HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocs re Add 19th St to TSP Map
STAFF REPORT
FILE NUMBER: PA-09-2
HEARING DATE: December 17, 2009, at 5:30 p.m.
LOCATION: Barnes and Sawyer rooms of the Deschutes Services Center,
1300 NW Wall St. in Bend.
APPLICANT/
OWNER: Deschutes County Road Department
c/o Tom Blust
61150 SE 27th Street
Bend, OR 97701
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a Plan Amendment to amend the
Deschutes County Transportation System Plan (TSP) map to add
19th Street, a future rural county arterial, between the City of
Redmond and Deschutes Junction. The alignment does require
an exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3, Agriculture.
STAFF CONTACT: Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner
I. APPLICABLE STANDARDS & CRITERIA:
A. Statewide Planning Goals 1, 2, 3, 11, and 12
B. Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR)
1. OAR 660-004, Interpretation of Goal 2 Exceptions Process
2. 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
a. Section 23.60.10
2. Chapter 23.64, Transportation System Plan
a. Section 23.64.020
b. Section 23.64.030
c. Section 23.64.040
3. Chapter 23.88, Agriculture
4. Chapter 23.120, Goal Exception Statement
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 2
II. PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT
A. Existing Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Designations: The Deschutes
County Comprehensive Plan Map designates the area as Exclusive Farm Use
(EFU). The area is predominantly Alfalfa Subzone (EFU-AL). About midway
between Redmond and Deschutes Junction the corridor for 19th Street clips the
southeast edge of a parcel designated EFU-Tumalo/Redmond/Bend (EFU-TRB).
At the southern terminus the alignment crosses five parcels just north of
Deschutes Junction that are zoned EFU-TRB.
B. Location: The subject properties are located between Redmond and Deschutes
Junction to the immediate east of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway
(BNSF) tracks. The properties are identified on Deschutes County Assessor’s
Maps from north to south as #15-13-000000-130; 16-13-000000-200; 16-13-
000000-100; 16-12-12-000-1200; 16-12-13-0000-101; 16-12-13-0000-602; 16-
12-13-0000-503; 16-12-13-0000-601; 16-12-24-0000-100; 16-12-24-0000-200;
16-12-24-0000-300; 16-12-23-0000-304; 16-12-23-0000-600; 16-12-26A-000-
401; and 16-12-26A-000-300. The proposed alignment lies within a ½-mile wide
corridor previously identified in the Upper Deschutes Management Plan
(UPRMP). The precise location of this two-lane rural arterial within that corridor
would be finalized prior to construction.
C. Site Description: The corridor is bounded to the north by the City of Redmond,
the west by the BNSF property, and the south by Deschutes Market Road. On
the east, the land is primarily Bureau of Land Management (BLM) with a mix of a
few private properties and land owned by Deschutes County. (Exhibit 1). The
terrain is primarily flat with some modest elevation changes just south of
Redmond.
D. Surrounding Uses: The proposed 19th Street site is flanked on the west by a
pre-existing transportation corridor, the BNSF tracks, and to the west of the
tracks is U.S. 97. The bulk of the remaining land to the east of the proposed 19th
Street is under BLM jurisdiction. Although zoned EFU, the land under BLM
oversight is not used for agriculture, but instead is utilized for wildlife habitat,
recreation, and slightly farther east the EFU land is the Biak Training Center for
the infantry and armor of the Oregon National Guard. The EFU land just north of
Deschutes Junction is primarily juniper trees with a few pockets of irrigated
agriculture. (Exhibit 2).
D. Procedure and Background: The location of the future 19th Street, a north-
south road paralleling US 97 but east of the BNSF, has been the subject of
planning at the federal and the local level. The right of way corridor for a future
19th Street was identified in the environmental work that culminated in the federal
“Upper Deschutes Resource Management Plan (UDRMP).” The September
2005 record of decision (ROD) for the UDRMP identified a ½-mile wide
transportation corridor across BLM holdings between Redmond and Deschutes
Junction. Specifically, the 19th Street corridor appears on UDRMP Map 2
“Transportation and Utilities.” (Exhibit 3). The UDRMP on page 135 under the
heading of Transportation and Utilities states Objective TU – 1: “Provide new or
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 3
modified rights of way for transportation corridors…to meet expected demands
and minimize environmental impacts.” On page 139 of the UDRMP, Objective
TU-5, Allocation #2, states “[D]esignate a transportation corridor approximately a
½-mile wide and extending from approximately the end of 19th Street in Redmond
to Deschutes Market Road. This includes a corridor connection to Quarry
Avenue that will allow for a future Federal Highway interchange.” (Exhibit 4).
The 1998 Deschutes County Transportation System Plan (TSP) in Policy #20
states “[W]henever practical, access to state highways shall be provided via
frontage roads, alternative local roads, or other means, rather than direct access
to the highway.” While not as explicit on 19th Street as the UDRMP above, the
policy indicates the strategic desire to have a system of parallel local roads as an
option to the state highway system. 19th Street would be an alternative local road
to U.S. 97. The future Quarry Road interchange appears on Page 155 at Figure
5.2.F2, “ODOT Projected Interchange Locations.” (Exhibit 5).
The Redmond TSP was updated in June 2008. On page 5-2 the TSP identifies
the extension of 19th Street to Deschutes Junction as a critical alternate link
between Bend and Redmond. The alignment is also depicted on the adopted
Redmond TSP map at Figure 9-1, “Functional Classifications.” (Exhibit 6).
Finally, in 2007 the federal government awarded $500,000 to the Deschutes
County Road Department to do the final fieldwork for the environmental
clearance for 19th Street. The Road Department has contracted with BLM to do
this work. As part of the release of these funds, the Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) requested that Deschutes County amend its TSP map to
specifically include 19th Street.
E. Proposal: The applicant is requesting a Plan Amendment to amend the Deschutes
County Transportation System Plan (TSP) Map to add 19th Street, a roughly six-
mile long Rural Arterial, between Redmond and Deschutes Junction. The
proposed 19th Street would provide a north-south alternative to US 97 and serve
as a rural-scale grid street between Bend and Redmond by connecting to
Deschutes Market Road.
Additionally, the applicant is requesting an exception to Goal 3 for those
properties zoned EFU across which the new corridor will be located. The
proposed 19th Street needs to be on those EFU lands east of the BNSF to 1) be
consistent with the transportation corridor identified in the UDRMP; 2) align with
the pre-existing City of Redmond 19th Street; 3) provide an option for the traveling
public to use a county road to access the Redmond Airport, the county
fairgrounds, and east Redmond; and 4) align with the Deschutes Junction Phase
II interchange. The proposed 19th Street will draw traffic that otherwise would
use the US 97/Yew Avenue interchange, which is already experiencing
operational challenges. Finally, the proposed 19th Street offers an alternate way
to route traffic between Bend and Redmond should either a train derailment close
Yew Avenue or a crash close U.S. 97, for example
III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 4
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: The salient federal and local planning documents all had public comment
periods and/or public hearings. The location of the proposed 19th Street underwent
considerable vetting in the development of the UDRMP. The Deschutes County and
Redmond TSPs also went through local adoption processes that included multiple public
hearings before each jurisdiction’s respective planning commission and decision-making
body. This proposed plan amendment will also go through a public process before the
Deschutes County Planning Commission and the Deschutes County Board of County
Commissioners which includes mailed notices to affected property owners and the
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (“DLCD”) and a published
public notice. The public has had and will continue to have ample opportunity to provide
oral and written public comment.
Staff believes the intent of Goal 1 is met.
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: In accordance with Goal 2, the applicant submitted this application to the
county to amend the county’s TSP map. The applicant provided sufficient information
about previous planning efforts and this current land use. Along with the discussion
below, that information assures an adequate factual base for the county to make an
informed decision regarding amending the TSP map to add 19th Street.
Staff believes the intent of Goal 2 has been met.
3. Goal 3: Agricultural Lands;
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 3 seeks “To preserve and maintain
agricultural lands.”
FINDING: Approximately 83% of the length of the proposed 19th Street lies on BLM
land; federal land is not governed by state or local land use requirements. The
remaining 17%, however, crosses private property in several place. As 19th Street is not
yet on identified right of way maps, the BNSF right of way is used as a proxy for
locational descriptions.
The first non-federal property is 1513000000130 (Division of State Lands [DSL]
property), an approximately 942.6-acre parcel that directly abuts south Redmond. This
former BLM land was conveyed to the State of Oregon to make up for the shortfall of
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 5
lands that were due to Oregon during the 1859 establishment of statehood. These
former BLM lands are transferred to the state to benefit the common school fund. DSL
intends for this land to come into the Redmond UGB primarily for industrial uses. Of the
DSL property, 913.4 acres lies east of BNSF.
The second non-federal property is 1613000000200, a 6.7-acre parcel owned by Bill Lee
of which only 1.1 acres lies east of the BNSF and in close proximity to the southern
boundary of the DSL property.
Another piece of non-federal land is at 1612130000101, the Halligan Ranch, which is
roughly midway between south Redmond and Deschutes Junction. All of the 72.3 acres
of the Halligan Ranch are east of the BNSF.
The Joann Jeans property is at 1612130000503 and is 41.8 acres in size, but only 0.7
acres is east of BNSF.
