Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-08-04 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 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 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, Paul Blikstad and Peter Russell, Community Development; media representative 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. Kerry Downs, who lives off Dodds Road, explained that there is a situation that concerns him and his wife, which has to do with weddings on private property. He has spoken with various people at Community Development, and said that he and his wife are no longer hosting weddings and other events as a commercial enterprise. He recalls that it was said there is not a problem having events with family and friends. He disclosed last year the dates they were holding weddings for commercial purposes, which were booked in 2008. He got a letter that told him to provide the contract dates up to a certain date. He disclosed a couple of private events and a baby shower that were not commercial in nature. He did not want to go through a repeat this year for personal events, so he disclosed earlier this year that there would be some activities involving friends and family. They were not being paid and these were not commercial in nature. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 1 of 10 Pages He stated that he received an e-mail back and was told there could be a Code violation anyway. He had a personal wedding, and found out that there were several dates when an officer had come out to follow up. He was told that this was at the discretion of the officer as part of an ongoing investigation. The officer indicated that this was initiated by Community Development. He spoke with Mr. Grundeman, who said that they had no way of knowing whether these particular events were commercial in nature. He and his wife are well established in the area, have a lot of family and friends here, and four weddings is not out of the ordinary for them. He won’t tell family and friends they are not welcome to use his property for these kinds of things. He wants to know why County resources are being used in this manner, since he already said what he is doing there. There are some people who don’t have anything better to do than watch what he is doing. The County was aware of all but one of these personal events. Commissioner Baney stated that it appears that there might be some over- zealousness if this is the case. She does not believe that this is in the spirit of what they had discussed in the past. Commissioner Luke stated that he’d like to hear both sides of the story. Commissioner Unger said that this is a difficult issue that has been a problem for some time. The Officer is probably trying to validate or follow-up on any calls that come in. It is a State issue and the State is not helping with it, which leaves the County in a difficult place. He does not see a resolution yet, but this is an issue throughout the State and is not unique to Deschutes County. It could be that others hosting events say that they are having private events but aren’t, and it is hard to find a balance. People are very sensitive about this issue. Commissioner Baney stated there is an outdoor mass gathering law, depending on the size of the gathering. She assumes that the private events he his hosting are not big enough to fit into that. Mr. Downs stated that he disclosed in advance what he would be doing so that there would be no misunderstanding. If he was having commercial events, it would be busy every weekend. He resents having a case file number and being watched over in this manner when he is just hosting family and friends for weddings, birthday parties and other personal events. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 2 of 10 Pages Commissioner Baney will seek clarification, since if this is the case it could be happening to others. No other citizen input was offered. 2. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of an Order Directing the Permanent Closure of Deschutes-Pleasant Ridge Road at the Intersection of Highway 97. Tom Blust and Pat Creedican and Joel McCarroll of the Oregon Department of Transportation came before the Board. Mr. Blust said the Board held a work session on June 29 to discuss this issue. ODOT has officially requested permanent closure of this road for safety reasons. The turning movements and high speed on the highway make it a hazardous location. This does not solve all the safety issues there, but it should help. ODOT held an open house to get public input. Mr. Creedican said there were probably 20 to 25 attendees at the open house, and no one seemed strongly opposed to this closure. Most of the citizens were more interested in the future of the area regarding a potential access road or a median barrier. A few residents wanted the road to remain right-out only, but there are few people living on Deschutes-Pleasant Ridge Road that are impacted. Mr. Blust stated that the Sheriff’s Posse asked about the right-out only as well, but the Sheriff’s Office is supportive of permanent closure. Commissioner Luke stated that the Board has discussed this issue in a work session, and he has attended transportation meetings at which this situation was addressed. Mr. McCarroll gave an overview of the accident history of the intersection. This would reduce the number of conflict points. Some were weather related. Mr. McCarroll discussed what is being contemplated for the west side of Highway 97. A frontage road has been discussed which would connect 61st Street straight down to Tumalo Road. It would require some redesign. The most interest is from the residents who would be impacted by the frontage road. No timeframe has been established because the cost is not known and other projects have priority. It is still an important area to address due to the potential for high speed traffic conflicts off Gift Road. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 3 of 10 Pages Commissioner Luke said that the State Transportation Commission wants to reduce access to the highway as much as possible, and this is a dangerous section of road. It may be possible for a frontage road or other changes to be a demonstration project, which would bring it up on the schedule. Many of the property owners would be willing to give up right of way if it meant that they would have better use of their property. Commissioner Unger indicated that he has been told that the deceleration lane for Tumalo Road going south on the highway is too short. Mr. Credican said the same complaint has come in regarding the deceleration lane for Gift and 61st. Commissioner Unger would like more attention given to using refuge lanes and other enhancements to come up with a model interchange for the future. Peter Russell said that he and Mr. Blust attended the public meeting, which was well-received. Mr. Blust stated that he has spoken with Emergency Services about installing a gate, and they said that a cul-de-sac and barricade would be adequate and a gate is not needed. Therefore, the Order was revised to reflect this. Commissioner Unger said that the Sheriff’s Posse was concerned that they were not directly contacted. Mr. Blust stated that the Sheriff’s Office was involved but evidently they did not share this information with that group. Mr. Creedican said that ODOT is working with them on access issues. Upon being asked whether a public hearing is needed, Laurie Craghead stated that this is not a land use issue and a hearing is not required. Commissioner Luke said that it appears that ODOT is working with the Sheriff’s Posse group already. Mr. Creedican stated that the school district is drawing up its transportation plan, and wants to know this is to be closed prior to notifying parents. Commissioner Luke indicated that in all likelihood this closure will happen. The Order will be addressed at the Wednesday, August 11 Board business meeting. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 4 of 10 Pages 3. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of an Order Establishing a Rural Solid Waste Collection Area near Sisters. Timm Schimke and Brad Bailey of High Country Disposal came before the Board. Mr. Schimke said that turning over some responsibilities to the service providers helps with County funding. High Country Disposal is working with the City of Sisters to change the operation of the depot there. This would establish curbside recycling in Sisters. Mr. Bailey said that they will begin cart pickup of recycling next week. Mr. Schimke stated that the areas were established in conjunction with the collectors. There will be a rate increase but more services offered to customers. Commissioner Unger asked if the City of Sisters is supportive of the changes. Mr. Bailey said they are, and are helping with some surveillance to keep the cost down. BANEY: Move signature of Order No. 2010-044, Establishing a Rural Solid Waste Collection Area near Sisters. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 4. Before the Board was Consideration of Chair Signature of Document No. 2010-546, Findings and Decision regarding a Landscape Management Site Plan and Lot Line Adjustment (Applicant: Eitel). Laurie Craghead gave a brief overview of the item. Commissioner Unger expressed concern about the location of the structure. He asked if the process had been followed, would the neighbor have any say over where it would be. Ms. Craghead said that as long as it fits the setback criteria, it is allowed. It also met the applicable landscape management zone provisions. Commissioner Unger asked how the second story of the building would be used. Ms. Craghead said that it cannot be used for living quarters. Tom Anderson stated that it was stubbed out for plumbing and that is allowed for a shop or garage. When a set of plans looks like it might be a residence, the applicant has to sign a statement that it won’t be used for that purpose. Ms. Craghead added that the criterion is whether it has a full kitchen, but plumbing is allowed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 5 of 10 Pages Commissioner Luke said that he has a real concern about the quality of the footings, which were not inspected when installed. Mr. Anderson replied that he has asked the inspector about this, and was told that it is exposed enough for adequate inspection. The Building Division on a regular basis inspects foundations after the fact, and it is felt that a satisfactory inspection can be done. Ms. Craghead said that the Board does not have authority over building code issues anyway. Mr. Kanner stated that the applicants have two years to carry out the approval process. Ms. Craghead said that Code requires two years because it is part of the land use process. Commissioner Luke does not like the idea of giving them two more years. Mr. Anderson said that the violation before the Board requires allowing two years. However, he does not think the building code violation has to wait that long. The Eitels have paid for most of the permitting and engineering, and he feels they will proceed quickly. They have to get the boundary survey done first. He does not think they will wait to proceed since they have no reason to. Ms. Craghead said the land use portion addresses whether the building can exist. The building permit code compliance is not part of this action as the Board has no authority over building permits. Mr. Anderson stated that they will work with them on the permitting process. BANEY: Move Chair signature of Document No. 2010-546, the Eitel site plan decision. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 5. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of an Order Amending Order No. 2010-006, Limiting Deschutes County Financial Assistance for Installation of a Nitrogen-reducing Onsite Wastewater System to the Cost of the System. Mr. Anderson said this only applies to the area subject to Order 2010-006, having to do with septic system failures and other issues. This came up when discussion occurred regarding proposed NeighborImpact programs. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 6 of 10 Pages The rebate program has already been replaced. The NeighborImpact program may allow for a loan for the cost of the entire upgrade. This Order requires that if a NeighborImpact loan is obtained, the rebate would be applied towards the principal of the loan. The $3,750 would be sent directly to NeighborImpact for this purpose. BANEY: Move signature of Order No. 2010-039, regarding financial assistance for onsite wastewater systems. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of the Consent Agenda. BANEY: Move approval of the Consent Agenda. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Consent Agenda Items 6. Signature of Order No. 2010-043, Rescinding Several County Policies 7. Signature of Document No. 2010-389, a Services Agreement with Marc Williams, M.D. to Provide County Health Services 8. Approval of Minutes: ƒ Work Sessions of July 26 and 28 CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE 911 COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 9. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the 911 County Service District (two weeks) in the Amount of $38,524.33. BANEY: Move approval, subject to review. UNGER: Second. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 7 of 10 Pages VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EXTENSION AND 4-H COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT 10. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for the Extension/4-H County Service District (two weeks) in the Amount of $9,095.07. BANEY: Move approval, subject to review. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. RECONVENED AS THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 11. Before the Board was Consideration of Approval of Weekly Accounts Payable Vouchers for Deschutes County (two weeks) in the Amount of $1,803.314.07. BANEY: Move approval, subject to review. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 12. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA A. Before the Board were Deliberations and a Decision of a LUBA Remand of the County’s Decision regarding a Plan Amendment and Zone Change from Exclusive Farm Use to Surface Mining (Millican – 4R Equipment). Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 8 of 10 Pages Paul Blikstad provided a brief overview of the item. Letters were received but the information brought up in the letters did not apply to the items that were subject to the LUBA remand. Commissioner Luke read a statement to the audience (a copy of which is attached for reference). Commissioner Baney agreed with his statement. She would like to see some coordination between the parties regarding the timing of blasting and grazing. Ms. Craghead said it is proper to address this aspect. The original decision does condition for blasting upon prior written notification of the neighbors. This can be added to the decision. Commissioner Unger asked when the applicant has to submit a restoration plan. Ms. Craghead said that this was not part of the hearing process at this time. DOGAMI issues those permits, and this is a long time out in the future. B. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Letter Appointing William J. Rainey to the Deschutes County Planning Commission (Sisters Area Representative), effective September 1, 2010 through June 30, 2014. The Commissioners commented that all applicants were good and it was a difficult choice. BANEY: Move approval. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. The meeting adjourned at 11:40 a.m. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Business Meeting Wednesday, August 4, 2010 Page 9 of 10 Pages