County planning staff propose text amendments to clarify temporary hardship dwellings; public hearing set April 23

Nicole Mardell, senior planner for Deschutes County Community Development, presented a staff‑initiated package of text amendments on April 21 to prepare the commission for a public hearing on April 23. The amendments are intended to align local code with state law and clarify review and renewal rules for temporary hardship dwellings.

Mardell summarized current practice: Deschutes County has allowed temporary hardship dwellings since 1979 to let a property owner or a relative with a medical condition receive care on site. Typical hardship dwellings may be RVs, manufactured homes, conversions of accessory buildings, or other temporary structures in certain zones. The revisions staff proposed include explicitly recognizing hardship dwellings for “the aged or infirm,” allowing a broader set of medical practitioners (for example, nurse practitioners and physician assistants) to confirm need, and extending the renewal check‑in timeline from one year to two years to match state law.

Staff also proposed policy clarifications outside strict state requirements. These include limiting property owners to one additional dwelling (for example, an ADU, an RV rental dwelling or a hardship dwelling) at a time; expanding allowance for using existing buildings in some non‑resource zones while noting statutory limits that prevented expansion into specific rural residential (R‑10) or multiple‑use agricultural (MUA‑10) zones; and restricting improvements to existing converted buildings to the existing floor area (to ensure conversion is reversible).

Mardell said planning staff will keep several of the county’s more restrictive RV requirements — including proof of highway licensing, quick‑disconnect utilities and at least a sink and toilet — to ensure temporary hardship RVs are safe and movable.

The planning commission held a March 13 hearing and voted 6‑0 to recommend approval of the amended package after staff removed a proposed expansion into the R‑10 and MUA‑10 zones that conflicted with an administrative rule. Mardell said staff received two supportive comments during the planning commission’s hearing and had incorporated the commission’s direction into the current draft. The county’s public hearing on the amendments is scheduled for April 23.

Commissioners asked how the hardship permitting process interacts with unauthorized accessory dwelling units and with code‑enforcement follow‑up at the end of a hardship period. Staff said planning and code enforcement coordinate; code enforcement tracks renewals and follows up when property owners do not submit required medical documentation or decommission a temporary use. Staff reported there are about 143 properties with active approvals for temporary hardship dwellings (as of a March 7 pull) and described a new automation to issue periodic renewal reminders and to trigger enforcement follow‑up when necessary.

Staff emphasized the changes are intended to reduce confusion, increase consistency with state law, and ensure temporary hardship dwellings remain temporary and reversible where required.