The remaining non-federal parcels are the six at the far southern end, 1612240000200
(Central Oregon Irrigation District) is 62.2 acres with 19.9 east of BNSF;
1612240000300 (Deschutes County) a 38.6-acre parcel with 37.3 east of BNSF;
1612230000304 (Martha Sundreth and Elizabeth White), a 2.5-acre parcel completely
east of BNSF; 1612230000600 (Leo and Judy Parsons) a 21-acre parcel completely
east of BNSF; 161226A000401 (a second Leo and Judy Parsons property) whose entire
36.1 acres is east of BNSF; and 161226A000300 (Jack Holt and Adelheid Ulrike), a
30.6-acre parcel east of BNSF.
All of the above state and privately-owned described parcels are zoned EFU and, thus,
would require an exception to Goal 3. Staff believes Goal 3 can be met through the
exceptions process as provided below.
4. Goal 4: Forest Lands
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 4 seeks “To conserve forest lands
by…”
FINDING: The land is not zoned for forestry uses, so Goal 4 does not apply.
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 resources are listed in the county’s acknowledged Comprehensive
Plan. Staff reviewed the county’s Goal 5 resource inventory and found no identified
cultural or historic Goal 5 resources within the corridor. Utilizing the selected corridor as
proposed would have no significant adverse impact on the amount of open space or
scenic views available. The BLM is conducting fieldwork for archaeological, cultural,
historical resources and threatened or endangered species within the corridor. The BLM
identified a ½-mile wide corridor and the proposed 19th street will be within that corridor.
The county’s minimum right of way standard for an arterial is 100 feet. Therefore, there
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 6
will be ample room to move the road to mitigate any impacts in the unlikely event a Goal
5 resource or other cultural or natural resource is discovered during the federal
environmental work.
There is an Open Space and Conservation (OS&C) designation for the State of Oregon
rectangular parcel (15-13-32-0000-400) that lies approximately a quarter-mile south of
Redmond. However, this parcel is already bisected by U.S. 97 as well as the BNSF
tracks. 19th Street would cross the far southeast corner of the parcel. DCC
18.48.020(D) and (E) list outright permitted uses in the OS&C zone. Class I, II, and III
road or street projects are all outright permitted uses. (A preliminary assessment
indicates when it comes time to construct 19th Street, this would be a Class I road project
as described at DCC 18.04.030 and thus will require a land use permit.) Finally, the
proposed 19th Street may not actually cross this site pending further design work. The
above information is provided as a contingency.
Impacts on related resources:
Mineral and aggregate resources: The corridor has not been zoned for mineral or
aggregate resources.
Energy sources: There are no known energy resources in the corridor such as natural
gas, oil, coal or geothermal heat.
Fish and wildlife habitat: The expansion site has no fish or wetland habitat. Preliminary
environmental work in the UDRMP has not identified any threatened or endangered
species.
Ecologically and scientifically significant natural areas, including desert areas: Nothing
about the selected corridor separates it from surrounding areas as ecologically or
scientifically significant.
Outstanding scenic views: Nothing about the selected corridor indicates it has a
significantly better view than other sites in the vicinity. As no bridges or overpasses are
planned, no views from the east to the west will be degraded.
Water areas, wetlands, watersheds, and groundwater resources: There are no wetlands
or watersheds within the subject site.
Wilderness areas: The site does not meet the definition of “wilderness areas” as
described within the Oregon State Goals and Guidelines.
Historic areas, sites, structures and objects: The expansion site has no structures listed
on the National Register of Historic Places. No structures or places of historical
significance have been determined to exist on or near the property selected.
Cultural areas: The site has no known cultural resources.
FINDING: Staff believes Goal 5 has been met.
6. Goal 6: Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 7
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 6 seeks “To maintain and improve
the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state.”
FINDING: Adding the line on the TSP for map for 19th Street will not affect air, water,
or land resources. Staff believes this criteria does not apply.
7. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 7 seeks “To protect people and
property from natural hazards.”
FINDING: There are no natural hazards in this area; staff believes this criteria does
not apply.
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: The proposed 19th Street predominantly lies on federal lands controlled by
BLM. This agency allows recreational activities upon its land. A previous Deschutes
County land use decision (CU-00-118, Condition of Approval #31) required the
Pronghorn destination resort to build a permanent secondary access road that will
connect to 19th Street after building out 50 percent of the residential units.
Staff believes this criterion has been met.
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: 19th Street will provide a parallel alternative to US 97 between Deschutes
Junction and Redmond. When the DSL property develops, the site can use 19th Street
as a transportation corridor to support its economic development. 19th Street will also
offer another routing choice for agricultural products produced on EFU land to reach
nearby urban markets.
Staff believes this criterion has been met.
10. Housing
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 10 attempts “To provide for the
housing needs of citizens of the state.”
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 8
FINDING: Staff believes this criteria is not applicable.
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, Public Facilities and Services, calls for a “timely, orderly and
efficient arrangement of public facilities and services…” The proposed 19th Street would
provide a north-south alternative to US 97 and serve as a rural-scale grid street between
Bend and Redmond by connecting to Deschutes Market Road.
This would be a higher-speed, two-lane road through agriculturally zoned land with
access only provided to parcels that would be otherwise landlocked. Such an access
management strategy would be consistent with Goal 11 Guideline A.2, “public
facilities...for rural areas should be provided at levels appropriate for rural use only and
should not support urban uses.”
Staff believes this criterion has been met.
12. Goal 12: Transportation
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 12 seeks “To provide and
encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system.”
FINDING: OAR 660-012 implements Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 12. This
administrative rule requires the county to prepare and adopt a Transportation System
Plan (TSP) as part of its comprehensive plan. The Deschutes County TSP was
adopted on August 26, 1998. The proposal’s compliance with OAR 660-012 is
discussed extensively below. Further operational analysis is provided below.
Staff believes this criterion has been met.
13. Goal 13: Energy Conservation
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 13 seeks “to conserve energy.”
FINDING: The road will accommodate bicyclists and buses and will only have stops
at either end with the rest of the facility being free flow.
Staff believes this criterion is either inapplicable or has been met.
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
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 9
accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban
growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide
for livable communities.”
FINDING: The land use is to amend the TSP to add 19th Street, a collector crossing
rural lands. The facility will be outside of an Urban Growth Boundary. The extension of
19th Street does appear on the Redmond TSP, even though the road would be outside of
the City’s jurisdiction.
Staff believes this criteria does not apply or has been met.
15. Goal 15: Willamette River Greenway
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 15 strives “to protect, conserve,
enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural,
economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette
River as the Willamette River Greenway.”
FINDING: This goal is not applicable as the site does not abut the Willamette River.
16. Goal 16: Estuarine Resources
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal seeks “To recognize and protect
the unique environmental, economic, and social values of each
estuary and associated wetlands; and To protect, maintain, where
appropriate develop, and where appropriate restore the long-term
environmental, economic, and social values, diversity and benefits
of Oregon's estuaries.
FINDING: The proposed alignment does not cross any estuaries, so this criterion
does not apply.
17. Goal 17: Coastal Shorelands
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 17 attempts “To conserve, protect,
where appropriate, develop and where appropriate restore the
resources and benefits of all coastal shorelands, recognizing their
value for protection and maintenance of water quality, fish and
wildlife habitat, water-dependent uses, economic resources and
recreation and aesthetics. The management of these shoreland
areas shall be compatible with the characteristics of the adjacent
coastal waters; and
To reduce the hazard to human life and property, and the adverse
effects upon water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, resulting
from the use and enjoyment of Oregon’s coastal shorelands.
FINDING: The proposed alignment is in the High Desert; staff believes this criterion
does not apply.
18. Goal 18: Beaches and Dunes
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 10
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 18 desires “To conserve, protect,
where appropriate develop, and where appropriate restore the
resources and benefits of coastal beach and dune areas; and
To reduce the hazard to human life and property from natural
or man-induced actions associated with these areas.
FINDING: The proposed alignment Is several hundred miles inland; this criterion
does not apply.
19. Goal 19: Ocean Resources
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 19 attempts “To conserve marine
resources and ecological functions for the purpose of providing
long-term ecological, economic, and social value and benefits to
future generations.
FINDING: The only ocean this alignment crosses is one of sagebrush; this criterion
does not apply.
B. Oregon Administrative Rules (OARs)
1. Section 660-004-0010, Application of the Goal 2 Exception Process to
Certain Goals.
(1) The exceptions process is not applicable to Statewide Goal 1
“Citizen Involvement” and Goal 2 “Land Use Planning.” The
exception process is generally applicable to all or part of those
statewide goals which prescribe or restrict certain uses of resource
land within or limit the provision of certain public facilities and
services. These statewide goals include but are not limited to:
(a) Goal 3 “Agricultural Lands,” however, an exception to Goal 3
“Agricultural Lands” is not required for any of the farm or non-farm
uses permitted in an exclusive farm use (EFU) zone under ORS
Chapter 215 and OAR 660 Division 33, “Agricultural Lands”;
FINDING: The applicant is seeking an approval of an exception to Goal 3 to amend the
TSP map to add a Rural Arterial, which is a public facility, on land zoned EFU. There is
currently no funding to construct the road, but adding the road to the map will enable the
county to successfully pursue state and federal funding for construction as those entities
require a facility to be on a TSP map. The proposed road use is not a use listed as
allowed on agriculture land under ORS 215.283 or by OAR Division 33, “Agricultural
Lands,” ORS 215.283(3) allows a road such as this proposed extension of 19th street,
however, if an exception to Goal 3 and any other applicable goal is approved.
