HomeMy WebLinkAbout90-009REAEViD
90-0,1455 148��
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DES
An Ordinance Amending Ordinance
No. PL -20, the Deschutes County
Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan, As
Amended, to Change the Designation r :;or'VjJ ZD
of Certain Property From Rural
Residential to Rural Service
Center, Taking an Exception to
Statewide Land Use Planning Goal
14, and Declaring an Emergency.
ORDINANCE NO. 90-009
WHEREAS, Don and Julie Strasser, Jim Montgomery and Dave
Oliver proposed the redesignation of certain property from Rural
Residential to Rural Service Center; and
WHEREAS such redesignation requires the taking of an exception
to Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 14;
WHEREAS, notice of hearing was given in accordance with law;
and
WHEREAS, the Board of Commissioners held a hearing on
December 13, 1989 concerning the proposed goal exception and
redesignation of property on appeal from the Hearing's Officer's
approval of the proposal; now therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON,
ORDAINS as follows:
Section 1. That an exception to Statewide Land Use Planning
Goal 14 is hereby adopted for the property described in Exhibit "A"
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, and
depicted on the map marked Exhibit "B", attached hereto and by this
reference incorporated herein.
Section 2. That Ordinance No. PL -20, the Deschutes County
Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan, as amended, is further amended to
redesignate that certain property described in Exhibit "A", and
depicted on the map marked "B", from Rural Residential to Rural
Service Center.
Section 3. That the reasons for the taking of the exception
and the findings and conclusions in support of the plan amendment
are set forth in the Findings and Conclusions of the Board of
Commissioners, dated February 12, 1990, relating to Plan Amendment
Application No. PA -89-6, marked Exhibit "C", attached hereto and
by this reference incorporated herein.
1 - ORDINANCE NO. 90-009
00 v 1489
Section 4. This Ordinance being necessary for the immediate
preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency
is declared to exist, and this Ordinance takes effect on its
passage.
DATED this day of 1990.
BOARD OF OUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF PESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
AT ST:
7z-�
-2 6��
Recording Secretary
2 - ORDINANCE NO. 90-009
LOIS ISPOW PRANTE, Commissioner
TOM iRO0$, hair
// / -Ir�
, Commiss
IOU -a '1490
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description
Lots 2 - 12, 14 - 21 of Block A of Deschutes River Recreation
Homesites, Extension to Unit One, on a Plat recorded with the
Deschutes County Clerk, on July 14, 1967, in Cabinet A-149.
3 - ORDINANCE NO. 90-009
EXHIBIT "B"
1.00 m 1491
Su Vop 20 -0 kv
RECREATION SOLAR OR.) . ROAD °
t k- _ 4 Rt _ 0
' o L 11 <! o
• r 2�
p
/ i
rnZS Z
��S I� j N o m 4 fid
I ' I l "n
r Z N �• O �.Z%��
I'a� ice! - Ji . •: .- �" _ ICr u - � `§ I
o y cn
I
c " \1 mt1J� °� A ID �• 4
I LR
cD
N
g� 01
fes,
= N81I g'
am
OS++r-y�-•-r S.• _�.5� O,I1II7 ` c�..tl.LL_. \i C
00
X 2 0: u C y�qq C _ q•�:,�
�O U• 1�' I d•: � P y1�' � ,iy.�J. __.i `ttil u P �
=8.
1
/ P'h _ of .✓ � �f E� Y. .'..,� � ,8 `' s 1 x � f' � a� .� �.� A .. 'r.Zi � l��•,- '�'
Lo
LUNAR
IVE�, F A; g,
W Oo � � (N � = u � N �� • R i` I t � "4 r U O. p tll A "'� I
�•. .7,..,• t • s% ^'` NI' - P v F �. �.. f� I 1..- - t = , :.� / ' N : - Off' �L..t.LJ.. 7
7
��• �'' � . 4Ij N, .��_(` n t: ..�, ',�' .tom I m I
ti`: \`a;� �' ,` s b r` '�.. hl•y„' fCf � � € � � � N N+! �'�"q�o�V; ���' + _ a � a ,`'p I �
iz
00
EL
so* Moo 20 it t
1.00 - 1492
EXHIBIT "C
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
In the Matter of the Applications
of Don and Julie Strasser, David
Oliver and Jim Montgomery for a * PA -89-6
Plan Amendment and Zone Change * ZC-89-7
From Rural Residential (RR -10) to * FINDINGS AND DECISION
Rural Service Center With a Limited*
Use Combining Zone (RSC -LU).
