HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 005 - TSP UpdateDeschutes 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 16, 2012
DATE: April 5,2012.
FROM: Peter Russell. CDD Phone #383-6718
TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM:
A PUBLIC HEARING and Consideration of\Ordinance No. 2012-005, Amending the Deschutes
County Comprehensive Plan Transportation Systems Plan, and Repealing Deschutes County Code
Chapters 23.60 and 23.64, and Declaring an Emergency.
PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS DATE? YES.
BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS:
Deschutes County adopted its Transportation System Plan (TSP), a 20-year document, in 1998. Staff
has prepared an update of the County's TSP. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) did
the technical analysis of existing conditions and forecast 2030 traffic volumes, identifying future
deficiencies on both State highways and County roads. County staff and ODOT identified future
projects for intersections or road segments forecast to fail by 2030. The Planning Commission began
public hearings on the TSP (files PA-11-5ITA-11-4) on Oct. 27,2011, and finished its deliberations on
Feb. 23, 2012. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the TSP with suggested changes.
Those changes are shown as either strikethrough for deletions or underline for additions to the text.
The draft TSP and its maps can be found at this link:
http://www.deschutes.orgiCommunity-DevelopmentiPlanningiLong-Range-PlanningiCurrent
Projects/Transportation-Planningl2011-Draft-Transportation-Plan.aspx#content
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The TSP lists future County and State improvements; the TSP project list forms the basis for the
County's transportation System Development Charge (SDC) rate. The TSP lists nearly $306 million
dollars in future projects, $61.3 million on County roads and $240.6 million on State highways.
RECOMMENDATION & ACTION REQUESTED:
The Board hold a public hearing on the TSP Update, an exhibit to Ordinance 2012-005. Staff requests
the Board consider continuing the hearing to allow for one evening hearing in Bend. At the conclusion
of the public hearing the Board will provide direction to staff regarding any potential modifications to
the TSP in terms of policies, project prioritization, financial assumptions, etc.
ATTENDANCE: Peter Russell, CDD.
DISTRIBUTION OF DOCUMENTS:
Peter Russell, CDD; Chris Doty, Road Department.
Instructions to view information on the TSP Update file
Please note: The file is too large to reasonably post in more than one location. It includes
reports, other documents and many maps.
To access the record now on file with Community Development, please do the following.
Step One: Click on this link.
http://www.deschutes.org/Community-Development/Planning/Long-Range-
Planning/Current-Projects/Transportation-Planning/2011-Draft-Transportation-Plan.aspx
Step Two: Click on either the chapter or figure you wish to read.
If you have any questions about the documentation or process, please contact Peter Russell,
Senior Transportation Planner for Deschutes County, at Peter.Russell@deschutes.org, or
541-383-6718.
Thank you.
1
STAFF REPORT
File: Ordinance 2012-005 (PA-11-5, TA-11-4)
HEARING DATE: April 16, 2012, at 10 a.m.
LOCATION: Barnes and Sawyer rooms of the Deschutes Services Center, 1300 NW
Wall St. in Bend.
APPLICANT/OWNER: Deschutes County
c/o Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner
117 NW Lafayette Street
Bend, OR 97701
REQUEST: The County is requesting a Plan Amendment and Text Amendment to
update the Deschutes County Transportation System Plan (TSP) and
accompanying map; the update will forecast traffic volumes in 2030;
identify gaps and deficiencies in 2030; add prioritized projects and/or
policies to mitigate those deficiencies; and make several functional
reclassifications of County roads in the Bend and Redmond areas.
STAFF CONTACT: Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner
I. APPLICABLE STANDARDS & CRITERIA:
A. Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 11, and 12
B. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR)
1. OAR 660-012, Transportation Planning
C. Title 22, Deschutes County Code Procedures Ordinance
1. Chapter 22.28, Land Use Action Decisions
D. Title 23, Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
1. Chapter 23.60, Transportation
2. Chapter 23.64, Transportation System Plan
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 2
II. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT
A. Procedure and Background:
Deschutes County prepared a Transportation section of its Comprehensive Plan in 1979 and
revised it in 1980, 1993, and 2002. The bulk of Chapter 23.60 (Transportation) predated
Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012, better known as the Transportation Planning Rule
(TPR). The TPR at 660-012-0015 establishes which jurisdictions must prepare a TSP and 660-
012-0020 lists the required elements. The TSP is a 20-year plan for various modes (air, auto,
bike, freight, pedestrian, transit, etc.,) that inventories existing facilities, reviews applicable State
policies, predicts 2030 traffic volumes, identifies current and future deficiencies, and proposes
mitigations to those deficiencies complete with cost estimates and prioritizations. The County
then prepared a TSP in accordance with the TPR.
