Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-04-14 Work Session Minutes Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS WEDNESDAY, APRIL 14, 2010 ___________________________ Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Alan Unger and Tammy Baney. Also present were Dave Kanner, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Tom Anderson, Nick Lelack, Peter Gutowsky and George Read, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; David Givans, Internal Auditor; Tom Blust, Road Department; Susan Ross, Property & Facilities; Capt. Gary Decker; and approximately ten other citizens, including representatives of the media. Chair Luke opened the meeting at 1:35 p.m. 1. Action Plan for Land Conservation in South Deschutes County. Jerry Hubbard, David Ogden, both who live on Azusa Road and are involved in Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Unit 8 Special Road District, presented a concept of a conservation corridor in the area, and are asking the County and others to participate. There are 68 or more parcels classified as wetlands that could be put in the public trust. This would solve a number of problems in the area. (They referred to the area on oversized maps.) They have no financial involvement but just want to make their area better. Mr. Ogden said that some of the wetlands have not yet been mapped. Everyone is aware of the nitrate issue. Most of the properties have water less than two feet under the surface of the ground. The lots were platted long before land use, but they are not appropriate for development. The County owns about ninety properties in that area. Commissioner Luke stated that some are owned due to foreclosure and are held in the public trust for various taxing districts. Laurie Craghead said that a land exchange is allowed as long as there is no public purpose – these are for the most part designated as park. This needs to be in the public interest, or there has to be an exchange of equal value. A nonprofit would have to oversee this process, and it is not a simple undertaking. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Page 1 of 8 Pages Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Page 2 of 8 Pages Mr. Ogden said that the Road District does not want to be the entity that handles this process, but they can at least try to get it going. He added that it appears that the developer wanted to at some point drain the land, but there are springs and seepage that would not allow for this. Mr. Hubbard stated that other agencies, such as the Forest Service, are cooperating. They hope that some property owners will donate their properties if they are not suitable for residential purposes. Mr. Ogden said that he has been working with Brad Chalfant, who knows how to work with land trusts. Mr. Hubbard asked for the County’s help with identifying suitable properties and assisting with the process. Dave Kanner stated that he is not sure the County can swap these properties. Mr. Ogden said that the County owns some properties that are in high groundwater areas, and feels that the County could offer an exchange of a potential conservation easement property with another County property that is not in the wetlands, but is in the same area. Peter Gutowsky added that there is a current wetlands inventory, but it is incomplete. He added that functional wetlands help to keep nitrates out of the river. 2. Discussion of Bicycle-Pedestrian Advisory Committee Recommendations for Skyliners Road. Chair Luke opened the hearing that had been continued from this morning’s business meeting. Erik Kropp introduced Cheryl Howard of the Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee. Capt. Gary Decker said that the law allows bicyclists to move into the roadway if there is not enough room on the side. However, there is a law that a slower vehicle needs to yield to other traffic. Side by side travel is allowed as well. Cheryl Howard and Jim Stowe said they met several times to discuss this issue. They really tried to find some outcomes and identify unforeseen results. If there is a long row of riders who are required to ride single file, it will be harder for vehicles to pass them. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Page 3 of 8 Pages Another big concern is that the concept of single-file riders might make a lot of people think that this should apply to all roads. There could be unforeseen, long-term consequences. With that in mind, they focused on the educational component. They want to make sure they do not set precedence for other roads in the County. They want to develop a public education campaign, and see that the natural culture of share the road is understood. Cycling events have liability insurance coverage. They also bring a lot of good things to the community. BPAC needs to get funds for printing educational pieces, and asked the County for assistance with this process. They have talked with every bike group in the area, as well as those bicycle-related businesses. They really need to create a better atmosphere. There is a lot of national and international interest in the area, and this is not going away. The entire committee has volunteered to help with this process. Commissioner Baney asked more about signage. She asked what they think about signage that addresses the actual dangers of the road. Ms. Howard said that they are supportive of this, so people know what to expect. Many people are not from the area and may be traveling the road for the first time. This might also give pause to cyclists as to what road they may want to ride on a given day. Commissioner Baney stated that the Board does want to see a speed study done, based on the condition of the road and its use. Commissioner Luke added that it is hard to get a speed limit lowered. Commissioner Unger thanked the group for its attention and he would like to see the direction this had previously been going dropped, and go more towards an educational perspective. Ms. Howard stated that there is a lot of interest in the community based on cycling events and the economic benefits that result. Commissioner Baney observed that with the help of the Sheriff’s Office, signage and educational components, this situation could be helped. She does not support the single-file riding requirement but wants signage that warns people of potential dangers. Ms. Howard said that many of the residents were not aware of the law. No amount of education will reach all motorists and cyclists, but this should help. