Hidden Valley Lake Land Use Plan Task Force
September 21, 2017
Meeting called to order by: Jennifer Donelson at 7:05 p.m.
Members Present: Jennifer Donelson, Janis Messer, Dave Patterson, Nelson Brett, David Ryberg, Randy Isom, Ken Horn
Members Absent: George Lortz, Michael Paul, Tim Halperin, James Hasselbeck, Robert Starks, Michael Boyce, Jim Buchanan
Board Liaison Present: N/A
POA Office Staff Present: Bruce Keller
Guests Present: Tom Plogsted
August meeting minutes approved with following changes to HVL POA Structure summary:
• Judicial Panel – changed “enacts” to “adjudicates”
• Made Judicial Panel box larger – words cut off after making above change
• Hidden Valley Lake not incorporated box – had to make bigger because “The POA is incorporated” was cut off
• Dave Patterson – motion to approve; Janis Messer – seconded. Approved unanimously.
Member and Guests introductions: a second round-table introduction was made for those not in attendance at first meeting.
Discussion of HVL Land Use Plan: led by Jennifer Donelson.
• Jennifer took the Land Use Plan started by Michael Paul in 2015 and updated it to reflect 2017 CMP Vision and Mission statements.
• The task force reviewed the Land Use Plan and all agreed it is a good start for our plan. We agree with the Goals and Objectives Michael laid out and the Specific Tasks are consistent with those we discussed in the first task force meeting:
1. Develop a database documenting all land owned by the HVL POA, current usage and restrictions
• Linda Hartmann has two Excel spreadsheets – one with common POA property and one with private property.
• The private property spreadsheet will only be used to coordinate the LUP task force zones with those used by Linda and Bruce for EPA reporting, deer culling, etc.
• The common POA property map spreadsheet is used by Linda for EPA reporting. The task force will use Linda’s information to overlay the HVL map and designate any blue stream restriction, etc.
2. Incorporate any existing land use plans (e.g. 77-acre Development Plan)
• The 77-acre Development Plan, although mentioned in the CMP, does not appear to be an approved plan, rather a Powerpoint presentation. George and Bruce are looking for copies and will supply the committee with the plan.
• Consensus of task force members that have been in the valley for a longer period is that most of the items on the 77-acre plan have already been accomplished.
• Once plan received, the LUP task force will review, determine if there are any outstanding items, and if those items should be included in new Land Use Plan.
3. Identify properties adjoining HVL and assess possible threats or opportunities associated with each
• Example is 127 acres behind Brabamhurst – Jennifer was told when purchased home that there was a 99 year no-development clause on this land. Is this true? How long remains? What are terms of clause? Could still be a threat if land were sold?
• Property to right of main entrance as you’re leaving – bridge on property collapsed and has caused water flow issue right at our entrance. We offered to fix property owner’s bridge but he wanted far too much from us (not our responsibility to fix, but we offered since he has a right of way from our entrance) and we let it drop. But, it is causing an issue for us – how to resolve?
4. Identify any POA-owned parcels available for further community development or possible sale, as well as remaining lots available for housing
• This is being accomplished by use of the HVL map, consultants hired by board, etc.
5. Create a color-coded Land Use Plan Map with explanation of key features
• The color-coded map with key features is complete and updated with brighter colors and to include new acquisitions. This map will be included in the LUP as the general HVL POA map.
• A new map will be prepared showing the outer / adjoining properties and internal land segments delineated by Michael Paul on the 2015 LUP outline. We will add Linda’s EPA information to color code all areas not currently developed that are off-limits to any other use (whether the community would want to use it or not).
Discussion of HVL Land Use Plan Outline and Working Document: led by Jennifer Donelson.
• Jennifer took the separate documents created in 2015 by Michael Paul and created one LUP Outline and Working Document. A few modifications to current land use types need to be made.
• Changes will continue to be made as the task force continues its work.
Discussion of Planned Unit Development (PUD): led by Dave Patterson
At the last meeting, the discussion of the existence of a PUD came up since it is on the 2015 Land Use Plan paperwork done by Michael Paul, and in the CMP. There were disagreements about whether HVL is under a PUD since a copy of the PUD has not been located with the county. Dave Patterson has contacted the HVL developer which has confirmed HVL was under a PUD at time of development, and therefore, all undeveloped space would remain so. In fact, resident’s deeds could even have clauses stating green space adjoining their property would not be developed.
1. If we cannot locate the PUD, and the developer says the community was designed under a PUD, can we retroactively “enact” a PUD? Primarily, is green space to be kept natural, or can it be maintained/improved? For instance, the shelter at Lake Melody – was that technically a violation of the PUD? Can we add park benches or play grounds to other areas? Can they, or should they, be mowed? Are they being mowed now? All of these are topics of consideration.
2. Once we overlay Linda’s EPA information to our map, we will be able to determine what parts of the original HVL development are off limits due to EPA considerations, whether or not any PUD is, or is not, in effect, and if any deed restrictions limit what can be done.
3. Any deed restriction changes would take a majority 66% vote similar to the golf course purchase.
Discussion of Newly Acquired HVL Properties: led by Bruce Keller
The consultant analysis should be available in the next couple of weeks. We will be able to discuss the analysis at the next LUP task force meeting.
Feb 2018 CMP meeting – we will present our initial LUP and ask for community feedback and ideas for current and future land use.
Motion to adjourn made by Dave Patterson. Seconded by Nelson Brett. Vote count: 7 for, 0 against, 0 abstain. Meeting adjourned by Jennifer Donelson at 8:30 p.m.