion.
(2) Notwithstanding OAR 660-024-0050(4) and subsection (1)(c) of
this rule, except during periodic review or other legislative
review of the UGB, a local government may approve an
application under ORS 197.610 to 197.625 for a UOB
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 25 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
amendment proposing to add an amount of land less than
necessary to satisfy the land need deficiency detennined under
OAR 660-024-0050(4), provided the amendment complies with
all other applicable requirements.
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds this subsection authorizes the city and county to expand
the Bend UGB to address a specific need with a specific piece of property as proposed by the
applicant. The proposed expansion would not satisfy the 20-year land need, but the city and
county are undertaking a legislative UGB expansion process including an evaluation of the
amount ofland necessary to satisfy the 20-year land need.
(3) The boundary location factors of Goal 14 are not independent
criteria. When the factors are applied to compare alternative
boundary locations and to detennine the UGB location, a local
government must show that all the factors were considered and
balanced.
FINDINGS: The proposal's compliance with the boundary location factors of Goal 14 is
addressed in findings above. As discussed there, the Hearings Officer has found the applicant has
demonstrated the proposed UGB expansion satisfies all applicable requirements of Goal 14.
(4) In detennining alternative land for evaluation under ORS
197.298, "land adjacent to the UGB" is not limited to those lots
or parcels that abut the UGB, but also includes land in the
vicinity of the UGB that has a reasonable potential to satisfy
the identified need deficiency.
FINDINGS: The subject property abuts the Bend UGB. The applicant's burden of proof states,
and the Hearings Officer agrees, that the subject property has a reasonable potential to satisfy the
identified need deficiency as required by this subsection. The applicant's alternative sites
analysis, discussed in detail in findings elsewhere in this decision, includes a review of sites both
adjacent to and in the vicinity of the Bend UGB and concluded that for several reasons the
subject property was preferable to all other sites reviewed. For example, the analysis concluded
the subject property is the highest priority land available under ORS 197.298. In addition, the
property is close to existing municipal public facilities and services such as water, sewer and
transportation. And the applicant acquired the subject property through a donation.
(5) If a local government has specified characteristics such as
parcel size, topography, or proximity that are necessary for
land to be suitable for an identified need, the local government
may limit its consideration to land that has the specified
characteristics when it conducts the boundary location
alternatives analysis and applies ORS 197.298.
FINDINGS: As discussed in the findings above, incorporated by reference herein, the
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 26 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
applicant's burden of proof identified a number of specific land characteristics required for the
siting of its proposed house of worship and related facilities. The applicant's analysis,
summarized here, shows how the subject property satisfies the majority of those characteristics.
The property is located on the west side of Bend near the residences of a majority of Fellowship
members. At 12.44 acres in size, the property is large enough to accommodate the Fellowship's
current and future congregations, and to develop the 350-seat sanctuary, offices, kitchen and
storage facilities, classrooms, a library, outdoor spaces, off-street parking for vehicles and
bicycles, and other necessary and desired facilities. The property has safe and convenient access
to an arterial and a collector street. The property is surrounded by residential neighborhoods. It is
located in a scenic part of Bend and has a moderate cover of natural vegetation. The property can
be served by city water and sewer service and fire protection.
Finally, the applicant already acquired the subject property through a donation, allowing
development of its proposed facility without the expense of purchasing property. The Hearings
Officer finds that Subsection (8) of this rule, set forth below, expressly authorizes consideration
of "relative costs" in the alternative sitelboundary analysis, and such consideration has been a
part of the alternative sitelboundary analyses in previous Bend UGB expansion decisions. For
example, this Hearings Officer considered relative cost in two previous decisions approving
UGB expansions requested by the Bend-La Pine School District to site new schools on property
offered to the district at reduced prices.9 In addition, Bend Hearings Officer Tim Elliott
considered relative costs and existing property ownership in approving a UGB expansion to
permit development of the Deschutes National Forest headquarters on federal land. 10
For the foregoing reasons, the Hearings Officer finds the applicant has demonstrated the subject
property clearly meets its identified land characteristic needs.
(6) The adopted findings for UGB adoption or amendment must
describe or map all of the alternative areas evaluated in the
boundary location alternatives analysis. If the analysis involves
more than one parcel or area within a particular priority
category in DRS 197.298 for which circumstances are the
same, these parcels or areas may be considered and evaluated
as a single group.
FINDINGS: Appendix F to the applicant's burden of proof describes and maps all of the
alternative sites considered for UGB expansion in order to meet the applicant's identified need.