Basic Findings
A. The subject property is located on the southwest corner of
Spring River Road and Lunar Drive, further described as 20-
11-7B, Tax lots 100, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110,
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, and 120.
B. The property is currently zoned RR -10, Rural Residential,
with a Landscape Management Combining Zone and Flood Plain.
It is located outside any Urban Growth Boundary.
C. The applicants seek to change the Comprehensive Plan from
Rural Residential to Rural Service Center. The purpose of a
Rural Service Center is to allow for uses in rural areas
that will meet the needs of rural residents and to provide
limited tourist commercial services. Applicants are also
requesting a Zone Change from RR -10 to RSC with a Limited
Use Combining Zone.
D. The uses proposed for the Rural Service Center zone, as
restricted by the Limited Use Combining Zone, are as
follows:
(a) fishing supplies and equipment;
(b) snowmobile accessories;
(c) marine accessories;
(d) general store;
(e) hardware store;
(f) convenience store with gas pumps;
(g) full service gas station with automobile repair
services;
(h) welding shop;
(i) fast food restaurant, cafe, or coffee shop;
(j) recreational rental equipment store;
(k) kennel or animal hospital;
(1) motel; and
(m) R.V. hookup facility.
E. Surrounding land use zones abutting the subject parcel
includes to the north, a narrow sliver of RR -10 and across
1 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
1.00 - 1493
Sunriver Development; east, vacant meadow in the floodplain
(EFU-80); south and west, Rural Residential lots (RR -10).
F. The current (1979) Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and
zoning ordinances recognize a number of existing rural
service centers and notes that such a service center may be
warranted in the future in the Spring River area.
G. The area for which the rural service center is proposed is
included within an exception area in the County's comprehen-
sive plan. The plan excepts the area from the necessity of
compliance with Statewide Goal 3 or Goal 4. The exception
was taken as a committed exception in recognition of the
already existing parcelization of lands in the area for
residential development.
Findinas of Fact
1. The subject parcel of land is composed of 10 acres of land,
covering 19 adjoining tax lots. Applicant Strasser owns 5
tax lots (2.5 acres), Applicant Montgomery owns 4 tax lots
(2.5 acres) and Applicant Oliver owns 10 tax lots (5 acres).
The site constitutes a portion of an old undeveloped sub-
division, known as Deschutes River Recreation Homesite
Extension to Unit One, platted as a subdivision in 1967.
Current approved uses present on the site engaged in by
Applicants include a ski shop (located on tax lot 100, owned
by Applicant Strasser), a real estate office and a building
contractor's office (located on tax lot 107, owned by Appli-
cant Montgomery). Applicant Strasser was granted a Condi-
tional Use permit for the ski shop in 1986.
2. Across Spring River Road to the north of the site is a small
vacant sliver zoned RR -10; across the river to the north of
that is open space in the Sunriver Development, which was
excepted from the Farm and Forest Goals. A large parcel of
U.S. Forest Service land lies across Spring River Road
slightly to the west of the proposed rural service center.
To the east across Lunar Drive is a common area for the
subdivision, zoned EFU-80 in a flood plain zone, then the
Deschutes River. Immediately to the south of the subdivisi-
on common area, diagonally across Lunar Drive from the
subject property, is a storage facility.
To the south, across Alpine Place (Azusa), are vacant
residential lots zoned RR -10 located below the flood
plain. To the west are more residential lots, some
vacant and some with improvements located on them,
including, a bed and breakfast, a landscaping service
and an auto shop. The lot closest to the applicants to
the west has an unoccupied home on it that cannot be
occupied due to an inadequately installed drainfield.