2. Section 660-004-0015, Inclusion as Part of the Plan
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 11
(1) A local government approving a proposed exception shall adopt
as part of its comprehensive plan findings of fact and a statement of
reasons which demonstrates that the standards for an exception
have been met. The applicable standards are those in Goal 2, Part
II(c), OAR 660-004-0020(2), and 660-004-022. The reasons and facts
shall be supported by substantial evidence that the standard has
been met.
FINDING: The amendments to the county’s comprehensive plan provisions in Deschutes
County Code (“DCC”) 23.120 includes a reference to Ordinance 2009-020 which
incorporates a findings document. The applicant addressed the standards of Goal 2,
Part II(c) above and addresses OAR 660-004-0020(2) and 660-004-0022 below.
Therefore, this requirement is met.
3. Section 660-004-0018, Planning and Zoning for the Exception Areas
(1) Purpose. This rule explains the requirements for adoption of plan
and zone designations for exceptions. Exceptions to one goal or a
portion of one goal do not relieve a jurisdiction from remaining goal
requirements and do not authorize uses, densities, public facilities
and services, or activities other than those recognized or justified by
the applicable exception. Physically developed or irrevocably
committed exceptions under OAR 660-004-0025 and 660-004-0028
are intended to recognize and allow continuation of existing types of
development in the exception area. Adoption of plan and zoning
provisions that would allow changes in existing types of uses,
densities, or services requires the application of the standards
outlined in this rule.
FINDING: This section of the administrative rule applies to the adoption of plan and zone
use designations. It does not apply to goal exceptions for roads. Those exceptions do
not require a change of plan or zone designations.
As stated above, however, a road is allowed in the EFU zone with approval of a goal
exception. In doing so, this administrative rule requires a decision as to which type of
exception is applicable – “physically developed,” “irrevocably committed” or a “reasons”
exception – and has different requirements for each.
(3) Uses, density, and public facilities and services not meeting
section (2) of this rule may be approved only under provisions for a
reasons exception as outlined in section (4) of the rule and OAR
660-004-0020 through 660-004-0022.
This exception does not qualify for a “physically developed” or “irrevocably committed”
exception subsection 2 of this rule. Therefore, this exception is a “reasons” exception.
4) "Reasons" Exceptions:
(a) When a local government takes an exception under the
"Reasons" section of ORS 197.732(1)(c) and OAR 660-004-
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 12
0020 through 660-004-0022, plan and zone designations must
limit the uses, density, public facilities and services, and
activities to only those that are justified in the exception;
(b) When a local government changes the types or intensities
of uses or public facilities and services within an area
approved as a "Reasons" exception, a new "Reasons"
exception is required;
(c) When a local government includes land within an
unincorporated community for which an exception under the
"Reasons" section of ORS 197.732(1)(c) and OAR 660-004-
0020 through 660-004-0022 was previously adopted, plan and
zone designations must limit the uses, density, public
facilities and services, and activities to only those that were
justified in the exception or OAR 660-022-0030, which ever is
more stringent.
The TSP amendment will add 19th Street to the TSP map. The land use designations for
the affected properties under local zoning will remain unchanged.
4. Section 660-004-0020, Goal 2, Part II(c), Exception Requirements
(1) If a jurisdiction determines there are reasons consistent with
OAR 660-004-0022 to use resource lands for uses not allowed by the
applicable Goal or to allow public facilities or services not allowed
by the applicable Goal, the justification shall be set forth in the
comprehensive plan as an exception.
FINDING: This section reiterates the procedural requirements of OAR 660-004-0015.
2) The four factors in Goal 2 Part II(c) required to be addressed when
taking an exception to a Goal are:
(a) Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable
goals should not apply: The exception shall set forth the facts and
assumptions used as the basis for determining that a state policy
embodied in a goal should not apply to specific properties or
situations including the amount of land for the use being planned
and why the use requires a location on resource land;
FINDING: The state policy embodied in Goal 3 is that agricultural lands should be
protected from non-agricultural development. A certain level of non-agricultural
development, as specified in ORS 215.283, is allowed. Road projects, other than the
creation of new roadways, are allowed without the approval of a goal exception. When a
new road is proposed, an exception must be approved.
The western edge of the road’s right of way will abut the BNSF right of way, so no non-
agricultural development would occur on that side. The UDRMP for the Bend-Redmond
area sets a goal and a vision to restore and maintain the ecosystem’s health and
diversity. Specifically, the Land Use Goal on page 24 of the ROD specifies “[P]reserve
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 13
and protect public lands in their natural condition, and assure they provide, where
appropriate, food and habitat for fish, wildlife and domestic animals, and land for outdoor
recreation and other uses.” Therefore, it is unlikely any development will occur on the
federal land. The zoning on the state and privately held lands is EFU, which by
definition is an agricultural zone. That zoning will not change with the construction of
this road.
Additionally, the road will not interfere with the agricultural uses on the state and
privately owned lands as the property consumed by the road will be minimal.
ORS 92.090 (2) requires that streets and roads "conform to the plats of subdivisions and
partitions already approved for adjoining property as to width, general direction and in all
other respects unless the city or county determines it is in the public interest to modify
the street or road pattern." The location for the 19th Street right-of-way and eventual
construction will align at the north end with the pre-existing 19th Street already
constructed within the City of Redmond. The approval of the goal exception is essential
to allow the applicant to conform to the platted location of the City of Redmond’s 19th
Street.
(b) Areas which do not require a new exception cannot reasonably
accommodate the use;
FINDING: The road must be located on EFU land in order to align with the existing 19th
Street within the City of Redmond. One of the purposes of the proposed 19th Street is to
provide a non-highway connection between Deschutes Junction and the City of
Redmond and to remove traffic from the US 97/Yew Avenue interchange.
To accomplish that latter objective, the road must be east of US 97. Given the pre-
existing zoning and comprehensive plan designations, it is impossible to locate a parallel
local route to US 97 east of the BNSF on anything but EFU land. Any location east of
US 97 would require a goal exception. The county’s 19th Street must be east of the
BNSF tracks to provide the traveling public with an alternative to the overtaxed U.S.
97/Yew Avenue interchange, which lies to the west of the BNSF.
(A) The exception shall indicate on a map or otherwise describe the
location of possible alternative areas considered for the use, which
do not require a new exception. The area for which the exception is
taken shall be identified;
FINDING: There are no other alternative areas for the use that will result in the
alignment of the proposed southern extension of 19th Street with the existing 19th Street
in Redmond and the Deschutes Market Interchange, Phase II. Additionally, all lands
from the BNSF east to the Crook County line are zoned EFU. The exception is for the
non-federal parcels identified above. No goal exception to the state planning goals is
needed for the land under federal jurisdiction.
(B) To show why the particular site is justified, it is necessary to
discuss why other areas which do not require a new exception
cannot reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Economic
factors can be considered along with other relevant factors in
determining that the use cannot reasonably be accommodated in
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 14
other areas. Under the alternative factor the following questions
shall be addressed:
FINDING: There are two alternative locations for 19th Street (Exhibits 7 and 8). Option
1 would be east of the BNSF and move the southern terminus farther east. Option 2
would be west of the BNSF and east of US 97 until about Pleasant Ridge Road, then
would cross back to the east side of the BNSF for the southern terminus. Both options,
however, would also require a goal exception as all the affected lands between US 97
and the BNSF tracks are zoned EFU, with the exception of three properties that are
OS&C. Thus there is no alternate location that does not require a goal exception.
Additionally, the intent of Deschutes Junction Interchange Phase II is to connect to the
future 19th Street. The construction of this second phase, which is predicated on 19th
being east of the BNSF, will be completed in October 2009. This design was approved
by Deschutes County in CU-08-42 and the location of 19th Street/Deschutes Market
Road intersection, specifically, was upheld in A-08-13. To make a logical north-south
connection and provide for an orderly development of transportation facilities, 19th Street
must be east of the BNSF.
Setting aside the fact all other sites also require a goal exception, if 19th Street were
west of the BNSF and east of 97 there would need to be two crossings of the BNSF,
likely along the Division of State Lands (DSL) property and again just north of the
Deschutes Junction interchange to get back east of the tracks. The Rail Division of the
ODOT is under a federal directive to not allow any new at-grade railroad crossings and
to reduce existing at-grade railroad crossings by 25%.
A 19th Street connection on the west side of Highway 97 would require two grade
separation to cross the BNSF tracks. Any grade-separated structure would cost millions
of dollars and, as stated above, two crossings would be needed. Finally, it would be
extremely difficult from a geometric design perspective to have a structure connect to the
City of Redmond’s 19th Street then cross above the BNSF and get back down to grade
while turning south to parallel 97 and then have a second structure cross back over the
BNSF to tie into Deschutes Junction Interchange Phase II. The cost of needless
structures would be an unfair burden that would be borne by the public.
Finally, the purpose of 19th Street is to provide a parallel local north/south alternative
route to the state highway. To accomplish this goal, the route needs to be an
appropriate distance east of the existing highway. Given the four lanes of US 97 are
posted for 55 mph and it is anticipated the proposed two lanes of 19th Street will be
traveled at a lower speed, if 19th Street were between US 97 and the BNSF tracks,
drivers would simply opt for US 97 and its higher speeds and better passing
opportunities. By locating 19th Street east of the BNSF, some drivers may opt to continue
on 19th Street to travel between NE Bend and Redmond.
(i) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on non-
resource land that would not require an exception, including
increasing the density of uses on non-resource land? If not, why
not?
