Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-031VOL �tJi'hGE 951" - BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON An Ordinance Amending Ordi- nance PL -15, Deschutes County * L" 1 Zoning Ordinance of 1979, as * l� L^ E Amended, Rezoning Certain Property From Exclusive Farm AU Use - 20 (EFU-4 ) Zone to G 2 6 1982 Airport Development (AD) Zone,* ROSE and Declaring an Emergency. * DESCHUTES NTTERSON Y CLERK ORDINANCE NO. 82-031 WHEREAS, the City of Bend, a municipal corporation, proposed the rezoning of certain property from Exclusive Farm Use - 20 (EFU-4) Zone to Airport Development (AD) Zone; and WHEREAS, notice of hearing was given in accordance with law; and WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Planning Commission held a hearing on the proposed zone change on June 9, 1982; and WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Planning Commission recommended that the property be rezoned from Exclusive Farm Use - 20 (EFU-4) Zone to Airport Development (AD) Zone by decision dated June 23, 1982; and WHEREAS, the decision of the Deschutes County Planning Com- mission has not been appealed to the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners; now, therefore, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS as follows: Section 1. That Ordinance No. PL -15, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance of 1979, is amended to change the zoning from Exclusive Farm Use - 20 (EFU-4) Zone to Airport Development (AD) Zone for the parcel of real property described as: Tax Lots 200 and 300 in Section Twenty (20), Township Seventeen (17) South, Range Thirteen (13) East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, and Tax Lot 200 in Section Seventeen (17), Township Seventeen (17) South, Range Thirteen (13) East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon; 1 - ORDINANCE NO. 82-031 VOL `"43wE 952 and depicted on the map marked Exhibit "A", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 2. To adopt as the Board of County Commissioners' findings and conclusions, the findings and decisions of the Deschutes County Planning Commission dated June 23, 1982, relating to Zone Change Application Number Z-82-5, marked Exhibit "B", attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 3. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and th}'s ordinance takes effect on its passage. DATED this the day of /�u �f , 1982. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF EHUTES COU Y, OREGON CL Y- . SHEPARIY, Chairman Le Tei �! e ALBERT A. YOUNG, Commissioner SRT C: PAULSON, JR.,C�ssloner ATTEST: J, W' SUSAN STONEMAN Recording Secretary 2 - ORDINANCE NO. 82-031 EXHIBIT "A" T Noft1 SECTION 20 T.17S. R.13E.W.M. DESCHUTES COUNTY i"=aoo' Z-82-5 C -A L4 o f Ben<i 1-7-13-:20 Tax LoVs 200 and 300 A A nr►n EXHIBIT "A VOL-43PAGE 954 ti ro ti FILE NO. Z-82-5 A PPT.TrANT COURTHOUSE ANNEX, ROOM 102 • PHONE 388-6556 BEND, OREGON 97701 FINDINGS AND DECISION VOL ~43PAGE 955 CITY OF BEND, a Municipal Corporation REQUEST An Application to zone approximately 340 acres from Exclusive Farm Use - 20 (EFU-4) Zone, to Airport Development (AD) Zone. LOCATION The subject property is located easterly of the intersection of Butler Market Road and Powell Butte Highway, and is described as Tax Lots 200 and 300 in Section Twenty (20), Township Seventeen (17) South, Range Thirteen (13) East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, and Tax Lot 200 in Section Seventeen (17), Township Seventeen (17) South, Range Thirteen (13) East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon. PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval. PUBLIC HEARING Public hearing was held in Conference Room A, Deschutes County Courthouse Annex, Bend, Oregon, on June 9, 1982, at 7:30 p.m. BURDEN OF PROOF Section 6.000 of Deschutes County Ordinance PL -9, as amended, Deschutes County Procedural Ordinance, provides: "(1) The burden of proof is upon one seeking the change. The degree of that burden increases propor- tionately with the degree of impact of the change which is sought. 1 - FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B" VOL __ 43PAGE 956 (2) The Applicant shall, in all cases, establish: (a) Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; and (b) Conformance with all applicable statutes; and (c) Conformance with all applicable ordinance provisions setting forth the various criteria to be employed for rezoning . . . ; and (d) Conformance with Statewide planning goals whenever they are determined to be appli- cable. (3) In addition to the requirements of subsection (2) of this section, the applicant shall, in the case of a requested rezoning establish: (a) That there is a public need for a change of the kind in question; and (b) That the need will be best served by changing the classification of the particular piece of property in question as compared with other available property." EVIDENCE Evidence on behalf of the Applicant, City of Bend, was presented by Phillip Young, Mayor of the City of Bend; Jay Turley, Assistant City Manager; Ron Marceau, City Attorney; and excerpts of prior testimony submitted by City Attorney, consisting of testimony of John Andersen, in written form, and testimony of Ray Costello, in written form; a written transcript of a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners dated December 21, 1979; and a letter from the Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, dated December 16, 1980. Testimony in opposition to the Application was presented by Al Holden, Margaret Saul, James Saul, Ken Cale, and Dorothy A. Cale. Evidence presented by Deschutes County in the form of its Staff Report, recommended approval, finding that the Applicant had sustained his burden of proof, that the Application was in con- formance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan applicable statutes and ordinances, and that because the Deschutes County Comprehen- sive Plan had received compliance acknowledgment from the Land Conservation and Development Commission, was in conformance with all Statewide Planning Goals. Staff found that there was a public 2 - FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B" vol 43PAGE 957 need for the change of the kind in question, and that it would be best served by changing the classification of the particular piece of property in question as compared with other available property. Other evidence noted is Ordinance No. 80-222, and Ordinance relat- ing to the Deschutes County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan, and Ordinance No. 80-221 adopting Section 4.160, Airport (AD) Zone. SUPPORTING TESTIMONY 1. Testimony of Phillip Young: Phillip Young asked the Commission to change the zoning of the Airport to Airport Development (AD) Zone, referring to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan which was amended one year ago to incorporate the Airport into the Comprehensive Plan. He indi- cated that the Land Use Board of Appeals had confirmed the Plan, as amended, and that the zone change would bring the zoning into conformance with that Plan. He stated that the Airport had been in existence since 1942, and is now being used by 120 local residents. 2. Testimony of Jay Turley: Jay Turley testified that City, County, State and Federal govern- ments have significant investments in the Airport, and that the change in zoning is necessary to take advantage of the public investment in a manner that is consistent with the governmental bodies' public trust. Mr. Turley made reference to the written_ testimony of Mr. Costello indicating that Federal and State officials are of the opinion that it would be impossible to locate the Airport in any other area of Deschutes County. He testified that it would be necessary that 340 acres be rezoned since all are used for Airport purposes. He testified that airport planning is very similar to other transportation systems, and that the State will develop a blueprint and then it is put into the national plan. He testified that the Bend and Redmond Airports are part of that State and national plan. He distinguished the Redmond Airport as an air carrier airport, which basically serves as a commercial aircraft facility. The role of the Bend Airport is that of a general aviation airport for very light aircraft. The roles of both airports are important to both Bend and Redmond, and benefit all of Central Oregon. He stated that the future will show the investment to be a wise investment, particularly for the local economy and transportation systems that are a vital part of encouraging economic growth within the Bend area. 3. Testimony -of Ron Marceau: Ron Marceau stated that every square inch of the Airport is used for airport purposes. Part of the Airport is being used for 3 - FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B" von-43PAGE 958 runways and hangars, some for buildings, and the rest being used to contain Airport noises and to give room to maneuver and accom- odate planes having safety problems. Mr. Marceau submitted written testimony by John Andersen, Ray Costello of the State Board of Aeronautics, and Mark Beisse of the Federal Aviation Commission. He also introduced a letter dated September 16, 1980, from the Federal Aviation Administration. Mr. Marceau testified that the Comprehensive Plan change approved by the Land Use Board of Appeals permits rezoning to AD for the Airport property itself. He testified that property around the Airport may be considered for a zone change when the time is right. He stated that since the Board of County Commissioners decided not to change the Comprehensive Plan for other properties, just the Airport can be considered for rezoning at this time. He distinguished the Bend' Airport from the Redmond Airport, and testified that the two facilities complement each other. In response to a question from Chairman Quackenbush, Mr. Marceau testified that AD Zone allows, as uses permitted, Airport uses and Airport related commercial uses. All other uses are conditional. 4. Written Testimony: A. Prior written testimony of John Andersen. The testimony summarized the location and history of the Bend Airport, showing that there is a need to assure Airport growth is compatible with the maintenance of rural character existing in the area. Mr. Andersen's testimony also stated that it is important from the County's perspective that adequate transportation facility is provided for the City of Bend, as regards air transportation. The testimony made reference to the Exceptions Statement adopted with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, which supports taking exception to Agricultural Goal 3 for the Airport property. Mr. Andersen identified the agreement of the City of Bend and Federal govern- ment that provided the Airport property be transferred on the condition that it continue as a airport facility. The City has agreed with the Federal Aviation Administration for ADAP funds to continue the Airport for the next twenty years. The report "Airport Compatibility Planning", by the Oregon Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Division, when reviewed