The 1998 TSP, which has an ending year of 2016, was codified as Chapter 23.64
(Transportation System Plan). There is a large overlap between the two chapters although they
conflict regarding Level of Service (LOS) standards. As staff has best been able to determine
after reviewing the 1998 TSP Table 2.2.T3, the LOS volumes in 23.60.010(G) were for County
roads and the LOS volumes in 23.64.080 were for State highways.
Both the changes described below and the fact the original TSP was almost halfway to its
planning horizon year of 2016 led Deschutes County to begin the process to update its TSP in
2007. The TSP now has a planning span of 2010-2030.
Between the 1998 and 2007 Deschutes County has witnessed a vast array of changes. The
most significant shifts relate to population growth, rise and plateauing of destination resorts,
development of regional public transit, changes in federal and local funding of transportation,
and changes to Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) plans and policies. The County
has grown from a 2000 population of 116,600 to its current population of 166,572 and an
estimated 2030 population of 266,539. The rural portion of the population in 2000 was 47,230
(41%) to its current level of 57,430 (34%) with an estimated 2030 rural population of 88,748
(33%).
Destination resorts grew throughout Central Oregon beginning in the mid-90s with Deschutes
County as their epicenter with pre-existing resorts (Black Butte, Crosswater, Eagle Crest, Inn of
the Seventh Mountain, Sunriver, Widgi Creek), expansion of existing resorts (Eagle Crest) or
new resorts (Caldera Springs, Pronghorn, Tetherow, Thornburgh). By the early 2000s,
however, the destination resort market had all but disappeared with little actual development at
Pronghorn, Tetherow, or the resorts approved in western Crook County; Pronghorn and the
Crook County resorts would have sent traffic onto Powell Butte Highway, a County arterial.
While there was no public transit in 1998 other than Dial-A-Ride and some social service
providers, fixed-route service debuted in 2006 in Bend with Bend Area Transit (BAT). Cascades
East Transit (CET) knitted various special needs transportation providers into a single tri-county
transit system in 2008. CET took over BAT in 2010 and provides fixed-route service between
the major cities in Crook, Deschutes, and Jefferson counties.
The timber revenues that once funded a significant portion of the Road Department ebbed as
lumber production declined. The federal government under the Secure Rural Schools Funding
Act attempted to buffer the economic effects by gradually phasing the loss of federal funds
before they vanished in 2012. The County established a road moratorium in 2006 to no longer
accept new facilities into the County-maintained system. The moratorium was modified in 2009
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 3
to give the Board the discretion to accept new arterials or collectors. In 2011 the County formed
a Road Committee to examine the operation of the Road Department for potential changes or
efficiencies as well as possible new sources of funding. The Road Committee completed its
work in early 2012 and recommended several internal efficiencies be tried in the Road
Department prior to the County seeking additional revenues in the form of either a gas tax or an
increase in the transient lodging tax (TLT) for rural properties.
One of the most significant shifts since the 1998 TSP was ODOT changed its mobility standards
in 1999 from Level of Service (LOS) to volume-capacity (v/c) ratio. LOS is based on time delay
whereas v/c is based on traffic volumes and theoretical capacity. Additionally, ODOT went to a
new functional classification system for its highways and their segments and added overlaying
designations. These designations also drive the access management of State highways.
(Chapter 2 of the TSP update provides fuller details.)
The Deschutes County Planning Commission (PC) held a public hearing on Oct. 27, 2011 and
after several continuances on Feb. 23, 2012, voted to forward the draft TSP to the Board with a
recommendation of approval with a few modifications. The modifications to the June 30, 2011,
draft are shown in Exhibit B as strikethrough for deletions and underline for additions. In
general the major topics of discussion at the PC were:
The need for or timing of a Deschutes Junction Refinement Plan
Policy language supporting a future bike/ped bridge across the Deschutes River just
beyond the southwest edge of the Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB)
Frontage road for the Deschutes Junction area
Designation of a County bikeway system
Long-term solution for US 20 in Tumalo
Prioritization for future State Highway and County Road projects in Table 5.3.T1
Adding an Illustrative List of projects as Table 5.3.T2
Additional lanes on US 20 between Black Butte Ranch and Sisters
Rural roundabouts
B. Proposal:
Deschutes County will amend the transportation section of its Comprehensive Plan by
eliminating Chapter 23.60 (Transportation) and replacing Chapter 23.64 (Transportation System
Plan) with the TSP Update. Essentially, the descriptive elements of 23.60 (types of roads,
functional classification, performance standards, inventories, etc.,) will appear in one section
with updated information. Chapters 23.60 and 23.64 have a large amount of duplication. By
having one chapter for Transportation, the current Comprehensive Plan confusion will be
eliminated. The County recently updated the Comprehensive Plan and transportation is now
located in Chapter 3, Rural Development under Section 3.7. The new TSP chapter will be
incorporated into the updated Comprehensive Plan by reference as Appendix C.