2 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
00 1494
3. The area is not currently designated open space and has
little, if any, scenic value. The area has no significant
natural resource values. A good portion of the site is
developed with commercial activity, including a paved area
of 2500 square feet. An additional 6,000 square feet of
paving has been approved for Applicant Montgomery's real
estate office, but has not yet been constructed. There was
conflicting testimony concerning the degree to which the
property has been developed and the natural resource values
of the property. The Board accepts the Applicant's descrip-
tion of the developed nature of the property as more cred-
ible. The Board also accepts applicant's characterization
that a substantial portion of the undeveloped portions of
the site bordering Spring River Road are in rocky terrain.
The Board accepts the Oregon Department of Fish and Wild-
life's opinion that the existing development has preempted
high wildlife values at the site.
4. The site has a small wetland that is not listed as having
significant resource values in the County's wetland inven-
tory. The evidence indicates that the wetland has been
filled without authorized permits. The site occupies a
portion of one lot on the northwest portion of the site.
The Division of State Lands is currently conducting an
investigation of that situation.
5. Feasibility determinations have been made for various lots
in the proposed site demonstrating the feasibility of septic
systems, which would service the sewage treatment needs of
the proposed rural service center. Water would be provided
from groundwater sources; Department of Water Resource
records for wells adjacent to the site show that abundant
groundwater is available close to the surface. The
electricity needs of the area are now served by Mid -State
Electric Coop and such service would be available to Appli-
cants. Existing law enforcement and fire protection will be
utilized.
6. The proposed development will replace 19 Deschutes River
Recreation Homesites lots. The area could be developed with
approximately 17 single family residences.
7. The predominant land use of the Spring River/Fall River area
is rural residential homesites on small parcels (approxi-
mately one-half to one acre). A high percentage of these
parcels are part-time or summertime owners and users.
8. The proposed development is bounded by existing paved roads,
Lunar Drive to the east, and Spring River Road to the North.
The Applicants will be required to obtain access permits
from the Deschutes County Department of Public Works to
access those roads.
3 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
1..40 - 1495
9. The Sunriver Airport is located immediately to the north of
the site. Air traffic from the airport Sunriver Airport is
at least 8538 flights per year (actual count), with many
more flights unaccounted for due to the airport's limited
official operating hours, possibly bringing the total
flights up to the neighborhood of 12,000 flights per year.
The flight path of aircraft taking off from Runway 36 is
directly over Applicant's property.
10. There are approximately 4,000 to 5,000 residential lots
within an area of approximately 5 miles of the proposed site
outside Sunriver. The nearest commercial establishments
outside the Sunriver area are 17 miles away in Bend to the
north and Lapine to the south. The only other existing and
potential alternative locations for commercial establish-
ments to serve the needs of the Spring River rural residen-
tial population are the Sunriver development and the
Sunriver Business Park.
Establishments in these areas are oriented toward tourist
needs, such as fancy restaurants. By contrast, the Appli-
cants propose to provide services more geared to area resi-
dents, such as a convenience store, fast food restaurant, an
auto repair shop, and other services oriented to rural
residential living. There are no existing fast food estab-
lishments outside of Bend or LaPine. Although there is a
service station located in Sunriver, Sunriver does not allow
automobile repair shops. Commercial land available in the
Sunriver development and the Sunriver Business park is
expensive, due to its proximity to the successful Sunriver
development, and is not generally available to the types of
businesses proposed.
11. The proposed development would be located on the major road
between the adjacent recreation residential area and the
recreation areas to the west, such as the high lakes and Mt.
Bachelor. This road gets heavy use from residents from
Deschutes River Recreation Homesites and tourists on their
way to the high mountain lakes and Mt. Bachelor.
12. The Applicants have submitted petitions signed by 270 indi-
viduals who are residents of the Spring River/Fall River
area in support of the rural service center.
13. There are no other tracts in the immediate area requiring a
goal 14 exception that could provide such services to the
rural residents in the Spring River Road area.
14. The number of trips generated per day by commercial uses is
less than the number generated by single family residences.
4 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
100 - 1496
15. Traffic surveys show that the traffic in the Spring River
Road area has increased substantially since the early 1980s.
16. Many of the residential lots in the area have not yet been
built upon.
17. The applicants have received letters from the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency (FEMA) dated November 23, 1988, and
January 27, 1982, declaring that the subject property does
not lie within the Special Flood Hazard Area as shown on the
Flood Insurance Rate Map for the County.
18. Access to the development will not require use of Alpine
Place or Alpine (Azusa) Road to the south.