The Hearings Officer has reviewed the alternative sitelboundary analysis in Appendix F and
concurs with its analysis and conclusions. Specifically, I find the 23 sites within the UGB and
site SE-l located outside the UGB either do not meet the applicant's identified land
characteristics and requirements, or meet them far less comprehensively and effectively than the
subject property. I further find the information and analysis in Appendix F is incorporated by
9 Bend-La Pine Schools (Pine Nursery Elementary), County File No. PA-07-5; City File No.PZ-070284;
Bend-La Pine Schools (Miller Elementary), County File No. PA-07 -7; City File No. PZ-07 -298.
10 Deschutes National Forest, County File Nos. PA-II-IIZC-IO-IIMA-11-3; City File No. PZ-08-34.
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 27 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
reference herein, and will be included m the adopted findings supporting approval of the
applicant's proposed UGB expansion.
(7) For purposes of Goal 14 Boundary Location Factor 2, "public
facilities and services" means water, sanitary sewer, storm
water management, and transportation facilities.
FINDINGS: The adequacy of public facilities and services for the subject property is discussed
in the Goal 14 findings above. Based on those findings, incorporated by reference herein, the
Hearings Officer finds adequate public facilities and services will be available to the applicant's
proposed house of worship and related facilities on the subject property.
(8) The Goal 14 boundary location determination requires
evaluation and comparison of the relative costs, advantages
and disadvantages of alternative UGB expansion areas with
respect to the provision of public facilities and services needed
to urbanize alternative boundary locations. This evaluation
and comparison must be conducted in coordination with
service providers, including the Oregon Department of
Transportation with regard to impacts on the state
transportation system. "Coordination" includes timely notice
to service providers and the consideration of evaluation
methodologies recommended by service providers. The
evaluation and comparison must include:
(a) The impacts to existing water, sanitary sewer, storm
water and transportation facilities that serve nearby
areas already inside the UGB;
FINDINGS: As discussed in the findings above, incorporated by reference herein, the Hearings
Officer has found that water and sewer service and transportation facilities are available to the
subject property, and the record indicates they will be adequate to serve the applicant's proposed
house of worship and related facilities, with connections and/or improvements the applicant
and/or others will install or construct. With respect to storm water, I find the applicant will be
required at the time of development of its proposed institutional use to comply with the city's
storm water master plan. Necessary improvements for storm water control would be addressed
during the city's future conditional use and site plan review process for uses on the subject
property. And as discussed above, no TPR analysis is required for the proposed UGB
amendment because no zone change is requested or needed. Traffic impacts associated with the
development of the house of worship and related facilities also will be addressed by the city in its
conditional use and site plan review process. Finally, as noted previously, the subject property
will be served by the Bend Fire Department which submitted comments in support of the
applicant's proposal.
(b) The capacity of existing public facilities and services to
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 28 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
serve areas already inside the UGB as well as areas
proposed for addition to the UGB; and
FINDINGS: The record indicates there is existing public facility capacity to serve areas inside
the UGB as well as the subject property located outside, and proposed for inclusion in, the UGB.
(c) The need for new transportation facilities, such as
highways and other roadways, interchanges, arterials
and collectors, additional travel lanes, other major
improvements on existing roadways and, for urban
areas of 25,000 or more, the provision of public transit
service.
FINDINGS: As discussed in the findings above, no zone change is required or proposed as part
of the UGB amendment and therefore no analysis under the TPR is required. Moreover, traffic
impacts associated with development of the property will be addressed by the city through future
conditional use and site plan review.
For the foregoing reasons, the Hearings Officer finds the applicant's proposed UGB expansion
satisfies all applicable administrative rule provisions.
D. Deschutes County Code
1. Title 22 of the Deschutes County Code, the Development Procedures
Ordinance
a. Chapter 22.28, Land Use Action Decisions
(1) Section 22.28.030, Decision on Plan Amendments and Zone
Changes
* * *
B. In considering all quasi-judicial zone changes and those
quasi-judicial plan amendments on which the Hearings
Officer has authority to make a decision, the Board of
County Commissioners shall, in the absence of an
appeal or review initiated by the Board, adopt the
Hearings Officer's decision. No argument or further
testimony will be taken by the Board.
FINDINGS: Joint city-county public hearings on the applicant's proposal were held on January
30 and February 6, 2013. The Hearings Officer's decision will be considered by the board at a
public meeting at which my decision will be adopted in the absence of an appeal or review
initiated by the board.