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Page 4 of 8 Pages Commissioners Unger and Baney did not want to proceed further with the Ordinance, as this direction seems to be more logical and helpful. Commissioner Baney stated that it was hard to limit the number of events, but felt it was necessary based on the condition of the road. Discussion took place regarding what kinds of signs might be appropriate. Ms. Howard said that they also need to rely on advertising and a media campaign to raise awareness. Commissioner Baney asked how they can track the progress made. Ms. Howard stated that the Committee can put together a proposal and bring it back to discuss with the Commissioners. Commissioner Unger added that it is not just this road, but others that are often unsafe for cyclists. Commissioner Baney requested that the Board be kept informed regarding interaction with the residents and also the progress made on potential work on the reconstruction of the road. Mr. Kanner suggested that signage certainly be placed in appropriate locations to address the locations on the road that are considered blind curves. There could be cyclists there, but also deer or other obstacles. He added that many of the drivers in the summer might be tourists, and they will notice the signs when others who live in the area might ignore them over time. Commissioner Luke closed the public hearing at this time. 3. Discussion of Code Enforcement Policy and Options. Tom Anderson referred to his memo to the Board regarding the history of Code enforcement. It is designed to be progressive, to try to get violations corrected without involving the Sheriff’s Office or other entities. For the most part, voluntary compliance is good. A notation appears on the title from the time the file on the violation is first opened. In terms of building Code violations specifically, a bill passed in the legislature last year that affects this. He and COBA (Central Oregon Builders Association) missed the fact that they have no choice; the bill removed the ability of the County to go to court. If a financial penalty is to be levied, there has to be a local administrative process. This process has not been identified or developed. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Page 5 of 8 Pages Commissioner Luke asked if someone built without a permit, occupied it, put in a drain field, added power, and so on, what would happened. He asked if under the new law, whether the courts could require compliance. Mr. Anderson stated that his Department has the ability to get an injunction if it is serious, as long as it does not involve a financial penalty. Ms. Craghead said a citation can still be used if the building is not allowed in that zone. Mr. Anderson said they will proceed with setting up this process, as it is important to be able to enforce the building Code. Mark Pilliod stated that there are limitations on the amount of fines defined in State law, but the County has to spell out the process for assessing it. Mr. Kanner asked if the County could contract out to Justice Court to handle these administrative processes, since they are set up to handle this type of thing. Mr. Pilliod said that it cannot be a judicial proceeding. However, a lawyer can be contracted to handle this in the fashion of a Hearings Officer, as this would be is different. The attorney could not act in the capacity of a Justice of the Peace. Commissioner Luke asked if a decision can be appealed. Mr. Pilliod stated that it could go to the Circuit Court. Mr. Anderson added that they tried using Justice Court some years ago and it did not work all that well. The Circuit Court is recognized as the one that carries more weight. Mr. Kanner asked how this new law affects cases that are already in court. Mr. Pilliod said this is not the right time to reply to this question. Mr. Anderson stated that there are often multiple violations on a case, but this would only affect the building Code portion. A review of the Code enforcement process is on the work plan for this coming year. Commissioner Baney said that she does believe in voluntary compliance, but not for those who blatantly disregard the law. That sets a bad precedence for other potential cases, when it may become just a cost of doing business for the violators. The level of enforcement seems to vary within the policy. There is a difference between an unintentional violation and one that is blatant. Commissioner Luke said he has no sympathy with those who violate the law. It can put others at risk if it is a health and safety issue. Commissioner Baney stated that perhaps more attention can be placed on deliberate disregard; or have people fix something before they can get another permit of any kind. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Page 6 of 8 Pages Commissioner Unger supports how the department is handling things but is sensitive to those violators who act in a blatant fashion. They create more problems for themselves in the long run. Mr. Anderson stated that for someone to say that Code enforcement is soft or ignores situations is not right. Sometimes the court proceedings can tie things up for a long time. Mr. Anderson said that there was an administrative decision to allow for a lot line adjustment on this property, and the County has ten days to call it up for review. Ms. Craghead said that there are specific reasons for calling up something on appeal. Commissioner Luke said that he already voiced concern about the amount of land allowed for the reserve drain field. Mr. Pilliod said that law enforcement and others cannot enter private property unless there is an obvious problem with health or safety. Evidence obtained that way may not be allowed in court. A search warrant is the safest way to do this unless there is clear evidence of a violation. Capt. Decker said that law enforcement can walk up to the front door unless there are signs or barriers prohibiting it. If he sees something that is an obvious violation, there could be probable cause. BANEY: Move that this file be called up for appeal before the Board. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. 4. Other Items. Before the Board was Consideration of Signature of a Letter to Oregon Housing and Community Services Supporting Putnam Pointe Affordable Housing. BANEY: Move signature. UNGER: Second. VOTE: BANEY: Yes. UNGER: Yes. LUKE: Chair votes yes. Minutes of Board of Commissioners’ Work Session Wednesday, April 14, 2010 Page 7 of 8 Pages ____________________________________ Nick Lelack gave a brief overview of the “Big Look” process that involves updating designations for resource lands. At a March work session in Salem involving several agencies, Richard Whitman of LDCD said that he would adopt Administrative Rules to clarify this once the counties have indicated they are interested in implementing the bill. They can only work with one or two counties per biennium. Jackson County was not in attendance, but Josephine County was. Dave Hunnicutt of Oregonians in Actions encouraged counties to implement the legislation, and asked Mr. Lelack about the conference. Mr. Hunnicutt stated that he understood Jackson County is also interested. The next step would be for Commissioners from both Jackson and Deschutes counties to meet with Richard Whitman on this process. Commissioner Unger asked why Jackson County is interested when they have separated themselves from the Association of Oregon Counties. Mr. Lelack said this is a separate track, looking at everything from wineries, timberland, and other issues. Commissioner Baney is on an AOC committee, and they will have to find a legislator to sponsor them. Commissioner Luke said that they do not want a court decision, but instead want to work towards common ground. Mr. Lelack stated that there is little interest in the current DLCD process of redefining agricultural lands. Commissioner Luke said that AOC is looking for some uniformity in how counties should handle their lands. This might be done by regions, but should not be done by individual counties. Commissioner Unger expressed concern about how Jackson County is handling this situation. The Commissioners will discuss this at a later date. Being no further items addressed, the meeting adjourned at 3:20 p.m.