Conclusions of Law
1. Deschutes County comprehensive plan goals concerning rural
development are met by findings of fact 1, 2, 31 4, 5, 6, 7,
91 10, and 11.
(A) Findings 1 and 3 demonstrate that open space and
natural values will not be compromised, due to the
physical character of the existing site and the nature
of the existing development at the site. The issue of
illegal filling of a wetland at the site will be ad-
dressed by the Division of State Lands in their inves-
tigation of possible illegal filling and by the County
in its fill and removal permit process.
(B) Findings 5, 6, 7, and 8 demonstrate that there will be
no unnecessary expansion of service boundaries and that
safety of rural land uses will not be jeopardized. The
area is already developed for residential use; hence
electrical, fire, police, and road access facilities
and services are already present, as are schools to
serve the subdivision residents. Applicant will
provide its own sewage and water supply facilities, and
it is feasible for Applicant to supply such facilities.
Development of the proposal will not increase demand
for schools and public safety facilities, since the
development will displace residential uses that other-
wise could have occurred.
(C) Findings 1, 31 7, 9, and 11 demonstrate that the area
surrounding the site already supports uses that are not
rural in c;aractar, ilac luring existing commercial
activities, small -lot residential parcelization, and a
airport. In addition, Spring River Road, bounding the
property on the north, is heavily travelled.
5 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
1.00 - 1497
(D) Findings 7, 10, 11 and 12 demonstrate that a current
need exists for the rural service designation. There
are a substantial number of homesites in the area, and
the only nearby commercial area caters more to tourists
than to area residents. The proposed development is
well placed on a major road to serve the needs of the
residents. Land available in the Sunriver Business
Park is too expensive to allow location there of the
more rural -oriented services, such as welding and
excavation services, that Applicants intend to develop.
2. Deschutes County comprehensive plan goals and policies
concerning transportation are satisfied in that it will be
necessary for Applicants to obtain access permits from
Public Works for any new access to Spring River Road and
Lunar Drive. In addition, it follows from finding 10 that
location of commercial services closer to the rural residen-
tial population than are now available will cut down on the
amount of travel necessary.
3. Deschutes County comprehensive plan goal and policies con-
cerning public facilities and services are met by findings
51 6, and 8, which demonstrate that the proposal will not
require any new development of public facilities. Fire,
police, and electric service are already in place. Sewer
and water will be developed by the Applicants themselves.
Applicants have demonstrated that it is feasible to develop
such facilities. Utilization of this parcel for a rural
service center will decrease the demand for such services as
schools and water and sewer, since such use would displace
as many as 17 homesites.
4. Statewide goal 3 is met by an exception, based upon findings
G, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, and 10. The area was excepted from the
farm and forest zones upon acknowledgement of the County's
comprehensive plan in 1979 as already committed to residen-
tial development. Since that time, the area has become even
more committed to non -resource uses. The subject 10 -acre
parcel now has 3 commercial uses on it. It is bounded by
two paved roads, one of which has a shown a substantial
traffic flow increase in recent years. There is no adjacent
resource land bounding the property that could be adversely
affected by the proposal.
5. Statewide goal 11 (public facilities) is met by findings 5,
6, and 8. The present level of public services serving the
area will be sufficient. Sewer and water needs will be
taken care of by wells and individual septic systems and
will not be developed to serve needs other than the proposed
development. See also discussion under Conclusion 3 above.
6 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
1.00 - 1498
6. Statewide goal 12 is met by findings 8 and 10, and 11 and
conclusion of law 9. Access permits will need to be
obtained from Public Works. Travel needs for the rural
residences will be lessened due to the availability of
commercial services closer to home. The services in the
proposed service center have been limited to those that will
serve the rural residents and will therefore not draw addi-
tional traffic from outside the area.
7. This proposal meets the requirements of a Goal 2 exception
to Goal 14 under OAR 660-04-020(2) and OAR 660-04-022 as
follows:
(A) OAR 660-04-020(2)(a) is satisfied by findings 7, 10,
and 12, and conclusion of law 9 which explain that the
Spring River Road area has been subdivided into recog-
nized small parcels predating the comprehensive plan
and that the purpose of this rural service center
proposal is to serve the rural residents of the area.