FINDING: The proposed road cannot be reasonably accommodated on non-resource
land as nearly all of the land between US 97 east to the Crook County line is zoned
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 15
EFU. The proposed 19th Street needs to be east of the BNSF to 1) be consistent with
the transportation corridor identified in the UDRMP; 2) align with the existing City of
Redmond 19th Street; 3) provide an option for the traveling public to use a county road to
access the Redmond Airport, the county fairgrounds, and east Redmond; and 4) align
with the Deschutes Junction Phase II interchange. The proposed 19th Street will draw
traffic needing to access the Redmond Airport, that otherwise would use the US 97/Yew
Avenue interchange, which is already experiencing operational challenges. Finally, the
proposed 19th Street offers an alternate way to route traffic between Bend and Redmond
should either a train derailment close Yew Avenue or a crash close U.S. 97, for example.
(ii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on
resource land that is already irrevocably committed to non-resource
uses, not allowed by the applicable Goal, including resource land in
existing rural centers, or by increasing the density of uses on
committed lands? If not, why not?
FINDING: There are no irrevocably committed lands in the area.
(iii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated inside an
urban growth boundary? If not, why not?
FINDING: No, the purpose of the goal exception is to amend the county TSP to add a
rural arterial. If the road were constructed inside an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) it
would not provide an alternate parallel route between Redmond and Bend.
(iv) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated without the
provision of a proposed public facility or service? If not, why not?
FINDING: The proposed use is a public facility. This criterion, therefore, either does not
apply or is met.
(C) This alternative areas standard can be met by a broad review of
similar types of areas rather than a review of specific alternative
sites. Initially, a local government adopting an exception need
assess only whether those similar types of areas in the vicinity
could not reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Site specific
comparisons are not required of a local government taking an
exception, unless another party to the local proceeding can describe
why there are specific sites that can more reasonably accommodate
the proposed use. A detailed evaluation of specific alternative sites
is thus not required unless such sites are specifically described with
facts to support the assertion that the sites are more reasonable by
another party during the local exceptions proceeding.
FINDING: As explained above, all other routes would also require a goal exception
given the EFU zoning of the land between US 97 and the Deschutes/Crook border.
(a) The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy
consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with
measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly
more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 16
being located in other areas requiring a Goal exception. The
exception shall describe the characteristics of each alternative areas
considered by the jurisdiction for which an exception might be
taken, the typical advantages and disadvantages of using the area
for a use not allowed by the Goal, and the typical positive and
negative consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site
with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. A detailed
evaluation of specific alternative sites is not required unless such
sites are specifically described with facts to support the assertion
that the sites have significantly fewer adverse impacts during the
local exceptions proceeding. The exception shall include the
reasons why the consequences of the use at the chosen site are not
significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same
proposal being located is areas requiring a goal exception other
than the proposed site. Such reasons shall include but are not
limited to, the facts used to determine which resource land is least
productive; the ability to sustain resource uses near the proposed
use; and the long-term economic impact on the general area caused
by irreversible removal of the land from the resource base. Other
possible impacts include the effects of the proposed use on the
water table, on the costs of improving roads and on the costs to
special service districts;
FINDING: Regarding alternatives, it is helpful to recognize the proposed 19th Street
corridor has three fixed anchor points: 1) the southern terminus of the existing 19th
Street in Redmond; 2) the northern and southern endpoints of the transportation corridor
identified in the UDRMP; and 3) the overcrossing from the second phase of the
Deschutes Junction interchange.
The current proposal has the benefit of requiring the least amount of EFU land. The
alignment immediately abuts the eastern edge of the BNSF right of way, which already
cuts through EFU land and means the disruption to agricultural practices would be
minimized as when compared to an alignment that bisected the various EFU lands. In
the latter case, agricultural vehicles would have to cross a rural, high-speed arterial. The
current alignment also minimizes the conflicts with training exercises on the Biak training
grounds.
The transportation corridor identified in the UDRMP is in an adopted federal planning
document for federal lands. Any alternative that deviates from this identified corridor
would require amending the UDRMP. Given the years the federal, state, and county
spent selecting a corridor that preserved transportation and utility corridors while
minimizing disruption to the natural environment it is highly doubtful there is a superior
alignment for 19th Street.
Given the transportation corridor in the UDRMP is set, the only area the alignment could
vary would be for the six tax lots from Deschutes Junction north (161226A000300,
161226A000401, 1612230000600, 1612230000304, 1612240000300, and
1612240000200). Swinging the alignment to the east would disrupt existing rural
residences and the Boonesborough rural subdivision. Such a realignment would cause
additional energy consumption due to out of direction travel and consume even more
EFU land due to the realignment.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 17
(b) The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses
or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce
adverse impacts. The exception shall describe how the proposed
use will be rendered compatible with adjacent land uses. The
exception shall demonstrate that the proposed use is situated in
such a manner as to be compatible with surrounding natural
resources and resource management or production practices.
"Compatible" is not intended as an absolute term meaning no
interference or adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses.
FINDING: The future 19th Street, being located along the boundary of the EFU property,
is not incompatible with adjacent uses in the EFU zone. The history of “farm to market
roads” indicates a road is necessary for agricultural uses. The 100-foot wide swath of
the future 19th Street will be located abutting the existing railroad right of way. The few
properties pursing agriculture have already made allowances for conducting farm and
ranch operations in the vicinity of BNSF, a transportation facility. The current land use
application is only to gain a goal exception and amend the TSP map to include the 19th
Street alignment. The county will need to apply for a conditional use permit (CUP) to
construct 19th Street and can identify specific mitigations at that time. Additionally, the
100 feet of right of way will leave sufficient land for each of the EFU zone properties to
continue to conduct the uses allowed on agricultural land.
The road could provide improved access to the affected properties and by extension
access to markets.
(3) If the exception involves more than one area for which the
reasons and circumstances are the same, the areas may be
considered as a group. Each of the areas shall be identified on a
map or their location otherwise described, and keyed to the
appropriate findings.
FINDING: This affected area is comprised of 1513000000130 just south of Redmond;
1612120001200 and 1612130000503, which are about midway between south
Redmond and Deschutes Junction; and the six tax lots extending northward from
Deschutes Junction, 161226A000300, 161226A000401, 1612230000600,
1612230000304, 1612240000300, and 1612240000200. While this proposal involves
multiple lots, it does not involve more than one area for which the reasons exception
must be sought.
(4) For the expansion of an unincorporated community defined
under OAR 660.022-0010, or for an urban unincorporated community
pursuant to OAR 660022-0040(2), the exception requirements of
subsections (2)(b), (c) and (d) of this rule are modified to also
include the following:
FINDING: This part of the rule does not apply as the applicant is not proposing the
expansion of an unincorporated community or an urban unincorporated community.
5. Section 660-004-0022, Reasons Necessary to Justify an Exception Under
Goal 2, Part II(c)
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 18
A. OAR 660-004-0022, Reasons Necessary to Justify an
Exception Under Goal 2, Part II(c)
An exception under Goal 2, Part II(c) can be taken for any use not
allowed by the applicable goal(s). The types of reasons that may or
may not be used to justify certain types of uses not allowed on
resource lands are set forth in the following sections of this rule:
(1) For uses not specifically provided for in subsequent sections of
this rule or OAR 660, Division 014, the reasons shall justify why the
state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply.
Such reasons include but are not limited to the following:
(a) There is a demonstrated need for the proposed use or activity,
based on one or more of the requirements of Statewide Goals 3 to
19; and either
FINDING: The proper extension and alignment of 19th Street proposed by the applicant
is needed to build the street network envisioned by the City of Redmond, Deschutes
County, and the federal government. The road is planned as a rural arterial.
Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, calls for a “timely, orderly and efficient
arrangement of public facilities and services…” The proposed 19th Street would provide
a north-south alternative to US 97 and serve as a rural-scale grid street between Bend
and Redmond by connecting to Deschutes Market Road.
This would be a higher-speed, two-lane road through agriculturally zoned land with
access only provided to parcels that would be otherwise landlocked. Such an access
management strategy would be consistent with Goal 11 Guideline A.2, “public
facilities...for rural areas should be provided at levels appropriate for rural use only and
should not support urban uses.”
Goal 12, Transportation, seeks to “provide and encourage a safe, convenient and
economic transportation system.”
Goal 12 Guideline A.1 calls for area-wide transportation plans be revised in coordination
with local governments. This application is consistent with that direction.
Guideline A.2 calls for using existing rights of way. While not an existing right of way,
the 1/2-mile-wide transportation corridor identified in the UDRMP follows the intent and
spirit of that guideline by locating 19th in a place set aside expressly for transportation
purposes.
Guideline A.3 seeks to restrain roads from being placed on Class I or II soils unless no
feasible alternative exists. The lands 19th street would use are not Class I or II soils.
Guideline A.4 states major transportation facilities should avoid dividing existing
economic farm units if possible. The alignment abuts BNSF right to way which results in
achieving that purpose.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 19
Guideline A.5 relates to modal choice and density. While 19th crosses large EFU
parcels, the road could be used by buses to provide a mass transit link between
Northeast Bend and southeast Redmond as well as the rural subdivisions near
Deschutes Junction.
Guideline A.6 suggests plans should consider the carrying capacity of the natural world.