The TSP map will be amended to include the following changes in functional classifications:
Bend Area:
Rural Collector to Rural Arterial:
Deschutes Market Road: Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) north to Deschutes
Junction/US 97 Interchange
OB Riley: Cooley Road south to Bend UGB
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 4
Hamby Road: Butler Market Road south to US 20
Ward Road: US 20 south to Stevens Road
Future Rural Collector to Future Rural Arterial:
Cooley Road Extension: US 20 west of OB Riley then back east to Glen Vista Road
Rural Collector constructed since 1998 TSP adoption:
Skyline Ranch Road: Skyliners Road south to Century Drive
Rural Collector to Local Road:
Deschutes Pleasant Ridge Road: From northern terminus south to Deschutes Market
Road
Redmond Area to ensure consistency with Figure 9-1 of Redmond TSP:
Future Urban Arterial:
Pershall Way: extending west to Helmholtz Way
Northwest Way: extending from NW Maple south to NW 27th Street/Hemlock Avenue
Northwest Maple: extending west from NW 35th Street to NW Helmholtz Way
Future Collector:
Quartz Avenue: extending west from SW 37th Street to SW Helmholtz Way
Elkhorn Avenue: extending east from 39th Street to BNSF railroad tracks
Rural Collector to Rural Arterial:
Helmholtz Way (43rd Street): Between NW Maple Avenue and South Canal Boulevard
Northwest Way: Maple Avenue to future west extension of Pershall Way
NW Maple Avenue: between Helmholtz (43rd Street) and Northeast Way (27th St)
Local to Rural Collector:
Elkhorn Avenue: SW Helmholtz to 39th Street
NW Spruce: Redmond City Limits west to western UGB edge, crossing Northwest Way
The following maps are proposed to be added or modified to the June 30, 2011, version of the
TSP Update. The maps do not add any new road projects, but either depict items described in
the TSP text, or carry forward a project from the 1998 TSP, or correct a mapping error. The
proposed maps and their subject matters on Exhibit B are:
New figures -
F5.3.12 “Redmond Area Functional Reclassification Map” (changes described on Page
156-157)
F5.3.13 “Bend Area Functional Reclassification Map” (changes described on Page 157)
F5.5.F10 “Proposed Regional Trails” (changes described on Page 167)
Modified or corrected figures –
F2.2.F13 “2009 State Highways Average Daily Traffic” (added traffic data)
F5.3.F1 “Proposed Travel Lane/Turn Lane Improvements” (additional lanes on US 20
between Providence to Hamby are shown in their actual location; data base error on an
earlier version had incorrectly shown lanes just outside Sisters instead of Bend)
F5.3.F2 “Proposed Intersection Improvements” (carried Quarry Road interchange
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 5
forward from 1998 plan’s map, Figure 5.2.F2 “ODOT Projected Interchanges”)
Modified or new language related to the bulleted topics above –
Deschutes Junction Refinement Plan (page 129)
Future bike/ped bridge across the Deschutes River outside of Bend UGB (page 168,
Policy 41.m)
Frontage road for the Deschutes Junction area (page 129)
Designation of a County bikeway system (pages 165-166; 167, Policy 41.a and b)
Long-term solution for US 20 in Tumalo (page 135)
Prioritization for future State Highway and County Road projects in Table 5.3.T1 (pages
143-147)
Adding an Illustrative List of projects as Table 5.3.T2 (page 147)
“Triggers” for new lanes on US 20 between Black Butte Ranch and Sisters (page 133)
Rural roundabouts (Page 151)
III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A. Applicable Statewide Planning Goals
1. Goal 1: Citizen Involvement
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 1 seeks “To develop a citizen involvement
program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all
phases of the planning process.”
FINDING: Goal 1 has been met as the TSP is the subject of a noticed public hearing before the
Deschutes County Planning Commission on Oct. 27, 2011. The TSP Update also included
noticed public hearings before the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) on April 16, 2012.
Additionally, Table 4.2.T1 “Partial List of Meetings Related to TSP Update” documents the
numerous opportunities for citizen involvement beginning in September 2008.
2. Goal 2: Land Use Planning
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 2 seeks “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.”
FINDING: Goal 2 has been met as the traffic model that projected the 2030 traffic volumes was
based on the adopted and acknowledged land uses of the comprehensive plans of Deschutes
County and the cities within the County. The model and its conclusions are reported in
technical memoranda on existing conditions (Technical Memo #2), 2030 future conditions and
identified deficiencies (Technical Memo #3), and mitigations to redress those deficiencies
(Technical Memo #4). These technical memos provide the adequate factual base. Additionally,
Oregon Revised State 197.610 allows local governments to initiate post-acknowledgement plan
amendments.