A Limited Use Combining Zone has been established to
ensure that uses not oriented to rural residential
uses, such as motels and R.V. parks, will not be estab-
lished. By serving only the needs of the residents in
the area, the proposal will be consistent with the
rural nature of the area.
(B) OAR 660-04-020(2)(b) is satisfied by findings C, 21 91
and 12. The services to be provided the area residents
are not available in nearby alternative commercial
zones for which an exception need not be taken -
Sunriver and the Sunriver Business Park - due to the
expense of land within those areas and the more upscale
and transient clientele served by those centers. Such
economic considerations are consistent with OAR 660-04-
020(2)(b)(B), which allows economic factors to be
considered in determining whether a proposed use could
be accommodated in an alternative site.
The alternative of providing such services as those proposed
in existing urban growth boundaries - 17 miles away in Bend
- would defeat the purpose of the rural service center
designation, which is to provide services to the rural
residents on site in rural areas.
The proposed rural service center will be sited on land that
is already committed to a non -rural uses. Large portions of
the 10 -acre site have already been committed to commercial
uses by the location of commercial establishments, such as
the broker and builder's office and the ski rental shop.
(C) OAR 660-04-020(2)(c) is met by findings 2, 8, 9, 11,
and 13. There are few other properties located as
7 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
100 - 1499
close to the end of Sunriver Runway 36 as this site is.
The major road serving the residential area bounds the
property to the north. Use of this road has increased
substantially in the past several years. With a common
area located to the east, an unbuildable flood plain
area located to the south, and the Sunriver development
to the north, there are few other sites as isolated
from conflicting neighboring uses as is this site. The
site is located on the exterior edge of the rural
residential area it would serve. The proposed rural
service center would take the place of as many as 17
homesites, which would generate more traffic than a
commercial use such as this one.
Under conclusion of law 9, the proposed service center would
be limited to those uses that serve the rural residents of
the area. In addition, under the proposed Limited Use
zoning, the Applicants would be required to submit a site
plan prior to further developing the site.
(D) OAR 660-04-020(2)(d) is satisfied by findings D, 6, and
8, and 14. Lands adjoining the site to the south and
west have already been excepted as non -resource lands
for residential development. Some of the lots to the
west already have commercial uses on them, and the
closest homesite to the west cannot be occupied due to
drainfield inadequacies. The floodplain designation of
adjoining residential land to the south restricts the
uses that could be in conflict with uses at the pro-
posed rural service center. The common area to the
east restricts development and the property to the
north is largely open space in the Sunriver Planned
Community except for a small sliver of vacant RR -10
land directly across Spring River Road. The rural
service center use will have no more impact on such
adjoining lands than the residential uses already
approved for the site. The allowed uses have been
restricted by the Limited Use Combining zone to pro-
hibit uses, such as kennels and motels, that might
impact the surrounding residential areas. In addition,
the Limited Use Combining Zone requires that site plans
be submitted to assure the compatibility with surround-
ing uses.
Applicant will not be using Azusa Road for access, so the
concerns of Azusa Road residents about possible traffic
increases on their road should not be realized.
OAR 660-04-022 is met by findings F, 9, 13, and 14. The
Comprehensive Plan provides for Rural Service Centers and
specifically speaks to the fact that such a use may be
warranted in the Spring River area in the future, depending
8 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
I Q 1) 1500
upon the needs of the area residents. Applicant has demon-
strated that such a need exists now.
By its very nature, a rural service center needs to be
located near the population it is to serve; therefore, as
mentioned above, location of the use within an existing
urban growth boundary is not an option. The services within
the LaPine Rural Service Center are likewise too far to be
of service to the rural population. Services such as exca-
vating services and fast food services need to be located
where the population to be served is located. The Sunriver
establishments are not oriented to the particular needs of
the residents of the Spring River area., The uses within the
proposed zone have been tailored by the LU designation to
fit the needs of the neighboring residents.
This particular site lends itself to use as a rural service
center. The existing commercial development at the site,
its lack of natural resource values, its proximity to the
Sunriver Airport, its proximity to major roadways in the
area, and the fact that the adjoining flood plain designa-
tion limits adjoining conflicting uses all point to this
site as the best site for locating a rural service center in
the Spring River area.