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 29 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
2. Title 23 of the Deschutes County Code, the Deschutes County
Comprehensive Plan-2011
a. Chapter 4, Urban Growth Management
(I) Section 4.2, Urbanization Policies
1. Goal 1. Coordinate with cItIes, special districts and
stakeholders to support urban growth boundaries and
urban reserve areas that provide an orderly and
efficient transition between urban and rural lands.
2. Policy 4.2.1. Participate in the process initiated by cities
in Deschutes County to create and/or amend their
urban growth boundaries.
FINDINGS: The Hearings Officer finds these comprehensive plan policies are aspirational
and/or require action by the county rather than by an applicant for a quasi-judicial plan
amendment. Therefore, I find they are not relevant to the applicant's proposal. Nevertheless, I
find these policies have been met through the review process for this application because it has
provided the county with the opportunity to coordinate with the city and participate in the
process of amending the city's UGB. In addition, affected agencies and departments have been
notified of the application and notice has been given to the public. Findings to address the
orderly and efficient transition between urban and rural lands are found elsewhere in this
decision and are incorporated herein by reference.
F. Bend Area General Plan
1. PrefacetotheBend AreaGeneral Plan
Format of the Plan
At the end of each chapter are policies that address issues discussed in the
chapter. The policies in the General Plan are statements of public policy, and
are used to evaluate any proposed changes to the General Plan. Often these
statements are expressed in mandatory fashion using the word "shall."
These statements of policy shall be interpreted to recognize that the actual
implementation of the policies will be accomplished by land use regulations
such as the city's zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance and the like ....
FINDINGS: In several previous City of Bend decisions, this Hearings Officer has held that the
preface of the city's comprehensive plan makes clear the plan's goals and policies are aspirational
and/or directed toward actions to be undertaken by the city, and therefore they cannot be
considered mandatory approval criteria for the applicant's proposed quasi-judicial plan amendment
to expand the Bend UGB to include the subject property. I adhere to those decisions here.
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 30 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
IV. DECISION:
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Hearings Officer hereby
APPROVES the applicant's proposed plan amendment to expand the Bend Urban Growth
Boundary to include the subject property, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION
OF APPROVAL:
1. Prior to the hearing before the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners to consider
approval of the proposed plan amendment, the applicant/owner shall submit to the
Planning Division a metes-and-bounds description of, and surveyed acreage calculation
for, the property subject to the plan amendment.
Dated this 28th day of February, 2013.
Mailed this 1 sl day of March, 2013.
Karen H. Green, Deschutes County Hearings Officer
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship
PA-12-6
Page 31 of31
EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2013-012
sectto(/\' 5.1-2 Leg tslattve H-tstOYtj
Background
This section contains the legislative history of this Comprehensive Plan.
Table 5.11.1 Comprehensive Plan Ordinance History
Ordinance Date Adopted!
Effective Chapter/Section Amendment
2011-003 8-10-11111-9-11
'All, except
Transportation, Tumalo
and Terrebonne
Community Plans,
Deschutes Junction,
Destination Resorts and
ordinances adopted in
2011
Comprehensive Plan update
2011-027 10-31-11111-9-11
2.5, 2.6, 304, 3.10, 3.5,
4.6, 5.3, 5.8, 5.11,
23040A, 2304OB,
23040.065, 23.01.0 I 0
Housekeeping amendments to
ensure a smooth transition to
the updated Plan
2012-005 8-20-12111-19-12
23.60, 23.64 (repealed),
3.7 (revised), Appendix C
(added)
Updated Transportation
System Plan
2012-012 8-20-1218-20-12 4.1,4.2 La Pine Urban Growth
Boundary
2012-016 12-3-1213-4-13 3.9 Housekeeping amendments to
Destination Resort Chapter
2013-002 1-7-13/1-7-13 4.2
Central Oregon Regional
Large-lot Employment Land
Need Analysis
2013-009 2-6-13/5-8-13 1.3
Comprehensive Plan Map
Amendment, changing
designation of certain
property from Agriculture to
Rural Residential Exception
Area
2013-007 3.10,3.11
Newberry Country: A Plan
for Southern Deschutes
County.
2013-012 TBD 23.01.010
Comj2rehensive Plan Maj2
Amendment, including c~rtai!l
RroRe~ within Citx of Bend
Urban Growth Boundarx.
DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -2011
CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
PAGE I OF 1 -EXHIBIT E TO ORDINANCE 2013-012