3. Goal 3: Agricultural Lands;
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 6
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 3 seeks “To preserve and maintain
agricultural lands.”
FINDING: Goal 3 has been met for the following reasons. The transportation alignments or
improvements in Table 5.3.T1 either:
1. meet the definitions of OAR 660-012-065 for transportation improvements on rural lands
that can be done without a goal exception (collector designation; two travel lanes;
channelization; replace an intersection with an interchange, etc.) or
2. are located on exception lands (MUA-10, RR-10) or
3. are within an Urban Growth Boundary or
4. occur within existing rights of way
If a transportation improvement would require building on farm or forest lands, the responsible
agency (ODOT, City of Bend, City of Redmond, Deschutes County, etc.) would have to apply for
and receive a goal exception before the project can occur. This is particularly true for ODOT
under OAR 660-012-0050.
4. Goal 4: Forest Lands
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 4 seeks “To conserve forest lands by…”
FINDING: Goal 4 has been met for the following reasons. The transportation alignments or
improvements in Table 5.3.T1 either:
1. meet the definitions of OAR 660-012-065 for transportation improvements on rural lands
that can be done without a goal exception (collector designation; two travel lanes;
channelization; replace an intersection with an interchange, etc.) or
2. are located on exception lands (MUA-10, RR-10) or
3. are within an Urban Growth Boundary or
4. occur within existing rights of way
If a transportation improvement would require building on farm or forest lands, the responsible
agency (ODOT, City of Bend, City of Redmond, Deschutes County, etc.) would have to apply for
and receive a goal exception before the project can occur. This is particularly true for ODOT
under OAR 660-012-0050.
5. Goal 5: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 5 seeks “To protect natural resources and
conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces.”
FINDING: Goal 5 has been met as there is no change to existing County policies and
regulations.
Impacts on related resources:
Mineral and aggregate resources: None; no current or future road or highway is designated to
fully or partially occupy a mineral or aggregate resource. Mineral and aggregate resources
would be utilized in any future road improvements.
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 7
Energy sources: None; no current or future road or highway is designated to fully or partially
occupy an energy source.
Fish and wildlife habitat: None; any future road or highway project must abide by existing
County, State and federal environmental regulations and policies.
Ecologically and scientifically significant natural areas, including desert areas: None; no current
or future road or highway is designated to fully or partially occupy an ecologically and
scientifically significant natural area even in the desert. Any future road or highway project must
abide by existing County, State and federal environmental regulations and policies.
Outstanding scenic views: None; no current or future road or highway is designated to fully or
partially occupy a scenic view. Any future road or highway project must abide by existing
County, State and federal environmental regulations and policies.
Water areas, wetlands, watersheds, and groundwater resources: None; wetlands make a very
poor location for a road. No new bridge sites are proposed. No new alignments are proposed
through a water area or wetland. ODOT and Deschutes County have plans and policies to
accommodate roadside runoff. Finally, any future road or highway project must abide by
existing County, State and federal environmental regulations and policies.
Wilderness areas: None; roads and highways are forbidden from wilderness areas. No current
or future road or highway is designated to enter a wilderness area.
Historic areas, sites, structures and objects: None; no current or future road or highway is
designated to fully or partially impact a historic site, structure, or object. Any future road or
highway project must abide by existing State and federal environmental regulations and policies
regarding historic and cultural resources.
Cultural areas: None; no current or future road or highway is designated to fully or partially
impact a historic site, structure, or object. Any future road or highway project must abide by
existing County, State and federal environmental regulations and policies regarding cultural
resources.
FINDING: Goal 5 has been met.
6. Goal 6: Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 6 seeks “To maintain and improve the
quality of the air, water and land resources of the state.”
FINDING: Goal 6 has been met as the State requires a TSP to include all modes to encourage
no one single mode dominates the transportation network. By adopting a 20-year plan to
accomplish that balance, the TSP will maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and
land resources within Deschutes County.
7. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 7 seeks “To protect people and property
from natural hazards.”
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 8
FINDING: Goal 7 has been met as roads provide evacuation routes in the event of a natural
hazard such as a wildfire or a flood. In the event the surface transportation system of roads and
rail is crippled or compromised, the presence of public use airports offers an alternative route to
deliver supplies to the region.
8. Goal 8: Recreational Needs
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 8 seeks “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.”
FINDING: Goal 8 has been met as transportation facilities such as roads and highways (both of
which accommodate bicycles), rail, and transit provide access to recreational areas.
9. Economic Development
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 9 seeks “To provide adequate
opportunities throughout the state for a variety of
economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's
citizens.”
FINDING: A functioning, well-managed transportation network with sufficient capacity to move
goods and services is a foundation of economic development. The TSP has identified
deficiencies in 2030 and mitigations to redress those deficiencies. Goal 9 has been met.
10. Housing
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 10 attempts “To provide for the housing
needs of citizens of the state.”
FINDING: Goal 10 is either met or is not applicable. The goal is met by providing a
transportation network with sufficient capacity to allow people to travel to and from their houses.
If the Goal is interpreted to mean the mix of housing types be available to the public, then it is
inapplicable.
11. Public Facilities and Services
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 11 endeavors “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.”
FINDING: Goal 11 is met by the development of the TSP itself and the resulting prioritized list
of projects at Table 5.3.T1, which will ensure a timely, orderly, and efficient development of
public roads and highways.
12. Goal 12: Transportation
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 9
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 12 seeks “To provide and encourage a
safe, convenient and economic transportation system.”
FINDING: Goal 12 is met through the TSP Update itself, but particularly by the technical
memoranda; the existing inventory of population and transportation in Chapter 2; the traffic
projections in Chapter 3; the transportation needs analysis and issues summaries in Chapter 4;
the planned improvements and policies in Chapter 5; and the financial forecast in Chapter 6.
13. Goal 13: Energy Conservation
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 13 seeks “to conserve energy.”
FINDING: Goal 13 is met as the TSP provides policies to encourage the development and use
of alternate modes such a biking, walking, transit and has policies and future projects to ensure
the roads and highways are not congested. Vehicles in stop and go traffic consume more fuel
than vehicles in free-flow conditions.
14. Goal 14: Urbanization
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 14 attempts “to provide for an orderly and
efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban
population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to
ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities.”
FINDING: Goal 14 is met as the TSP was prepared with input from the cities within the County
to ensure consistency within the respective TSP’s regarding functional classification, future
improvements, and transportation policies. The meshing of the County and urban TSPs
ensures an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. The urban and County
TSPs are consistent regarding functional classification and planned improvements.
Goals 15 through 19 are not applicable to any amendments to the County’s comprehensive plan
as the County has none of these types of lands
B. Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs)
(1) OAR 660-060, Transportation Planning Rule (TPR)
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 10
FINDING: The requirements of the TPR have been met. The TSP Update was prepared in
accordance with the requirements of OAR 660-012-0020 (Elements of a TSP). Chapters 2
provides inventory and background. Chapter 3 documents the transportation forecast and
deficiencies. These two chapters, along with Technical Memo #2, “Existing Conditions” and
Technical Memo #3 “2030 Traffic Projections” satisfy the requirements of 660-012-0030
(Determination of Transportation Needs). Chapters 4 and 5 document the transportation needs
analysis as well as planned improvements and policies. These chapters, coupled with
Technical Memo #4 “Mitigations,” satisfy 660-012-0035 (Evaluation and Selection of
Transportation System Alternatives). Additionally, the combination of Chapters 3-5 and
technical memos #3 and #4 satisfy 660-012-0060, determining whether there were any
significant effects and identifying appropriate mitigations.
C. Title 22, Deschutes County Code Procedures Ordinance
22.12.020. Notice.
A. Published Notice.
1. Notice of a legislative change shall be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the county at least 10 days prior to each public hearing.
2. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing and contain a
statement describing the general subject matter of the ordinance under
consideration.
B. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted at the discretion of the Planning Director
and where necessary to comply with ORS 203.045.
C. Individual Notice. Individual notice to property owners, as defined in DCC
22.08.010(A), shall be provided at the discretion of the Planning Director, except
as required by ORS 215.503.
D. Media Notice. Copies of the notice of hearing shall be transmitted to other
newspapers published in Deschutes County.
FINDING: Notice was published in The Bulletin, a general circulation newspaper serving
Central Oregon, on Oct. 2, 2011. The notice described the land use and provided a file number,
location, time, and date of the public hearing before the Deschutes County Planning
Commission. The hearing was also posted on the website of the Deschutes County Planning
Commission in a timely manner. Similar information was posted for the Board’s April 16, 2012,
public hearing and the materials were available on the Board’s website prior to the hearing.
22.12.030. Initiation of Legislative Changes.
A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment
of required fees as well as by the Board of Commissioners or the Planning
Commission.
FINDING: The application was submitted by the Deschutes County Planning Division as part of
the County’s update of the TSP.
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 11
22.12.040. Hearings Body.
A. The following shall serve as hearings or review body for legislative changes in
this order:
1. The Planning Commission.
2. The Board of County Commissioners.
B. Any legislative change initiated by the Board of County Commissioners shall
be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to action being taken by the
Board of Commissioners.