The road will not have any adverse affect upon the air, land, and water in the area. The
road will not have any stoplights, so cars will not be discharging pollution from idling in
traffic or accelerating from a light, instead they will be constantly at-speed which is when
pollution emissions are the lowest. The BLM land is not in agricultural production so
carrying capacity will not be significantly affected. There is no standing or flowing water
on the route, save for a canal near the southern terminus; the road will have no adverse
affect upon the canal.
(b) A resource upon which the proposed use or activity is dependent
can be reasonably obtained only at the proposed exception site and
the use or activity requires a location near the resource. An
exception based on this subsection must include an analysis of the
market area to be served by the proposed use or activity. That
analysis must demonstrate that the proposed exception site is the
only one within that market area at which the resource depended
upon can reasonably be obtained; or
FINDING: The proposed road right of way is not dependent upon a resource. Thus, this
provision is not applicable to the proposed exception.
(c) The proposed use or activity has special features or qualities that
necessitate its location on or near the proposed exception site.
FINDING: The road use proposed is a rural arterial. This road must be located as
planned in order to achieve an orderly and efficient road system that offers a parallel
local alternative to US 97. The location is pre-determined by 1) southern terminus of
existing 19th Street in City of Redmond; 2) the identified transportation and utility corridor
in the UDRMP; and 3) alignment of Deschutes Junction Interchange, Phase II as set
forth in CU-08-42 and A-08-13. The alignment of 19th Street is a critical element to
developing a functional network of streets to ensure the proper flow of traffic within a
rural segment between Bend and Redmond. There is no non-exception site that can
accomplish these objectives given the stated geographic constraints.
6. Section 660-012-0060, Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
(1) Where an amendments to a functional plan, acknowledged
comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation which significantly
affect an existing or planned transportation 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:
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 20
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned
transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an
adopted plan);
FINDING: The proposal will amend the map to create a rural arterial, the southern
extension of 19th Street from Redmond to Deschutes Junction. Creation, however, is
different from changing an existing or planned transportation facility.
As for the streets to which this arterial will be connected, the proposed amendment will
not change the functional classification of 19th Street in Redmond. Nor will the
amendment change the functional classification of Deschutes Market Road.
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification
system;
FINDING: No changes are proposed to the standards that implement the functional
classification system for Deschutes County roads.
(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; or
FINDING: The Deschutes County Code at 23.60(D) Table 1, “Road Functional
Classification,” indicates an arterial is intended to link “…the most important intra-county
travel corridors.” DCC 23.64.030(1)(b)(4) requires the county “shall consider roadway
function, classification, and capacity as criteria for plan map amendments and zone
changes to assure the proposed land uses do not exceed the planned capacity of the
transportation system.” DCC 17.48.210(B) states “The creation of access onto arterials
and collectors is prohibited unless there is no other possible means of accessing the
parcel.” Therefore county operational policies and access management spacing policies
will ensure travel and access will be consistent with the road’s rural arterial designation
over the 20-year planning horizon of the TSP.
(B) Reduce 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.
FINDING: The county at DCC 17.16.115(H)(1)(a) defines minimum acceptable Level of
Service (LOS) for a new facility is LOS C. For a two-lane rural road under county
jurisdiction, LOS C is defined as being between 3,401 and 5,700 average daily traffic
(ADT) volumes, according to DCC 23.64.080, Table 5.2.T2 “Maximum Average Daily
Traffic Allowed for Various Levels of Service.” In 2030 the proposed 19th Street is
expected to have 1,100 daily vehicles, according to a traffic forecast from ODOT’s
Transportation Planning Analysis Unit (TPAU). TPAU is creating the transportation
model for the ongoing update of the Deschutes County TSP.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 21
(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 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.
(3) Notwithstanding sections (1) and (2) of this rule, a local
government may approve an amendment that would significantly
affect an existing transportation facility without assuring that the
allowed land uses are consistent with the function, capacity and
performance standards of the facility where:
(a) The facility is already performing below the minimum acceptable
performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan
on the date the amendment application is submitted;
(b) In the absence of the amendment, planned transportation
facilities, improvements and services as set forth in section (4) of
this rule would not be adequate to achieve consistency with the
identified function, capacity or performance standard for that facility
by the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP;
(c) Development resulting from the amendment will, at a minimum,
mitigate the impacts of the amendment in a manner that avoids
further degradation to the performance of the facility by the time of
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 22
the development through one or a combination of transportation
improvements or measures;
(d) The amendment does not involve property located in an
interchange area as defined in paragraph (4)(d)(C); and
(e) For affected state highways, ODOT provides a written statement
that the proposed funding and timing for the identified mitigation
improvements or measures are, at a minimum, sufficient to avoid
further degradation to the performance of the affected state
highway. However, if a local government provides the
appropriate ODOT regional office with written notice of a
proposed amendment in a manner that provides ODOT
reasonable opportunity to submit a written statement into the
record of the local government proceeding, and ODOT does not
provide a written statement, then the local government may
proceed with applying subsections (a) through (d) of this
section.
FINDING: Deschutes County sets performance standard of LOS C for new facilities and
LOS D for existing roads in DCC 17.16.115(H)(1)(a). Table 2.2.T3 in the TSP ties LOS
standards to average daily traffic (ADT). LOS C is between 3,401 and 5,700 ADT and
LOS D is between 5,701 to 9,600. These service standards by daily traffic volume also
appear in DCC 23.64.080. According to ODOT’s modeling unit, in 2030 19th Street is
expected to carry 1,100 ADT. Thus, the map amendment has no significant effect.
(4) Determinations under sections (1)-(3) of this rule shall be
coordinated with affected transportation facility and service
providers and other affected local governments.
(a) In determining whether an amendment has a significant effect on
an existing or planned transportation facility under subsection (1)(c)
of this rule, local governments shall rely on existing transportation
facilities and services and on the planned transportation facilities,
improvements and services set forth in subsections (b) and (c)
below.
(b) Outside of interstate interchange areas, the following are
considered planned facilities, improvements and services:
(A) Transportation facilities, improvements or services that
are funded for construction or implementation in the
Statewide Transportation Improvement Program or a locally
or regionally adopted transportation improvement program or
capital improvement plan or program of a transportation
service provider.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 23
(B) Transportation facilities, improvements or services that
are authorized in a local transportation system plan and for
which a funding plan or mechanism is in place or approved.
These include, but are not limited to, transportation facilities,
improvements or services for which: transportation systems
development charge revenues are being collected; a local
improvement district or reimbursement district has been
established or will be established prior to development; a
development agreement has been adopted; or conditions of
approval to fund the improvement have been adopted.
(C) Transportation facilities, improvements or services in a
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) area that are part
of the area's federally-approved, financially constrained
regional transportation system plan.
(D) Improvements to state highways that are included as
planned improvements in a regional or local transportation
system plan or comprehensive plan when ODOT provides a
written statement that the improvements are reasonably likely
to be provided by the end of the planning period.
(E) Improvements to regional and local roads, streets or other
transportation facilities or services that are included as
planned improvements in a regional or local transportation
system plan or comprehensive plan when the local
government(s) or transportation service provider(s)
responsible for the facility, improvement or service provides
a written statement that the facility, improvement or service is
reasonably likely to be provided by the end of the planning
period.
(c) Within interstate interchange areas, the improvements included
in (b)(A)-(C) are considered planned facilities, improvements and
services, except where:
(A) ODOT provides a written statement that the proposed
funding and timing of mitigation measures are sufficient to
avoid a significant adverse impact on the Interstate Highway
system, then local governments may also rely on the
improvements identified in paragraphs (b)(D) and (E) of this
section; or
(B) There is an adopted interchange area management plan,
then local governments may also rely on the improvements
identified in that plan and which are also identified in
paragraphs (b)(D) and (E) of this section.
(d) As used in this section and section (3):
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 24
(A) Planned interchange means new interchanges and
relocation of existing interchanges that are authorized in an
adopted transportation system plan or comprehensive plan;
(B) Interstate highway means Interstates 5, 82, 84, 105, 205
and 405; and
(C) Interstate interchange area means:
(i) Property within one-half mile of an existing or
planned interchange on an Interstate Highway as
measured from the center point of the interchange; or
(ii) The interchange area as defined in the Interchange
Area Management Plan adopted as an amendment to
the Oregon Highway Plan.
(e) For purposes of this section, a written statement provided
pursuant to paragraphs (b)(D), (b)(E) or (c)(A) provided by ODOT, a
local government or transportation facility provider, as appropriate,
shall be conclusive in determining whether a transportation facility,
improvement or service is a planned transportation facility,
improvement or service. In the absence of a written statement, a
local government can only rely upon planned transportation
facilities, improvements and services identified in paragraphs (b)(A)-
(C) to determine whether there is a significant effect that requires
application of the remedies in section (2).
FINDING: The county used ODOT staff to forecast the 2030 traffic volumes on 19th
Street and worked with ODOT, City of Redmond, and BLM staff to site 19th Street’s
alignment during the UDRMP process. The county assumed only the presence of the
Deschutes Junction Interchange, Phase II; the funded project is under construction and
slated for fall 2009 completion. ODOT classifies US 97 as a Statewide Highway and
thus it is not an interstate.