in conjunction with the Airport Plan, shows the majority of lands within the 65 LDN in the Year 2000 Forecast within the Airport property. The Bend Airport Master Plan outlines the current City ownership of the Bend Airport, showing current uses and buffers on the pro- perty. John Andersen's testimony identified the Airport Height Combining (AH) Zone which was established based on the recommen- dation of the Airport Master Plan to prohibit obstructions within the zone for the safety of pilots taking off and landing from the Airport facility. The testimony supported that the Airport is the key facility that meets the needs of the rural and urban residents within the Bend area, that there are no alternative locations within the area that could be used for the proposed purpose, and 4 - FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B" VOL 49PAGE 959 the City is committed to maintaining the Airport as mentioned above, due to financial and environmental difficulties associated with any new location. B. Written testimony of Ray Costello: The testimony of Ray Costello emphasized that airports historical- ly have been located in agricultural areas, and there is no con- flict between agriculture and airport uses. Mr. Costello iden- tified the different role of the Redmond Airport as opposed to the Bend Airport. Mr. Costello identified that most -agricultural activity in the vicinity of the Bend Airport is the grazing of large animals, which probably is the least conflicting agricultur- al use with airport uses. Mr. Costello testified that all of the Airport property is necessary, since maneuverability and clear zones are necessary in order to utilize airport property. Mr. Costello testified that the Airport will probably increase in usage in the future, but that the Federal Aviation Administration is developing new noise regulations, which should lessen the noise impact in the future. Mr. Costello indicated that it would be impossible to relocate the Airport in any other location. Mr. Costello testified that airports were being lost nationwide at approximately 200 per year, and that the capacity of airports has increased from 13% in 1974 to approximately 60% currently. C. Written testimony of Mark Beisse. Mr. Beisse testified that the present use of the lands around the Bend Airport is the best use of the land. 3,000 airports out of approximately 14,000 airports across the country are considered essential to the FAA system. The Bend Airport is one of those 3,000 essential airports. He reiterated that the Redmond Airport is an air carrier airport to serve larger airplanes. Bend only serves the smallest airplanes. Mr. Beisse felt that the Master Plan should be incorporated in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and that the ADAP funding for the facility will continue. D. Written testimony of Department of Transportation - letter dated December 16, 1980. The written testimony indicated that the Federal Aviation Admin- istration had approved the Airport Layout Plan, and felt that it provided a sound basis for managing the growth of the Airport. It indicated that existing agricultural zoning is most compatible with airport operations, and airport uses are common near airports and few problems encountered in cases from either aeronautical or agricultural users. Industrial zoning would be next in order of desirability, although potential problems with construction, etc., should be closely monitored. The letter from the Federal Aviation Administration noted that the Bend Municipal Airport is considered 5 - FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B" VOL "` Una 960 essential to the national airport system, and has a utility role which complements rather than duplicates activities at the Redmond Municipal Airport. DISTINGUISHING ADVERSE TESTIMONY 1. Testimony of Al Holden: Al Holden testified that the Airport didn't belong where it has been located since 1942. He felt that all airport traffic should be handled through the Redmond Airport. The Planning Commission, based on evidence presented by the City, and the explanation of City Attorney, determines that the Applicant's evidence shows that the facility services a different type of airplane and usage, and that the investment by the City in this location, along with the inability to establish new airports, make the current Bend Airport site the only feasible site for airport use and the AD designation. 2. Testimony of Margaret Saul: Margaret Saul's main contention was that if the Airport was to receive AD zoning, her property should receive the same zoning since it is close the the Airport and impacted by noise. The Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan of Deschutes County provides that when noise impacts spread to the property, it will be eligible for an exception if there is a need for such zoning at that time. Since Mrs. Saul primarily was interested in having her own property rezoned, the Planning Commission feels that they are unable to address such a desire without an application before them. The fact that a neighboring property is not being rezoned is not a sufficient factual basis to withhold zoning from the Applicant's property. 