Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-06-07 Business Meeting MinutesDeschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MONDAY, JUNE 7, 2010 _____________________________ Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend __________________________ Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; Tom Anderson, Nick Lelack, Cynthia Smidt, George Read and Kevin Harrison, Community Development; Chris Edelston, Finance; Hillary Borrud of The Bulletin; and six other citizens. Chair Luke opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m. 1. Before the Board was Citizen Input. Tom Anderson explained that the signs have been taken down or covered at the adult business location at Deschutes Junction. The tenant came in on Friday to find out about the application process and what building permits might be required. The color of the building, bright pink, probably does not comply with the landscape management criteria. The signs did not comply with Code. Rick Coffin of Deschutes County said he understands the process and wanted to talk about his experience in Deschutes Junction. He gave an overview of the history of the area. He said that the person who wants to put in the business has the same type of business in other areas and is apparently well-funded. Rick Coffin said that the big picture needs to be looked at. Deschutes Junction needs to be addressed and examined carefully. Certain types of uses should be allowed. Mr. Aceti, Mr. Fagan and others have agreed to pay for a frontage road. There is a responsibility to young people to have the right kinds of business at this location. He hopes that there are legal grounds to deny this business, and would like to see Deschutes Junction cleaned up and used appropriately. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, June 7, 2010 Page 1 of 8 Pages The Commissioners thanked Mr. Coffin for his comments, and noted that there has been a lot of other input on this issue as well. Deschutes Junction is being examined as part of the comprehensive plan update as well. ___________________________________________ Commissioner Luke asked Laurie Craghead about accepting comments on other agenda items. Ms. Craghead stated that regarding item #3, it is up to the Commissioners as to whether to take testimony, but it was not noticed as a hearing. Regarding item #4, the record is closed, and any comments made cannot be a part of the record at this point, and cannot be used to help make a decision. 2. Before the Board was a Public Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Fee Schedule for Deschutes County. Chair Luke opened the public hearing. Christina Edleston said there were changes – a daycare use and remodel free are now included. Also, Community Development’s schedule was reduced by 5%. Paul Dewey for Central Oregon LandWatch asked about the increase in appeal fees for land use decision. Tom Anderson said that the current fee is being increased approximately 5%. Mr. Dewey indicated that he erroneously referred to a schedule that was several years old. Being no further testimony offered, the hearing was closed. Dave Kanner said that a new law allows the County to adopt a new or changed fee schedule mid-year if necessary. 3. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of Order No. 2010-032, Initiating Review of the Hearings Officer’s Decision regarding a Bed & Breakfast Inn (Applicant: Anderson). Cynthia Smidt and Kevin Harrison came before the Board. Ms. Smidt gave an overview of the item, which involves the denial of an application to establish and bed and breakfast inn. Based on past Code, since 1991 until 2009, the State acknowledged bed & breakfast in Code. Staff categorized this as a bed and breakfast, but the Hearings Officer found differently. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, June 7, 2010 Page 2 of 8 Pages Mr. Harrison said it comes down to the wording of bed and breakfast or room and board arrangement. This has been found consistent with State law. Staff came to believe that bed and breakfast inn wording is the same as room and board arrangement. In 2009 the latest update of the EFU zone removed the reference to bed and breakfast. Mr. Anderson applied for a room and board arrangement several months ago. The opponents argued that bed and breakfast and room and board arrangements are not the same. The Hearings Officer denied the application on that basis. Staff is asking that a review of application be allowed, as staff feels they have some responsibility for leading the applicant down the wrong road. Commissioner Luke said that he has some concerns about this situation. He asked if the Hearings officer made the decision erroneously. He added that staff gives advice to people all the time. The Hearings Officer is very capable of understanding the law. The applicant has an obligation to confirm information given. Commissioner Baney stated that she believes the Board should hear this de novo. People should be able to go to professional staff and get correct information without having to hire legal counsel. Commissioner Luke said that if this is heard, people are more likely to challenge other information provided to them by staff. Commissioner Baney stated that the Code was just changed a year ago. It would have been allowable as a conditional use, but through those changes there is an opportunity to shed light on a Code change. It would be difficult to replicate this situation. Commissioner Unger agreed with Commissioner Baney. They cannot expect every applicant to have to obtain legal counsel on every issue. The applicant deserves a fair opportunity to deal with this. Commissioner Luke asked about consideration of the opponents and the legal fees they paid. Commissioner Baney noted that anyone should expect accurate information from professional staff. A mistake might have been made as to what information was given to them. Ms. Smidt said that staff gave advice as to what they thought was correct, but according to the Hearings Officer it was the wrong direction. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, June 7, 2010 Page 3 of 8 Pages Commissioner Baney stated that it should stand on its own. Ms. Craghead said that the applicant did apply for the room and board application, but staff had them go for a bed and breakfast instead. Ms. Smidt stated they felt they were one and the same. The Hearings Officer said that this was an application for a bed and breakfast in the context of room and board. Commissioner Luke stated that room and board is typically for more than one night. Bed and breakfast is not allowed per State law, per Mr. Harrison; it is handled under room and board. There is no limit on the number of days. Room and board arrangements are a conditional use in the EFU zone. It would before a maximum of five people, with no limit on stay. Ms. Craghead added that she does not know if there are cases that define room and board. Nick Lelack said that they were to meet conditional uses for a bed and breakfast. The criteria for bed and breakfast are not the same as for room and board situations. Ms. Craghead said the Board would have to hear this to clear it up. Commissioners Tammy and Unger feel they should. Ms. Craghead stated that the only de novo issue would be the ones on which the Hearings Officer denied the application. The issue of bed and breakfast versus room and board would not be a part of the discussion. BANEY: Move that this be heard de novo. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes no. (Split vote.) 4. Before the Board was Consideration of First and Second Readings and Adoption, by Emergency, of Ordinances 2010-001 and 2010-002, regarding Destination Resort Remapping Goals, Policies and Procedures. Peter Gutowsky and Nick Lelack came before the Board. Mr. Gutowsky gave an overview of the criteria the Board wanted followed. The first modification recognizes that the first Tuesday. In September they would be set for submitting a map change application. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, June 7, 2010 Page 4 of 8 Pages The second modification has to do with the grandfather clause, and ‘opting in” in January. Measure 56 obligations would also have to be met. Commissioner Luke stated that all land should be treated the same regardless of ownership. Nick said there may be interested by Commissioners or Planning Commission to allow land that has CCR’s to convert to destination resorts rather than having individually owners apply. If it is a platted subdivision, the original developer could require that the entire subdivision comply. Commissioner Luke pointed out that just because they are on the map does not mean that they can automatically do this. He said that the Ordinance establishes a process. Once the map is generated, public hearings would follow. This just creates the map, and narrows considerably what the Planning Commission last wanted to do. Discussion then occurred regarding language in criteria D, as proposed by staff (copy attached for reference). Commissioner Baney observed that she would like to have public input on this, but the conversation is far bigger than that. It involves deed restrictions on property that people have purchased. UNGER: Move that criteria D be added to Ordinance No. 2010-002. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Yes. BANEY: Move first and second readings by title only of Ordinance No. 2010- 001. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Yes. Chair Luke conducted the first and second readings by title only, declaring an emergency. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, June 7, 2010 Page 5 of 8 Pages UNGER: Move adoption of Ordinance No. 2010-001. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Yes. BANEY: Move first and second readings by title only of Ordinance No. 2010- 002, as amended. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Yes. Chair Luke conducted the first and second readings by title only, declaring an emergency. UNGER: Move adoption of Ordinance No. 2010-002. BANEY: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Yes. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE BLACK BUTTE RANCH COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 5. Before the Board was a Public Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Fee Schedule for the Black Butte Ranch County Service District. Chair Luke opened the public hearing. Christina Edleston said there were no changes from the work session. Being no testimony offered, the hearing was closed. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE SUNRIVER SERVICE DISTRICT 6. Before the Board was a Public Hearing on the Fiscal Year 20010-11 Fee Schedule for the Sunriver Service District. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, June 7, 2010 Page 6 of 8 Pages Chair Luke opened the public hearing. Christina Edleston said there were no changes from the work session. Being no testimony offered, the hearing was closed. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF DESCHUTES COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT DISTRICT #1 7. Before the Board was a Public Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Fee Schedule for Deschutes County Law Enforcement District #1. Chair Luke opened the public hearing. Christina Edleston said there were no changes from the work session. Being no testimony offered, the hearing was closed. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF DESCHUTES COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT DISTRICT #2 8. Before the Board was a Public Hearing on the Fiscal Year Fee 2010-11 Fee Schedule for Deschutes County Law Enforcement District #2 . Chair Luke opened the public hearing. Christina Edleston said there were no changes from the work session. Being no testimony offered, the hearing was closed. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 9-1-1 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 9. Before the Board was a Public Hearing on the Fiscal Year 2010-11 Fee Schedule for the 911 County Service District. Chair Luke opened the public hearing. Christina Edleston said there were no changes from the work session. Being no testimony offered, the hearing was closed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Monday, June 7, 2010 Page 7 of 8 Pages