7. Section 660-012-0065, Transportation Improvements on Rural Lands
FINDING: OAR 660-012-0065 prescribes rules that apply to transportation
improvements on rural lands that do not require goal exceptions. The county reviewed
the language of 660-012-0065(3)(b) which describes transportation improvements
allowed either outright or conditionally by ORS 215.213 and 215.283 or OAR Chapter
660, Division 6 (Forest Lands). Additionally, staff reviewed the language at 660-012-
0065(3)(g) for new access roads and collectors. Staff reviewed, as well, the language
for local travel facilities as described at 660-012-0065(3)(o). The proposed 19th Street,
an arterial that will provide a link between Northeast Bend and southern Redmond, does
not meet the definition of an allowed use under 660-012-065. The county must
demonstrate the need for Goal 3 exception for a transportation improvement on rural
land as set forth by 660-012-0070.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 25
8. OAR 660-012-0070, Exceptions for Transportation Improvements on
Rural Land
FINDING: This section of the administrative rule prescribes the rules that apply when a
goal exception is required in order to plan and construct a transportation system
improvement, which in this instance is 19th Street.
(1) Transportation facilities and improvements which do not meet
the requirements of OAR 660-012-0065 require an exception to be
sited on rural lands.
FINDING: The proposed road alignment requires an exception to be sited on rural lands.
It does not fit neatly into any of the exemptions provided by OAR 660-012-0065.
(2) When an exception to Goals 3, 4, 11, or 14 is required to locate a
transportation improvement on rural lands, the exception shall be
taken pursuant to ORS 197.732(1)(c), Goal 2, and this division. The
exceptions standards in OAR chapter 660, division 4 and OAR
chapter 660, division 14 shall not apply. Exceptions adopted
pursuant to this division shall be deemed to fulfill the requirements
for goal exceptions required under ORS 197.732(1)(c) and Goal 2.
FINDING: Compliance with ORS 197.732(1)(c) is addressed later in this application.
Compliance with Goal 2 and the Goal 2 rules and this division have been addressed
earlier in this application.
(3) An exception shall, at a minimum, decide need, mode, function
and general location for the proposed facility or improvement:
a) The general location shall be specified as a corridor within which
the proposed facility or improvement is to be located, including the
outer limits of the proposed location. Specific sites or areas within
the corridor may be excluded from the exception to avoid or lessen
likely adverse impacts. Where detailed design level information is
available, the exception may be specified as a specific alignment;
(b) The size, design and capacity of the proposed facility or
improvement shall be described generally, but in sufficient detail to
allow a general understanding of the likely impacts of the proposed
facility or improvement and to justify the amount of land for the
proposed transportation facility. Measures limiting the size, design
or capacity may be specified in the description of the proposed use
in order to simplify the analysis of the effects of the proposed use;
(c) The adopted exception shall include a process and standards to
guide selection of the precise design and location within the
corridor and consistent with the general description of the proposed
facility or improvement. For example, where a general location or
corridor crosses a river, the exception would specify that a bridge
crossing would be built but would defer to project development
decisions about precise location and design of the bridge within the
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 26
selected corridor subject to requirements to minimize impacts on
riparian vegetation, habitat values, etc.;
(d) Land use regulations implementing the exception may include
standards for specific mitigation measures to offset unavoidable
environmental, economic, social or energy impacts of the proposed
facility or improvement or to assure compatibility with adjacent
uses.
FINDING: The exception is to amend the Deschutes County TSP map to add 19th Street,
a future rural arterial with two travel lanes. The need for 19th Street is twofold. First, this
future county rural arterial is intended to offload traffic from US 97, which 19th Street
parallels. Complementing the reduction in US 97 traffic, 19th Street will lead to Airport
Way, which is east of the congested Yew Avenue/US 97 interchange, and thus trips on
19th Street will not travel through the Yew Avenue interchange. Second, 19th Street
would offer a potential detour should an incident close US 97.
The design of 19th Street will ensure the facility is multimodal, meaning it will
accommodate vehicles besides passenger cars and trucks. The county requires a
minimum of 3’- to 5’-shoulders on its arterials, so there will be adequate
accommodations for cyclists. Also, Cascades East Transit or other shuttle services,
particularly those with beginning and ending points at either the Redmond Airport or the
industrial lands in east Redmond, could utilize 19th Street.
The function is a rural arterial as set forth in DCC 23.60.010(D)(2)(a)(1-3) . That portion
of the county code includes goals to link cities and larger towns, provide service to
transportation corridors with trips lengths greater than those provided by collectors, and
that rural arterials be routes with “relatively high overall travel speeds, with minimum
interference to through movement.”
The general location was decided by the UDRMP, a collaborative planning process
between the federal, state, and local governments. The northern end ties into an
existing City of Redmond street and the southern terminus is set by the Deschutes
Junction Interchange Phase II design. The precise location will be decided during
project development and will minimize disruptions to existing agricultural practices. The
construction of 19th Street will require a conditional use permit from the county and thus
offer another opportunity for public comment and mitigation to any potential adverse
impacts to agriculture or the physical environment.
(4) To address Goal 2, Part II(c)(1) the exception shall provide
reasons justifying why the state policy in the applicable goals
should not apply. Further, the exception shall demonstrate that there
is a transportation need identified consistent with the requirements
of OAR 660-012-0030 which cannot reasonably be accommodated
through one or a combination of the following measures not
requiring an exception:
(a) Alternative modes of transportation;
(b) Traffic management measures; and
(c) Improvements to existing transportation facilities.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 27
FINDING: The future 19th Street is consistent with 660-012-0030 in that both the Oregon
Transportation Plan (OTP) and the Oregon Highway Plan (OHP) stress the need for
parallel, local alternatives to offer a viable route to the state highway system. ODOT is
in the beginning efforts to conduct a refinement plan for Redmond Re-Route, Phase II,
which is an extension of the newly realigned US 97 south from its current southern
terminus. The agency has stated US 97 will be at 90% of capacity south of OR 126 by
2030. The refinement’s draft scope of work at key issue #7 on page 3 states, “The
Bureau of Land Management’s Upper Deschutes Resource Management Plan (UDRMP,
EIS) objectives, conditions, and standards need to be addressed.” The state has
therefore recognized the need for 19th Street.
In terms of alternative forms of transportation, the most recent volume data (2008) on
US 97 indicates the volumes are too high for buses or bicycles to make a dent in the
daily flow. The Redmond Automatic Traffic Recorder, 09-020, is 1.40 miles south of
Yew and recorded an average daily traffic (ADT) of 28,000 vehicles. The ADT 0.10
miles south of Quarry Avenue was 25,800 and 0.10 miles south of Deschutes Market
Road was 25,500. Although there is a rail line adjacent to US 97, the BNSF only offers
freight service at this time and has not expressed any desire to begin passenger rail
service in the Madras-La Pine corridor.
Traffic management measures to improve operations on US 97 could include a raised
median, frontage roads connecting grade-separated interchanges, and parallel local
alternative routes such as 19th Street. Yet, given US 97 between Deschutes Junction
and Yew Avenue is a rural segment with few driveways, such access management
strategies as consolidating or closing direct approaches and installing raised medians
would improve safety, but not add much capacity. This is because the plurality of the US
97 traffic traveling between Bend and Redmond comes from those two cities, not the
rural lands between these places.
Adding travel lanes to existing US 97 would also result in travel lanes being constructed
on resource land given the extensive EFU zoning between Bend and Redmond. Yet,
from a livability standpoint, a six-lane cross-section is not desirable.
Improving South Canal Boulevard/Old Bend-Redmond Highway would not divert from
the Yew Avenue/US 97 interchange traffic bound for the Redmond Airport or industrial
lands in eastern Redmond. This is because South Canal/Old Bend-Redmond lies to the
west of the interchange, requiring eastbound traffic would have to pass through Yew/97
interchange, whereas 19th Street connects to Airport Way to the east of both the Yew
Avenue/97 interchange and the BNSF tracks. Therefore, the chosen location for this
new road is the only viable option.
(5) To address Goal 2, Part II(c)(2) the exception shall demonstrate
that non-exception locations cannot reasonably accommodate the
proposed transportation improvement or facility. The exception
shall set forth the facts and assumptions used as the basis for
determining why the use requires a location on resource land
subject to Goals 3 or 4.
FINDING: The applicant's findings regarding the Goal 2 exceptions rules demonstrate
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 28
that non-exception locations cannot reasonably accommodate the proposed
transportation improvement. The proposed road cannot be reasonably accommodated
on non-resource land as nearly all of the land between US 97 east to the Crook County
line is zoned EFU. The proposed 19th Street needs to be east of the BNSF to 1) be
consistent with the transportation corridor identified in the UDRMP; 2) align with the pre-
existing City of Redmond 19th Street; 3) provide an option for the traveling public to use
a county road to access the Redmond Airport, the county fairgrounds, and east
Redmond; and 4) align with the Deschutes Junction Phase II interchange.
(6) To determine the reasonableness of alternatives to an exception
under sections (4) and (5) of this rule, cost, operational feasibility,
economic dislocation and other relevant factors shall be addressed.
The thresholds chosen to judge whether an alternative method or
location cannot reasonably accommodate the proposed
transportation need or facility must be justified in the exception.
(a) In addressing sections (4) and (5) of this rule, the exception shall
identify and address alternative methods and locations that are
potentially reasonable to accommodate the identified transportation
need.
(b) Detailed evaluation of such alternatives is not required when an
alternative does not meet an identified threshold.
(c) Detailed evaluation of specific alternative methods or locations
identified by parties during the local exceptions proceedings is not
required unless the parties can specifically describe with supporting
facts why such methods or locations can more reasonably
accommodate the identified transportation need, taking into
consideration the identified thresholds.
