BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS'

REGULAR MEETING

February 22, 2006

1:30 p.m.

Commissioners' Conference Room

APPROVED 3/15/06

 

Commissioner Faye Stewart presided with Commissioners Bobby Green, Sr., Anna Morrison and Peter Sorenson present.  Bill Dwyer was excused.  County Administrator Bill Van Vactor, Assistant County Counsel Stephen Vorhes and Recording Secretary Melissa Zimmer were also present.

 

17. OTHER BUSINESS

 

a. SWEARING-IN CEREMONY/Swearing In of Upper Willamette Justice of the Peace Gary Carl.

 

18. PUBLIC HEARINGS

 

a. SECOND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING/Ordinance No. PA 1229/In the Matter of Amending the Lane County Coastal Resources Management Plan Chapter II-Estuarine Resources Text and Diagram for Ten Acres of Estuary Management Unit (MU) 'C' Identified as 'Sub-Area C-1' From 'Natural' to 'Conservation' and Adopting Savings and Severability Clauses (File No. Pa 05-5506, City of Florence & Shelter Cove Homeowners Assn.). (NBA & PM 2/8/06).

 

Stephanie Schulz, Land Management, reported that this is a resources management plan designation for the 10 acres of Management Unit C known as Sub-Area C-1.  She noted the proposed amendment would change the plan designation from natural to conservation and the change is supported by scientific study of the area and regulatory agencies as shown in the public records for the project.  She indicated the change would facilitate consideration and development of erosion control measures in the estuary at the base of the Shelter Cove area.   

 

Schulz indicated that the city planning commission and city council conducted hearings in 2004 on amendments to both Management Unit “C” and “1” inside the city that are plan designations in the Coastal Resources Management Plan.  She added in April 2005 the city and the homeowners association brought the amendments to Lane County for co-adoption.  She noted that the Lane County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on November 1.  The record was held open for an additional three weeks and testimony was received.  She indicated that on considering the input received at the hearing and the high level of concern regarding continuing erosion of the area, the applicants requested that the Lane County Planning Commission provide a recommendation on forwarding one of the pieces of the city approved ordinance from natural to conservation.  She noted that for today, only the Sub Area C-1 request for change is moving forward as part of the action on the ordinance.

 

Schulz reported that after the public hearing at the planning commission, the deliberations were held on December 20 and the planning commission recommended approval of the plan amendment.  She noted it would be a major amendment to the Coastal Resources Management Plan.  She said it was a Special Purpose Plan of the Rural Comp Plan applicable to coastal Lane County and the four coastal statewide goals.  She added that it applies to both rural and urban areas and the four goals that apply to the coastal geographic area.  She noted the amended criteria found in Lane Code 16.400 require referral to the planning commission, adoption by ordinance, adopting findings that support the ordinance and payment of the fees in order to process an amendment.  She reported that everything had been complied with and she believed the proposal for the amendment had met the Lane Code criteria and should be approved as presented.

 

Van Vactor noted that there was testimony in the morning Public Comment from Brian McConnell that matched his written statement

 

Schulz reported the 45 day notice was sent on September 27, 2005 and there was no comment.

 

Stewart explained that this decision is subject to plan amendment and rezoning criteria cited in the agenda cover memo and attachments.  He noted that evidence and testimony must be directed toward the approval criteria and failure to raise an issue to enable a response may preclude an appeal to LUBA.  He indicated that this was the opportunity for those present to enter information into the record and only persons who qualify as a party may appeal board decisions to LUBA.

 

Stewart asked if there were any ex-parte contacts.

 

Sorenson reported a phone call from the person who spoke at public comment in the morning, but he did not return his phone call.

 

There were no other ex-parte contacts.

 

Linda Sarnoff, City of Florence, reported the area was unique, designated as natural. She noted they had not done any significant preservation of the inner jetty and the forces of the nature had deteriorated the jetty.  She recalled in the late 70’s the Army Corps of Engineers was concerned about the Siuslaw River.  She indicated they had done everything they could to stabilize the river to keep it in its banks.  She added in the 80’s there was more deterioration of the area.  She noted the erosion has been between five and ten feet per year and the reason the application was brought to the Board is that it had been 20 years since development was contemplated. She noted at this time there was no application for riprap.  She said they were asking for the ability to work and contemplate the use of different techniques. She said currently the national designation does not allow any of those techniques to be considered.  She said the amount of erosion had deteriorated the resource.  She indicated that this was to save people’s homes and to restore an area that is experiencing significant environmental degradation.  

 

Green asked how the proposal was consistent with Statewide Planning Goals.

 

Sarnoff responded that in its current state of advanced deterioration, it is not a stable environment and preserving a non-stable environment was not in the city’s interest or consistent with statewide goals.  She said they want to get to the point where they could make it a stable environment.

 

Commissioner Stewart opened the Public Hearing.

 

Phil Brubaker, Mayor of Florence, recalled that at the time the jetty was constructed, there were two entrances to the Siuslaw River.  He noted there is hardening of the area and it needs to be repaired in a way as a resource preservation issue.  He indicated a change was being requested.

 

Mike Broch, Environmental Geologist, represented the Shelter Cover Homeowners. He commented that he was donating his time on this.  He gave a presentation on the erosion of the Shelter Cove area. He indicated that they need to stop the erosion and revegetate the bank; otherwise they would be looking at the loss of homes in two to three years.  He commented that to approve the zone is to approve the river and the infrastructure at no expense to the state.   

 

Richard Lewis, Florence, stated he was vice president of the homeowner’s association.  He asked the Board to support the project and help them in any way they could for the betterment of the area where they live.

 

Richard Markee, Florence, stated he lives at the top of the area.  He said he wasn’t in the natural zone but in the conservation zone.  He said they planted 1,000 trees and that he doesn’t have erosion any more.

 

George Bynon, Florence, stated that his home was built 3½ years ago and is within the boundary of the 10 acres that the Board is considering in the rezone application.  He noted that his home is approximately 95 feet from the 70-foot bank.  His neighbor’s home is 65 feet from the bank.  He said when his home was built, public and private experts anticipated an average annual erosion rate of three to five feet per year.  He said that last year some areas of the bank lost more than 25 feet.  He said when he built his home, he anticipated he had 20 to 30 years available to consider and implement erosion control measures.  He added that time frame has now been reduced to a few months before something catastrophic is likely to happen.  He said the Corps of Engineers acknowledges the problem but has no plans to rectify the situation.  He said there has been disappearance of flora and fauna from the cove estuary.  He explained that the plan they put forward to stop the erosion will result in the return of the area and reduce the amount of sand pulled into the Siuslaw River.  He said the plan would be paid for at home and lot owner expense.  He commented that any solution ultimately adopted would be environmentally friendly and ecologically sound. He asked the Board to give consent for the rezone.

 

Richard Gabriel, Eugene, stated he is a local Eugene resident and a surfer of 35 years.  He was with the Surfrider Foundation.  He said they were not opposed to restoration or hardening of the repair of the Army Corps of Engineer jetty.  He thought there were other issues that might affect waves.  He thought there was room for compromise to work together.  He wanted more time to get more research done for the area.  He thought the solution would fail unless they got the Army Corps of Engineers to repair their portion of the jetty going out to the ocean and they don’t have the money for that.

 

Sylvia Shaw, Eugene, Executive Director, Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition, stated she was present on her behalf and for Oregon Shores.  She presented written testimony that echoed the concerns of the Surfrider Foundation and the Goal 1 Coalition.  She requested that the petition be denied.  She believed that Goal 16 and 17 had not been adequately addressed and need to be addressed and put into place before they proceed with the change in the zoning.

 

Broch explained that wave reflecting modeling was something they would agree to do.  He said the construction could be out of the water.  He said they will look at all aspects, and committed to the DEQ that they would do that.  He noted on the south cove they solved the same problem by the structure they implemented to solve the erosion problem.

 

Sorenson asked what the maximum activity was that could occur if the Board approved this.

 

Vorhes noted what was in front of the Board was the Coast Resources Management Plan designation, not the zones.  He indicated the zones had already been in place and the beaches and dunes overlay zones apply.  He said whatever proposal reaches the approval of the federal and state agencies; it would have to get approval from Lane County under the zone that is applicable to the land or the City of Florence.   

 

Sorenson asked if the evidence existed that the zoning should be changed from natural to conservation.

 

Vorhes stated there were findings in front of the Board that address the goals.  He said if there is an appeal, and the adequacy of the findings are tested, it may or may not survive the test.  He noted there was evidence in the record.  He added that the ordinance had been approved as to form.

 

There being no one else signed up to speak, Commissioner Stewart closed the Public Hearing.

 

MOTION: to adopt Ordinance No. PA 1229.

 

Morrison MOVED, Green SECONDED.

 

ROLL CALL VOTE: 4-0.

 

19. COMMISSIONERS' ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

None.

 

20. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD

 

None.

 

21. OTHER BUSINESS

 

None.

 

There being no further business, Commissioner Stewart recessed the meeting into Executive Session at 2:50 p.m.

 

 

Melissa Zimmer

Recording Secretary