3. Testimony of Ken Cale: Ken Cale testified in opposition to the Airport because he felt that the present Airport projects a runway onto his property. His objection was that the City may ultimately acquire his property through an eminent domain procedure. His other concern related to the fact that his property was not being zoned AD like the Air- port. The Planning Commission feels both issues are not related to zoning, and that any eminent domain procedure is an action unto itself. Additionally, when and if his property falls within the noise corridor level, as shown in the Comprehensive Plan, it will be eligible for rezoning. Since his property is not the subject of the current Application, the Planning Commission feels it cannot consider whether or not that property should be also upzoned to AD zoning. 6 - FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B" VOL -. 43PAGE MI 4. Testimony of James Saul: James Saul objected to the Airport because his property is within 200 feet of the Airport property. He also questioned the need to have 340 acres of property for AD zoning. The Planning Commission felt that the testimony of the City adequately defended the size of the parcel for zoning AD, since those portions not actually occupied by buildings and runways were used to contain noise levels, and for emergency landings. 5. Testimony of Dorothy Smead Cale. Dorothy Smead Cale testified that she had managed the Airport, and the Airport had never bothered their cows. She indicated that she had owned a portion of the Airport property and had sold it to the City. She said she had never been against the Airport, but she had never been contacted about the land possibly taken away be- cause of the Comprehensive Plan. She requested the emphasis be placed on the Redmond Airport, and keep the Airport a small air- port. The Planning Commission did not feel that this testimony was necessarily in opposition to the Airport zoning on Applicant's property. This is especially true, taking cognizance of the fact that any expansion is subject to site plan and possible condition- al use application, felt that growth of the Airport would be minimal. FINDINGS 1. Airport Development (AD) Zone is appropriate zoning for an. airport facility. 2. The 340 acres of property under the ownership of the City of Bend is currently being used for airport uses. 3. All of the property is used in some manner for airport or airport -related uses. 4. Surrounding agricultural uses are compatible with airport uses on the Airport property. 5. The property is currently zoned Exclusive Farm Use - 20 (EFU-4) Zone. 6. The subject property is generally level and is used as an airport facility with runways, hangars, and miscellaneous accessory uses. That those portions of the property undeveloped are used for other airport -related uses. 7. The surrounding property is currently zoned either Exclusive Farm Use - 40 (EFU-3) Zone, Exclusive Farm Use - 20 (EFU-4) Zone, or Multiple Use Agriculture (MUA) Zone. 7 - FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B" I OL -43PAGE 969 8. The surrounding property is primarily used for agricultural uses. The Bend Municipal Airport has been used as an Airport since 1942. 9. Considerable investment has been made in the Airport site, and it appears that there is a commitment to continue the use of the Airport for the next twenty years. 10. The Bend Municipal Airport could not be relocated to any other site. 11. The Bend Municipal Airport complements the Redmond Airport since they have differing functions. 12. That all public agencies involved in the Airport and the users of the Airport have relied on its continued existence and capability to meet general requirements of the area. 13. The Airport will continue as a general aviation facility which will develop to mee the growing needs of the community for such a transportation facility. 14. The subject property is designated as a airport in the Deschutes County Year 2000 Ccomprehensive Plan map. 15. Ordinance No. 80-221 adopted Airport Development (AD) Zone to be applied to airports within Deschutes County. 16. Ordinance No. 80-222 added an amended policy to the Deschutes County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan recognizing the Bend Airport, taking an exception to Agricultural Goal 3 for the Airport, and recognizing the Airport Master Plan for future development of said Airport. 17. Land Use Board of Appeals has upheld the adoption of the Airport Development (AD) zoning, and has approved the Comprehensive Land Use Plan policies relating to the Bend Airport. That the Land Conservation and Development Com- mission found the Airport Development Zone and the plan policies relating to the Bend Municipal Airport as being consistent with Statewide planning goals. CONCLUSIONS 1. The Application is in conformance with the Deschutes County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan. 2. There is a public need for the zone change. If the zoning is not changed to Airport Development (AD) Zone, the Airport will continue as a non -conforming use. This would make the 8 - FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B" } VOL .10. 43pw 963 Airport out of conformance with the Year 2000 comprehensive Plan, since it could not be used as outlined in the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The need is best served in its present location. It would be virtually impossible to locate the Airport in another loca- tion, the current Airport has been developed at its present location since 1942, and the City of Bend has expended over $600,000.00 for improvements to the Airport. 4. The applicant has met its burden of proof that the 340 acres comprising the Airport should be rezoned, and that the need for the Airport is best met in its specific location. DECISION The application is hereby approved. od " DATED this 23 rday of Alk, 1982. ICK QU KEN USH, Chairman 9 — FINDINGS AND DECISION EXHIBIT "B"