The proposed exception area would be composed of the entire
area for which the plan amendment and rezoning is proposed.
9. The following uses proposed under the Limited Use Combining
Zone are appropriate for this proposed Rural Service Center:
(a) fishing supplies and equipment;
(b) snowmobiling accessories;
(c) marine accessories;
(d) general store;
(e) hardware store;
(f) convenience store with gas pumps;
(g) full service gas station with automobile repair
services;
(h) welding shop;
(i) fast food restaurant, cafe, or coffee shop;
(j) recreational rental equipment store;
(h) excavation business.
These uses are appropriate to serve the needs of the rural
Spring River area residents. Commercial establishments
dealing in fishing supplies, snowmobile accessories, and
marine accessories would serve the recreational needs of the
local residents. That uses serving recreational needs is
desired is indicated by the present existence of the ski
rental shop. It is assumed that many of the part-time
residents use their homes in the area primarily for recrea-
9 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
100---* 1501
tional purposes. These uses would support the recreational
needs of those residents.
A convenience store use will allow rural residents to
purchase necessities that might not be available to them in
the nearby shops in Sunriver and the Sunriver Business Park.
Presumably, the general store use would be of this nature
also.
Uses such as an auto repair and gas station use would have
obvious utility for rural residents, all of whom rely
heavily on their automobiles for transportation. Siting of
automobile repair shops is restricted in the Sunriver
development.
Uses such as a hardware store, welding, and excavating
services reflect the fact that many of the residential lots
in the area have not yet been built upon. These services
would support the needs of residents who are building upon
their property and also those who may be remodeling or land-
scaping.
The requested motel, R.V. hookup, and kennel uses are not
allowed. The motel and R.V. hookup uses cannot be said to
serve primarily the needs of the rural residents. While
there may be some residents who in the process of building
their homes might make uses of such facilities, the appli-
cants have not demonstrated that such residents would be the
primary users of such facilities. The kennel use is denied
as being incompatible with the surrounding residential area.
Adoption of these uses satisfies the requirements of Section
4.250 of the Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance. All the
enumerated uses are uses allowed in the RSC zone. A review
of PL -15 shows that there is no other applicable zone that
would adequately limit the uses to those appropriate for the
needs of the residents of the Spring River area. The LU
zone complies with Comprehensive Plan policies of the County
in that the approved uses are limited to those that would
serve the needs of the area residents.
10. The zone change meets the requirements of Article 10 of the
Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance by virtue of findings 5,
61 8, 10, 11, and 14 and conclusions of law 1, 2, 3, and 9
as further described below.
The public health, welfare, and safety are served by the
fact that no new services or facilities will be required and
by the fact that by displacing as many as 17 homesites,
demands for certain public services, such as schools, fire,
and law enforcement will actually be less than if the home -
sites were developed. Furthermore, impacts of the proposed
10 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
1.00--� 1502
service center on surrounding lands will be consistent with
the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The
comprehensive plan recognizes rural service centers as
serving valid needs in the County's rural areas. The com-
prehensive plan excepted the Spring River area from resource
goals because of the then existing rural residential devel-
opment and recognized that the area might warrant a rural
service center in the future. Applicant has demonstrated
that there is a need for the type of services to be offered
to the rural residents of the area. Applicants have demons-
trated that the uses allowed by this decision are limited to
those uses serving the local residents.
Finally, the Board recognizes that there has been a change
in circumstances in the area. The facts show that traffic
in the area has increased considerably from the time that
the Comprehensive Plan and current zoning were adopted. In
addition, Applicant Strasser has been granted a conditional
use permit for a ski shop on the property.
11. Zoning restrictions relating to developments located in
flood plains do not apply, since federal authorities have
established that the subject land is not within the flood
plain. The subject property has been removed by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency from the flood hazard area on
the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the County.
12. The current Landscape Management zoning of the property
remains unchanged.
Conclusion
Applicants are granted a plan amendment from Rural Residential to
Rural Service Center, and a zone change from RR -10 to RSC -LU,
with uses limited to those listed in Conclusion 9 above.
DATED this 'jJ day of
AT
r
Recording Secretary
11 - FINDINGS AND DECISION
19 9 0.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON