Published: March 22. 2009 4:00AM PST
At issue
A proposal to ban destination resorts from the Metolius basin.
Once state development officials negotiate a compromise with property owners, local officials and others over special protection for the area, any plan must be approved by the Legislature.
SALEM -- The Department of Land Conservation and Development appears on the brink of a compromise with two property owners who'd sought to build destination resorts in the Metolius River Basin.
But its basin protection plan still faces a hostile reception in the Legislature.
The department's plan for the basin would block destination resorts but significantly increase the development rights of the two landowners over what they have now.
In December, Gov. Ted Kulongoski ordered the department to prepare a plan banning destination resorts in the basin, while giving the area special protection as an "area of critical statewide concern."
Since then, the department has been holding public meetings while conducting closed-door negotiations with property owners, local officials and others.
Earlier this month, members of the Land Conservation and Development Commission recommended that the Metolius basin be granted special protection. However, the commission is not expected to vote on the details of the plan until a teleconference Tuesday.
Those details had not been posted on the department's Web site by Saturday afternoon. However, documents and interviews Friday indicated that the landowners will win greater concessions from the department than in earlier drafts of the proposal.
For instance, the Ponderosa Land and Cattle Co. had discussed a resort for a 10,000-acre property on the basin's edge, about 8 miles north of Sisters. In an earlier draft plan, the department instead offered 100 units on 100 acres.
The latest draft, however, will allow Ponderosa 100 homes and 20 overnight lodges on 320 acres.
Rick Allen, a lobbyist for Ponderosa, said the company has not formally decided whether it will drop its opposition to the plan, but his client is already changing its plans to align with the state's proposal.
For instance, Ponderosa is considering an equestrian-oriented development with no golf course called the Ponderosa Ranch, he said.
"Everyone's going to be giving a little on this," he said. "We're going to be lot smaller than we'd planned to be, but we're going to be a little bigger than the purists wanted. It's a whole different scale and a whole different model."
Meanwhile, Dutch Pacific Resources LLP had been planning the Metolian resort for a square-mile area in the heart of the basin, just north of U.S. Highway 20 and Suttle Lake. It would have contained more than 400 homes as well as more than 120 overnight dwellings.
An early draft offered the Metolian only 25 homes on 25 acres; however, the new draft will allow the Metolian to build 10 overnight lodges there as well, according to correspondence between the department and the Metolian's developer, Shane Lundgren.
On March 19, Lundgren sent the department a letter to confirm his understanding of the department's new position. In an interview, the Metolian's lobbyist, Hasina Squires, called the proposal "intriguing."
Erik Kancler of Central Oregon LandWatch is part of an environmentalist coalition that formed to support special protections for the Metolius basin. Although he hasn't seen the department's latest draft, he said his group is pleased by the department's efforts so far.
But if the full plan is approved Tuesday, it would still need to be OK'd by the Legislature.
And it appears headed for a chilly reception.
Two influential Democratic lawmakers think the department is giving up too much in the plan, according to one of them, Rep. Brian Clem, D-Salem.
Clem said the department appears to be reacting to the threat of a Measure 49 claim if the protection plan goes through.
If upheld, a claim would require compensation for loss of development rights or that the restrictions be removed.
However, Clem said he has doubts that Measure 49 applies. He thinks the resorts should be given no more development rights than what their current forestland zoning allows them.
"That's probably where most of us are at," he said of his fellow Democratic representatives. "We don't want to take away Measure 49 rights, but we don't want to assume they're there either."
Nick Budnick can be reached at 503-566-2839 or at nbudnick@bendbulletin.com.