FINDING: The land use was heard before the Deschutes County Planning Commission on
October 27, 2011, at 5:30 p.m. and the Planning Commission made its recommendation for
approval on Feb. 23, 2012. The Board of County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on
April 16, 2012 at 10 a.m. in the Barnes and Sawyer rooms, Deschutes County Services Center.
22.12.050. Final Decision.
All legislative changes shall be adopted by ordinance.
FINDING: These findings are in support of Ordinance 2012-005, therefore, this criteria is met.
D. Title 23, Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan
1. Conformance with Chapter 23.60, Transportation
23.60.010(A) Introduction
The purpose of DCC 23.60 is to develop a transportation system that meets the
needs of Deschutes County residents while also considering regional and state
needs at the same time. This plan addresses a balanced transportation system that
includes automobile, bicycle, rail, transit, air, pedestrian and pipelines. It reflects
existing land use plans, policies and regulations that affect the transportation
system.
FINDING: As this is an update of the TSP the document was prepared in accordance with the
State’s OAR requirements for TSP’s. The document conforms to the transportation component
of the Comprehensive Plan. The TSP Update retains all the previous policies of DCC 23.60. In
terms of housekeeping, the County’s Comprehensive Plan Update took effect on Nov. 9, 2011.
The TSP Update will become the transportation component of the updated Comprehensive
Plan, which combines the former 23.60 and 23.64 into a new Section 3.7. This Section will
incorporate the complete TSP by reference into the updated Comprehensive Plan, as Appendix
C.
2. Conformance with Chapter 23.64, Transportation System Plan
Section 23.64.020, Coordination and implementation of the TSP
Based on the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), Deschutes
County has established an ongoing procedure to periodically analyze, prepare,
and plan for the transportation needs of Deschutes County residents and visitors.
The following goals and policies are intended to implement the Deschutes County
Transportation System Plan, and thereby meet the requirements of the TPR.
FINDING: Given the TSP Update is the TSP, by definition the document is consistent. Any
existing policies that were modified or deleted were done as part of the public hearing process.
EXHIBIT C of ORDINANCE 2012-005 12
As this is an update of the TSP the document was prepared in accordance with the State’s OAR
requirements for TSP’s. The document conforms to the transportation component of the
Comprehensive Plan.
3. Conformance with the overall Comprehensive Plan
FINDING: The TSP update conforms to the updated Comprehensive Plan because it does not
propose any new transportation projects or roads that would impact the resources the
Comprehensive Plan protects. Alternately, the updated Comprehensive Plan does not amend
existing land uses, so the Comprehensive Plan does not impact the TSP. The TSP was created
through a public process consistent with the County’s policies for community outreach and
regional cooperation.
The TSP Update does not include any future roads or highways on or across resource lands.
The TSP Update does not result in the consumption of any cultural and historic resources,
surface mines, open spaces, scenic views, energy resources or other Goal 5 resources. The
TSP Update therefore conforms to the resource management goals and policies of the
comprehensive plan.
The TSP Update does not propose any additional rural growth other than what is currently in the
comprehensive plan and zoning. The traffic projections of the TSP update were based on the
existing land use designations of the comprehensive plan. Similarly, the TSP Update does not
propose any additional urban growth other than what is currently in the comprehensive plan and
zoning. The TSP Update thus conforms to the comprehensive plan in terms of growth
management for both rural and urban areas.
Conclusion
Staff recommends the Board of County Commissioners approve Ordinance 2012-005 to update
the Deschutes County TSP.
REVIEWED
LEGAL COUNSEL
F or Recording Stamp Only
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance Amending the Deschutes County *
Comprehensive Plan Transportation Systems Plan, *
and Repealing Deschutes County Code Chapters * ORDINANCE NO. 2012-00S
23.60 and 23.64, and Declaring an Emergency. *
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department planning staff initiated a Comprehensive Plan
amendment in order to update the Transportation System Plan ("TSP") adopted by Ordinance 98-044 on August
26,1998;and
WHEREAS, after notice was given in accordance with applicable law, public hearings were held before
the Deschutes County Planning Commission on October 27, 2011 to consider the revised draft County
Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, on October 27, 2011, the Planning Commission forwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners ("Board") a recommendation of approval to adopt changes to the Comprehensive Plan; and; and
WHEREAS, the Board considered this matter after a duly noticed public hearing on [date] and
concluded that the public will benefit from changes to the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Board finds it in the public interest to adopt the following Comprehensive Plan
amendments; now, therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS
as follows:
Section I. AMENDING. Deschutes County Code 23.01.010, Introduction, is amended to read as
described in Exhibit "A," attached and incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined and
deleted language set forth in strikethrough.
Section 2. AMENDING. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, adopted in Deschutes County Code
23.01.010, Section 3.7, Transportation Plan, is amended to read as described in Exhibit "B," attached and
incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined and deleted language set forth in strikethFeugh.;
Section 3. ADDING. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, adopted in Deschutes County Code
23.01.010, Section 3.7, Transportation Systems Plan, is amended by the addition of Appendix C as described in
Exhibit "C," attached and by this reference incorporated herein.
Section 4. REPEALING. Deschutes County Code Chapter 23.60 Transportation is repealed.
Section S. REPEALING. Deschutes County Code Chapter 23.64, Transportation System Plan, is
repealed.
Section 6. FINDINGS. The Board adopts as its findings Exhibit "D," attached and incorporated by
reference herein.
PAGE 1 OF 2 -ORDINANCE NO. 2012-00S
Section 7. EMERGENGY. This Ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this Ordinance takes effect on XXXX,
2012.
Dated this ___of ____-',2012 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
ANTHONY DEBONE, Chair
ALAN UNGER, Vice Chair
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary TAMMY BANEY, Commissioner
Date of 1SI Reading: __day ____-7 2012 .
Date of 2nd Reading: __day of ______, 2012.
Record of Adoption Vote:
Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused
Anthony DeB one
Alan Unger
Tammy Baney
Effective date: __day _____,2012.
PAGE 2 OF 2 -ORDINANCE NO. 2012-005
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.
(Ord. 2012·005 §l, 2012; Ord. 2011·027 §1 through 12,2011; Ord.2011·003 §3, 2011)
I jage.l.of•.1 EXHIBlTA TOORDINANCE2012·005 ..
'ci:ii!ii'tted: Font: 11 pt m~
"~tted:Font: 11 pt, Not Bold 1
, " CFormatted:Font: 11 pt 1
,,', : { Formatted: Font: 11 ~, Not BoIdl
,;;;', { Formatted: Font: 11 pt J
Background
The Transportation System Plan was adopted in Ordinance 2012-005 and is hereby
incorporated into this Plan as Appendix C.
DRAFT DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN -20 I 0
CHAPTER 3 RURAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 3.7 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN
PAGE 1 OF 1 EXHIBIT A OF ORDINANCE 2012-005
1
Planning Commission's Proposed Modifications to Deschutes County TSP Update
Deschutes Junction Refinement Plan
Deschutes Junction Frontage Road
Bike/Ped Bridge Across Deschutes River
Designating County Bikeways
4-12
(page renumbered
136)
4-12
area in TSP; maximum is
a Des Jct refinement plan in
(see Doug White submittals
Ireceived 10/27/11; 11/10/11;
12/15/11;1/24/12)
Con: Support draft language as land
use shows no transportation
improvements are needed (see Paul
Dewey letter received 1/26/12)
IPlanninll Division work program
. Seeks to add "would prefer Retain existing language that frontage
to policy language on road be In place prior to or
I~rt~ndlng raised median on 97. (See simultaneous with the extension of the
submittal received 12/15/11.) raised median
(page renumbered to
136)
would prefer frontage road be
I....nllir..ri prior to or simultaneous
with raised median's extension
Public concerns that County does Add 1) Figure 5.5.FlO (Regional Trails)
not take a more proactive stance but still do not show bridge; 2) add
blke/ped bridge appearing on policy language suggested by Doug
Bend TSP in what are County-White and Steve Jorgensen on 2a)
Figure 5.5.FS (Bend administered lands. The proposed future trails, 2b) coordinating with
Area Existing and bridge, which is just outside the SW property owners, and 2c) support
Proposed Trails) corner of the Bend UGB, is not modifvim! OAR 736-040
Figures 5.5.F2-F5
(Bend, Redmond,
South County
area bikeways)
under the State's scenic
Iwaterwav rules (OAR 736-0(0)
Alliance proposed
ladditional public roads (see
1 submittal) regardless of
roads were in County
Imaintalned system or not
Options A-G (see
supports either Option E (Sisters
Alliance proposal modified to
only County-maintained roads)
or Option G (original Sisters Trail
Alliance proposal plus all arterials or
lcollectors within 3 miles of UGB or
Sunriver, Terrebonne, or Tumalo)
to plan unneeded mitigations
a frontage road, vehicles
to access homes and
businesses on west side of 97 north of
Ihi2h-speed, high-volume segment of
highway
with staff language, 4
(2/9/12)
language proposed by Doug White (see Go with staff's suggestion
