GOLD BEACH – The Curry County Board of Commissioners will hold a public hearing at 1:30 p.m. Sept. 10 to consider the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) remand of Curry County’s approval of the $20 million Crook Point Golf Resort.
LUBA asked for four changes in the county’s approval of the proposed destination resort in the Pistol River area. The hearing will be limited to accepting evidence and argument regarding only the four issues that formed the basis of the remand.
The county commissioners gave written approval Dec. 28, 2010, of that plan, rejecting appeals by Oregon Shores and Oregon Coast Alliance, which had opposed the project.
Courtney Johnson, attorney for Oregon Shores Conservation Coalition, and Kenneth D. Helm, attorney for Oregon Coast Alliance, both filed notices of appeal on Jan. 14, 2011.
The development, proposed by the Crook family, would include an 18-hole golf course, a nine-hole golf course, golf shop, golf lodge, spa lodge and interpretive center, 175 overnight lodging units, resort owner and employee housing, and an equestrian center.
The family is developing the resort on a 378-acre tract zoned Forestry-Grazing, a part of the 2,800 acres of property they own in the Pistol River area. The resort site would be next to Crook Point, to the south of Pistol River, halfway between Brookings and Gold Beach.
The LUBA response was dated May 19, 2011.
LUBA agreed with the petitioners on the first point, that the county did not make clear that the planning commission proceedings make it clear that there will be a public hearing with proper notice when the Crook family applies for final master plan approval.
“Remand is necessary for the county to take corrective action,” the LUBA decision said.
A second item from the petitioners upheld by LUBA was a determination that the county failed to properly delineate the coastal shorelands boundary on the property.
“The applicant conducted no geological hazard analysis under (county zoning ordinance) and the county erred in adopting a shorelands boundary delineation that is not based on a geological hazard analysis, as the comprehensive plan requires,” the LUBA decision said.
The next assignment of error was the county’s finding of compliance to correctly avoid or minimize adverse impacts on the adjacent state parks and national wildlife refuge.
“The county needs to adopt better findings in regards to why adverse impact could be avoided or not required to show why it’s necessary,” former Assistant County Counsel Jeni Meyer said.
The petitioners also challenged whether there was enough water for irrigation and fire suppression.
Meyer said LUBA sided with the county, saying there was sufficient water to meet the demand “and it was proper to defer asking water right until final approval.”
LUBA generally upheld the county’s actions on water.
“With regard to water, they agreed with the county on all issues except one,” Meyer said.
In that one, LUBA said “Curry County will take measures to protect groundwater from drawdown which would lead to loss of stabilizing vegetation, loss of water quality, or intrusion of salt water into water supplies,” or explain why that didn’t need to be addressed.
In the September hearing, additional evidence and argument will only be accepted regarding the named issues and other arguments or evidence will not be accepted.
The area to be developed includes several parcels both east and west of Highway 101 and next to the Pacific Ocean. The properties are between Byrdies Lane and Burnt Hill Creek in the Pistol River area.
The county commission’s decision upheld an earlier approval by the Curry County Planning Commission, which had been appealed by the two groups.