FINDING:
Cost
The goal exception is needed for the non-federal parcels already identified. The current
construction estimate for 19th Street is $6.2 million. Three other options provide a
construction cost comparison; all estimates were prepared by George Kolb, County
Engineer.
Option 1 (the previously referenced Exhibit 7): This $7.44 million alignment was kept
completely on BLM land. This estimate does not include the additional right of way
needed for 19th Street or the realignment and reconstruction of Morrill Road.
The road would hug the eastern boundaries of those lots, then swing southeast at about
the 36-acre Parsons property (161226A000401) to reach Morrill Road while staying east
of two EFU parcels of approximately 20 acres each owned by Randall and Christina
Reid (1612000012300 and 1612000012301). From there the alignment would have to
tie into Morrill Road, which is an unpaved legacy road. The costs to a) build such a
realignment from the south end of the UDRMP corridor to Morrill to a county rural arterial
standard, then b) rebuilding to Morrill to current county rural arterial standard for the
segment from 19th Street intersection west to Deschutes Junction and then c)
redesigning and rebuilding the Deschutes Junction/19th Street so that the connection
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 29
comes from the east instead of the previously approved north, would be significantly
more than the proposed alignment and cost prohibitive.
Option 2 (the previously referenced Exhibit 8): This $10.56 million alignment would
lie between US 97 and the BNSF tracks. At the southwest edge of the DSL property a
bridge would take 19th over the BNSF tracks. A second bridge would bring 19th Street
back to the east of the BNSF tracks at approximately 1612240000200 to connect 19th
Street to Deschutes Junction, Phase II interchange.
There are additional costs besides the added distance to construct. To keep 19th Street
on federal land, which would not need an exception to state planning goals, the UDRMP
would have to be amended. This would entail significant staff time for natural and
cultural resource inventories to establish a new transportation and utility corridor. As the
requesting agency, the financial burden would fall to the county.
Economic Dislocation
As these are all large parcels, there would be minimal disruption to agricultural practices.
No homes would be relocated by the 100-foot-wide alignment.
Operational Feasibility
The proposed goal exception is the only option that creates an alignment that
corresponds to the existing 19th Street in Redmond, the transportation corridor already
preserved by the UDRMP, and the Deschutes Junction Phase II interchange. Any other
alignment would require severe reversing curves between the southern end of the
UDRMP and Deschutes Junction, which would be contrary to the best engineering
practices and county road standards.
Safety
The proposed road alignment and location is the safest for the numerous reasons
discussed earlier.
(7) To address Goal 2, Part II(c)(3), the exception shall:
(a) Compare the economic, social, environmental and energy
consequences of the proposed location and other alternative
locations requiring exceptions. The exception shall describe the
characteristics of each alternative location considered by the
jurisdiction for which an exception might be taken, the typical
advantages and disadvantages of using the location for the
proposed transportation facility or improvement, and the typical
positive and negative consequences resulting from the
transportation facility or improvement at the proposed location with
measures designed to reduce adverse impacts;
FINDING: The alternative locations and why they are not appropriate is discussed
above. However, in case the reviewing body disagrees with the applicant’s
assessment, the following findings are provided.
Any alternative to the west of the tracks and east of US 97 would require additional
bridges over the BNSF tracks to reach both the southern terminus of the existing 19th
Street in Redmond and the northern terminus of Deschutes Junction Phase II
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 30
interchange improvements. Additionally, an alignment west of the railroad and east of
US 97 would not be consistent with the Deschutes Junction Phase II interchange site
plan as approved in CU-08-42 and A-08-13.
Any alternative east of the transportation corridor identified in the UDRMP would require
amending the UDRMP to identify a new transportation corridor. It can be assumed that
the UDRMP EIS has already identified and selected the transportation corridor with the
least, if any, environmental, economic, social, or energy adverse impacts.
Finally, the alignment identified in the UDRMP is the shortest alignment possible
between existing 19th Street in Redmond and Deschutes Junction. A longer alignment
would result in increased energy consumption to build and the resulting out of direction
travel by users would also result in increased energy consumption.
(b) Determine whether the net adverse impacts associated with the
proposed exception site are significantly more adverse than the net
impacts from other locations which would also require an exception.
A proposed exception location would fail to meet this requirement
only if the affected local government concludes that the impacts
associated with it are significantly more adverse than the other
identified exception sites. The exception shall include the reasons
why the consequences of the needed transportation facility or
improvement at the proposed exception location are not
significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same
proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other
than the proposed location. Where the proposed goal exception
location is on resource lands subject to Goals 3 or 4, the exception
shall include the facts used to determine which resource land is
least productive; the ability to sustain resource uses near the
proposed use; and the long-term economic impact on the general
area caused by irreversible removal of the land from the resource
base; and
FINDING: While there will be a loss of irrigated EFU land at the south end, there is no
alternative that does not require building on irrigated EFU land. Air photo analysis was
used to identify irrigated agriculture. On the properties between the BNSF and US 97
the lands are irrigated EFU in the vicinity of Deschutes Junction. For the alternative to
go farther east of the transportation corridor identified in the UDRMP, there are irrigated
EFU lands as well. Additionally, if 19th were swung southeast of its currently proposed
alignment it would ultimately intersect Morrill Road, which is classified as a local road.
Morrill Road would have to be reclassified as a rural arterial and then reconstructed to
meet the county’s standard for that classification.
To upgrade Morrill Road to handle 19th Street traffic wishing to go west to Deschutes
Junction, the existing right of way would have to be widened by at least 40’ to meet
Deschutes County standards for a rural arterial. The lands along the affected segment
of Morrill are also irrigated EFU.
In summary, any other alternative would also consume as much or more irrigated EFU
lands, have higher construction costs, and impose out of direction travel on users. The
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 31
proposed 19th Street has the least amount of adverse effects among all alternatives
requiring a goal exception.
(c) The evaluation of the consequences of general locations or
corridors need not be site-specific, but may be generalized
consistent with the requirements of section (3) of this rule. Detailed
evaluation of specific alternative locations identified by parties
during the local exceptions proceeding is not required unless such
locations are specifically described with facts to support the
assertion that the locations have significantly fewer net adverse
economic, social, environmental and energy impacts than the
proposed exception location.
FINDING: No alternative locations that would require a goal exception achieve the goals
of 1) consistency with the transportation corridor identified in the UDRMP; 2) are
consistent with the Deschutes Junction Interchange Phase II site plan approved in CU-
08-42 and A-08-13; 3) provide a parallel route to US 97 that would relieve the Yew/97
interchange; and 4) would be an efficient geometric design that would meet Deschutes
County design standards and minimize costs; and 5) would be a shorter route and thus
impact a lesser amount of EFU land.
(8) To address Goal 2, Part II(c)(4), the exception shall:
(a) Describe the adverse effects that the proposed transportation
improvement is likely to have on the surrounding rural lands and
land uses, including increased traffic and pressure for non-farm or
highway oriented development on areas made more accessible by
the transportation improvement;
FINDING: As explained above, the exception will not have an adverse effect on
surrounding rural lands and land uses. The land adjoining the exception area is used for
agricultural use and this road alignment will still allow for a viable use of those private
land for agricultural uses. The land in federal ownership has been identified in the
UDRMP for preservation of natural resources and this road will not interfere with that
preservation purpose.
As part of the county’s ongoing update of the comprehensive plan, the county is drafting
a subarea plan for Deschutes Junction. The area residents and property owners on the
east side of US 97 have stated they desire to preserve the rural environment and
oppose any commercial development.
The 19th Street alignment has the BNSF on the western border of the road’s right of way.
No development pressure can occur there as there is no physical room to develop.
Adding the route to the map will not directly result in any increased traffic.
(b) Demonstrate how the proposed transportation improvement is
compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through
measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. Compatible is not
intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or adverse
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 32
impacts of any type with adjacent uses; and
FINDING: Roughly 83% of this planned rural arterial will be located in a half-mile wide
corridor explicitly reserved in the UDRMP as a transportation and utility corridor. A rural
arterial only needs a minimum of 100 feet of right of way. Placing a 100-foot swath
within a half-mile wide corridor would give more than ample room to allow for any minor
realignments to ensure compatibility or reduce adverse affects to adjacent land uses.
Lastly, the proposed 19th Street will abut the BNSF railroad, an existing transportation
facility.
(c) Adopt as part of the exception, facility design and land use
measures which minimize accessibility of rural lands from the
proposed transportation facility or improvement and support
continued rural use of surrounding lands.
FINDING: The Deschutes County Code at 23.64.030(1)(b)(4) requires the county “shall
consider roadway function, classification, and capacity as criteria for plan map
amendments and zone changes to assure the proposed land uses do not exceed the
planned capacity of the transportation system.” DCC 17.48.210(B) states “The creation
of access onto arterials and collectors is prohibited unless there is no other possible
means of accessing the parcel.” Therefore, county operational policies and access
management spacing policies will ensure travel and access will be consistent with the
road’s rural arterial designation. The county road approach permit process will minimize
accessibility to adjacent rural lands from the proposed transportation facility and will
support the continued rural use of the adjacent rural land owned by the applicant.
3. Conformance with Oregon Revised Statutes
ORS 197.732 Goal exceptions; criteria; rules; review.
FINDING: OAR Chapter 660, Division 4 implements this statute. Therefore, the above
responses to the criteria in that OAR demonstrate compliance with the statute.