10/27/11 submittal) and Steve to add Jorgensen's and
!Jorgensen (see 1/5/12 submittal) will White's policy and goal
provide guidance to amend pedestrian language; delete any
policies to satisfactorily address issue reference to 1) supporting
(see pages 175-176) modifvinll OAR 736-040
E recognizes Road Dept. cannot
legally spend funds on roads not in the
ICounty-maintained system, but staff is
to try option G which results in a
Idesignating as bikeways the public
roads cyclists prefer to ride
G,4-O
Page 1
~"",,,,",,,...:NoI;~ .........._,,,.....,.,_~nM......\citt"_""""~4,,.X~~~~~~IItI.n4~~~*~~II<:,~~Iii.t"~ii!ilU'l"S')j* Y*~'~""jj;~iitlUlfli:llinl'iO'~!JlI giil1:i lilIi'ln fI ''kIt: ii#plji'!'alilitlllltiMi.~_;d'jtn\~li0j 1i1 ~lllm.,n&v.w '~o)i~MI!Ii')t'uili"'lI fo *)0; ....:~;/!\~~1'~~ 'hI t}~_"""".u_" .•Mn."••W",,'a~ -ret,
Planning Commission's Proposed Modifications to Deschutes County TSP Update
Issue is raised median on US 20 and Support a raised median on US 20 in Raised median provides refuge for Go with 1-3 (County roads
ODOT's proposed US 20/Cook-OB Tumalo; support grade-separation at cyclists, peds crossing US 20. Bulk of under highway) 4-0; add
Riley grade-separations of C-4 US 20/Cook-OB Riley. County staff crashes are related to either a) turns language requiring ODOT
4-17 I(County roads over US 20) or 1-3 supports either concept, but slightly onto US 20; b) turns off of US 20; or c) to hold a public meeting
Page 2
US 20 in Tumalo Long-Term Solution
5.3.T1 (Co. Road & Hwy Projects)
Illustrative Projects List
US 20 between Black Butte & Sisters
(County roads under US 20). Public prefers C-4 crossing US 20; a raised median Tumalo prior to design of(renum be re d t 0 page • .142) IS concerned about adverse effects prevents those type of crashes. Grade-the proJect, 6-0
to Tumalo businesses (see Carolyn separation provides conflict-free route
Perry letters received 10/27/11;
12/1S/11)
of project priorities, cost Agree with all changes except
and adding new project reclassifying US 20 long-term solution
5-6 to 5-9
to add lanes to US 20 between from High to Medium priority
(renumbered to
Cooley and OB Riley (see ODOT
pages 149-153) submittal received 12/15/11)
issue in the pa st
would list projects either not Agree with all projects proposed for Quarry/97 interchange already appears Go with Go with staff's
or unlikely to be funded by list, except for Quarry Road/97 on '98 County TSP; both City and recommendation. 4-0
2030. (See ODOT submittal received interchange. Illustrative List should be County have collected transportation
12/15/11; City of Redmond letters a completely separate table in TSP SDC's for project; interchange is crucial
n/a Ireceived 10/27/11 and 1/26/12; to Redmond's future "ring road" and
(Page 153) Department of State Lands submittal DSllands; difficulty to get Goal 3
received 1/26/12; Central Oregon exception from state to put Quarry /97
LandWatch submittal received interchange back on the TSP map
1/26/12)
passing lanes from '98 TSP as ODOT and County staff proposed Staff relies on research done at the
Memos #3 and #4 show they "trigger" language for passing lanes
still needed. Opponents believe (see 10/27/11 PowerPoint approximately 99 years of experience
are unneeded and have presentation). ODOT and County staff of managing state highways regarding
about aesthetics. reviewed language proposed by passing the need, timing, and location of
4-15 4-6 ..-,..----language to identify lane opponents and found the passing lanes. Additionally, passing
tbe° ld passing lane "triggers" continues to suggestions to be either immeasurable, lanes are part of ODOT and the
(renum re to . ..140 141 be an Item of diSCUSSion (see impractical, or unneeded (see staff County's "four-phased" approached to
pagels -15;8s)ee separate submittals from Eva Eagle memos submitted 11/1/11; 12/9/11; Iteratively improving rural highways. asopage . -_.. Bruce Bowen received 12/30/11; 1/17/12) The "four-phased" approach was
'/11; Chuck Humphreys adopted in the '98 TSP and continues in
1/10/11; City of Sisters 12/9/11; the draft TSP Update (see pages 5-11 to
Pace 12/20/11) 5-12)
Planning Commission's Proposed Modifications to Deschutes County TSP Update
Roundabouts (renumbered to
157) to be more proactive
rding roundabouts on the State
(see Chuck Humphreys
1<:llbmittal received 1/23/12)
April 6, 2012 version
Page 3
__....-_---~~~"'.~~~, }ii,ILU tW.Utu"" idWI