C. Title 22, Deschutes County Procedures Ordinance
22.12.010. Hearing Required.
No legislative change shall be adopted without review by the Planning
Commission and a public hearing before the Board of County
Commissioners. Public hearings before the Planning Commission shall be
set at the discretion of the Planning Director, unless otherwise required by
state law
FINDING: The county has scheduled a public hearing on this land use application for
December 17, 2009, beginning at 5:30 p.m. in the Barnes and Sawyer Room, Deschutes
Services Center, 117 NW Lafayette, Bend, OR.
22.12.020. Notice.
A. Published Notice.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 33
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. 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.
Individual notices were sent to affected property owners as well as Central Oregon
media. The hearing was also posted on the website of the Deschutes County Planning
Commission in a timely manner.
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 Road Department as
part of the county’s update of the TSP.
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 will be heard before the Deschutes County Planning Commission
on December 17, 2009, at 5:30 p.m. and the Planning Commission will make a
recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners, which will also hold a public
hearing on a date yet uncertain.
22.12.050. Final Decision.
All legislative changes shall be adopted by ordinance.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 34
FINDING: These findings are in support of Ordinance 2009-020, 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: A goal exception for 19th Street is consistent with the intent to balance
regional and state needs. A future rural arterial between Redmond and Deschutes
Junction could serve the transportation needs of both local residents and through
travelers. Local residents could use 19th as a “back way” to Redmond, which would
reduce traffic on US 97. The future 19th Street would provide another route for cyclists
and could be used by transit as well.
23.60.010(D) Road System Configuration
Functional classification describes how the public road system should
operate. Roads are grouped by their similar characteristics in providing
mobility and/or land access. Within the county there are six rural road
classifications and nine urban classifications. An explanation of the
various road classifications used in Deschutes County is found in Table 1.
There are three designated urban areas within the county where the urban
standards generally apply, with the rest of the county using the rural
standards. Table 2.2.T1 in the Transportation chapter of the Resource
Element, provides a mileage and maintenance responsibility breakdown of
the various county road classifications.
FINDING: The requested land use action is to amend the TSP map to add 19th Street, a
future rural arterial. A rural arterial, according to Table 1 “Road Functional
Classification” accomplishes the following:
y Links cities, larger towns and other major traffic generators, providing
interregional and inter-county services; and
y Spaced at distances so that all developed lands are with reasonable distance of
an arterial highway; and
y Provide services to corridors with trip length and travel density greater than that
predominately served by rural collector or local systems
y Serves the more important intra-county travel corridors
y Movement of goods and services
y Includes Federal Forest Highways
The proposed 19th Street will link Bend and Redmond. The northern terminus connects
to the existing City of Redmond’s 19th Street. The 19th/Airport Way intersection is
approximately a ¼-mile east of the US 97/Yew Avenue interchange. At the southern
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 35
terminus, 19th Street connects to the Deschutes Junction Interchange Phase II. Thus
19th Street is spaced at a reasonable distance to an arterial highway, in this case US 97.
The proposed 19th Street will provide an alternative route to motorists traveling between
the two largest cities in Central Oregon. The north-south route between Bend and
Redmond is an important intra-county corridor as can be seen by the presence of Old
Bend-Redmond Highway and US 97.
2. 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.
23.64.020(1)(b)
Have an ongoing transportation planning process and maintain a
transportation plan that meets the needs of the county and its residents.
The transportation plan and facilities of Deschutes County shall be
coordinated with the plans and facilities of incorporated cities within
Deschutes County, adjacent counties, and the State of Oregon.
FINDING: Road Department and Planning staff have identified the need for a parallel
local route to meet the transportation needs of Deschutes County residents. The City of
Redmond TSP plans for the future presence of 19th Street and the City of Bend has also
expressed a desire for an improved Deschutes Market Road/19th Street corridor to
accommodate travel between northeast Bend and Redmond. Additionally, the State of
Oregon through its transportation agency, ODOT, and state plans such as the Oregon
Transportation Plan and the Oregon Highway Plan, has stressed the need for local
roads to provide relief to traffic on state facilities.
23.64.030, Arterial and collector roads
23.64.030(1) County road network. The findings in the TSP conclude that
the county road network currently in place, except for several specific
segments, should be adequate to the county needs over the next twenty
years. Given the rural nature of Deschutes County and the fact that the
majority of new development will take place on existing lots with existing
access, few additional roads are anticipated. New road corridors to
isolated subdivisions and new roads linking urban and rural areas are the
main exceptions…
FINDING: The future rural arterial of 19th Street will be an arterial that provides alternate
access between south Redmond and rural areas between Redmond and the Deschutes
Junction neighborhood and, thus, links urban and rural areas of the county.
23.64.030(1)(b)(2) Deschutes County shall not add any miles of new road to
the system unless the following issues are satisfied:
a. The need for the road can be clearly demonstrated;
b. The County can financially absorb the additional maintenance
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 36
requirements;
c. The condition of the road proposed for acceptance into the
County system must meet County road standards;
d. An accrued benefit can be shown to the County’s economic
growth; and
e. An overall increase in efficiency in the County road network can
be demonstrated
FINDING: The need for 19th Street is to provide an alternate route to US 97. The TSP
at 23.64.030(1)(a) has a goal to “[E]stablish a transportation system, supportive of a
geographically distributed and diversified industrial base, while also providing a safe,
efficient network for residential mobility and tourism.” The future 19th Street will support
the industrial development of DSL property to the south of Redmond, enable residents to
more easily travel between northeast Bend and southern Redmond, and will provide
access to the Deschutes County Fairgrounds and the Redmond Airport. Regarding the
latter two, one is a tourism destination and the other provides a tourism gateway to
Central Oregon.
BOCC Resolution 2009-118 recognizes the county will consider the long-term financial
aspects before accepting new roads into the county’s system. However, BOCC 2009-
118, Section 4 states [“T]hat the Board may establish roads that are functionally
classified as Arterials or Collectors.” 19th Street would be an arterial.
The current land use is to amend a TSP map and approve an exception to Goal 3.
Subsequent to approving this land use, the county will need to apply for a conditional
use permit (CUP) to build 19th Street. DCC 17.36, Design Standards, and 17.48, Design
and Construction Standards, will apply to 19th Street when it is built. These chapters
ensure the road will be constructed to county standards.
The accrued benefit to the county’s economic growth is supporting continued agricultural
practices, provide a potential secondary access to DSL land should it be rezoned for
industrial use and provide a non-highway link between the later phases of the City of
Bend’s Juniper Ridge project and Redmond. The final benefit is providing an alternate
route to U.S. 97, thereby avoiding the congestion of the Yew Avenue interchange and
any attendant delays to the movement of goods and services.
Finally, 19th Street will fill a gap in the county’s rural-scale grid system. Currently, only
Old Bend-Redmond/South Canal Boulevard provides a parallel alternate route to US 97
between Deschutes Junction and Redmond. By providing a complementary route on the
east side of US 97, the future 19th Street will make the county’s road network more
efficient.
23.64.040, Access Management
23.64.040(1)(a) Establish an access management system adequate to
protect the quality and function of the arterial and collector system.
FINDING: DCC 17.48.020 and its Table A sets the design specifications for county
roads. DCC 17.48.090 sets access management spacing standards and DCC
17.48.210(B) discusses prohibiting new accesses onto arterials and collectors unless
there is other way to access the parcel. Thus the county has in place ordinances to
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 37
ensure the quality and function of the future 19th Street.
23.64.040(2)(c) Wherever practical, access to state highways shall be
provided via frontage roads, alternative local roads or other means, rather
than direct access to the highway.
FINDING: The future 19th Street would provide an alternative local road to US 97
between Deschutes Junction and Redmond as well as northeast Bend and Redmond.
3. Conformance with Chapter 23.88, Comprehensive Plan, Agriculture
Section 23.88.010. Agricultural Lands.
The protection of farmland is a public policy goal of the federal government
(USDA, Secretary's Memo #1828, Revised, Oct. 30, 1978), most states in the
United States and many other countries. In Oregon, the 1975 Planning
Goals, as amended, set statewide standards which must be met by local
governments. For farmlands, ORS 215 and 197 and OAR 660, Division 5 set
forth the criteria for compliance. The principal concept is that standards in
the EFU zones must provide protection for the continuation of commercial-
scale agriculture in the County, including farm operations, marketing
outlets and the agricultural support system.
FINDING: This portion of the comprehensive plan is silent on transportation issues;
however, a road is a conditionally allowed use on EFU land, provided the county
approves an exception to Goal 3, Agriculture. Section 23.88.010 does identify access to
markets as a critical component to continued agricultural vitality.
4. Conformance with Chapter 23.120, Goal Exception Statement
23.120.010. Introduction.
The purpose of this document is to identify the lands where Deschutes
County shall request the Oregon Land Conservation and Development
Commission grant an exception to meeting the requirements of either
Planning Goal 3 (Agricultural Lands) or Goal 4 (Forest Land). Further, this
statement shall also explain the findings and reasoning which justifies such
an exception be granted.
FINDING: The contents of this burden of proof shall become part of an attachment to a
Board decision documenting the rationale behind the decision to approve an exception
to Goal 3, Agriculture, for adding the 19th Street alignment to the Deschutes County TSP
map. The attachment will explain the findings and reasoning which justify the exception.
Conclusion
For the above reasons, the county should approve PA-09-02 to add the future 19th Street
to the Deschutes County TSP map. Actual construction will require a CUP and further
public hearings so the public can advise and comment upon the design of the road.
PA-09-2, 19th Street between Redmond and Deschutes Junction Page 38