Here’s an email I sent to the Design Committee. I would encourage you to read the “red lined” version of the amended Design Manual that the committee has submitted to the SROA Board for up-or-down approval (no amendments).

From: Paul Conte <paul.t.conte@gmail.com>
To: Design Committee <designinfo@srowners.org>,
Sunriver Owners Association <infosroa@srowners.org>
CC: Jacki Bue <jackib@srowners.org>,
James Lewis <jamesl@srowners.org>
Date: May 14, 2026, 5:35 PM

Subject: Response Requested. Questions re Amended Design Manual

TO THE SUNRIVER DESIGN COMMITTEE

Submitted May 14, 2026

I am submitting the following questions regarding the recent amended Design Manual that was adopted by the Design Committee.

I would appreciate a timely and substantive response from the committee to each of the questions so that I can submit well-informed comments to the SROA Board.

Some of the questions address current criteria, which were not amended, and for which I have never received answers to the questions previously submitted. Other questions address new or changed criteria.

For questions Q1, Q4, Q5, Q6, Q11, Q17, and Q19 I would like to know these three things:

a) What problem is the rule addressing?
b) What evidence is there of the current extent of this problem, i.e., how many tallied and/or estimated cases are there where existing development and/or use is considered to have this “problem.”
c) What evidence is there of the extent of owner support or opposition, i.e., prior complaints, submitted comments, etc.?

Comment 1: Based on committee and staff statements and actions prior to adoption of the “tree-protection” criteria and following the implementation, the main purpose seems to be to control the visual impacts of fencing that is typically used to protect plants from deer, beaver, and other mammal predation and damage. The prohibition against electric and barbed-wire fencing is the only criterion for which there is evidence supporting the rule as a necessary protection for wildlife.
Q1: Why is the protection of plants limited to certain trees, and not allowed for shrubs and flowers?

Comment 2: It is very common practice to plant new trees as saplings less than 6 feet tall
Q2. Why is protection prohibited for trees less than 6 feet tall?

Q3. What is the definition of “grouping of trees”?

Q4. How is the maximum “diameter” measured for fencing that is arranged as a rectangle?

Q5. Why are white tree trunk wrappings prohibited?

Q6. Why must all “trellises” be attached and match the house color?

Comment 7: 1.01.c.2.a “All improvements shall be subordinate to the forest and the natural landscape to the maximum extent possible.

Q7a. How does an improvement become “subordinate” to a natural landscape to the maximum extent possible? Inarguably, the way a house becomes subordinate to the landscape is to be as small as practicable. From a different perspective, a structure should have differing colors as the landscape does, not be a large monochromatic item in the varied forest.
Also, “guidelines” are properly expressed with “should,” while rules are properly expressed as “shall.”

Q7b. Why shouldn’t this guideline instead be: “All improvements should be harmonious with the surrounding natural landscape to the fullest practicable extent.

Comment 8: 2.02.a and d. and Definition “Non-conforming”. These items are duplicative and inconsistent. The rule should follow the widely accepted constitutional principle that, with specific called out exceptions, any development or use that was permitted prior to a rule change is permitted (with certain conditions) to continue. The current rules have an unreasonable “Catch-22” — a prior use has to have been approved by the Design Committee, but the Community Development Department refuses to submit approval forms for development and use that is “by right.”

Q8.a. Why is there a need for the term “Nonconforming” to be in the definitions? All of the requirements should be in one place — the criteria and rules in Section 2.02.

Q8b. Why doesn’t the Design Manual implement the standard framework for permitted nonconforming development and use?

Q9. 2.04.b.1 and c, Why aren’t these sections consistent with the Consolidated Plan 8.09 Estoppel Certificate in terms of scope?

Q10. 3.02.e.c Why doesn’t the rear yard calculation explicitly take into account right-of-way areas (not just “commons”), given the long standing (and now deleted) stated purpose: “to maintain a minimum of 50 feet between structures 12 inches above grade between adjacent property to the rear”?

Q11. 3.04.6 Are all black asphalt driveways allowed? Are off-white concrete driveways allowed? What colors are allowed for paver driveways?

Q12. 3.04.b.1 Why isn’t there a clear-and-objective maximum driveway area? (See Section 3.05.a.1, as an example.) How would an owner know what is an “excessive size”?

Q13. 3.05.a.6 and 7. See Q11 and Q12.

Q14a. 3.02.a.2 What is/are the standards by which “excessively contrasting” color is evaluated? There are multiple industry and scientific standards that should be relied upon.
Q14.b … Same question for all the numerous uses of this term.

Q15a. 3.18 Why doesn’t this section have the same requirement for “Landscape” as for Driveways and Walkways, i.e., “Landscaping must comply with the Purpose & Intent as established in Section 1.01 of this Manual, at the sole discretion of the Design Committee.”

Q15b. Why are irrigated turf lawns still allowed when they are arguably neither “subordinate to” nor “harmonious with” the forest and native landscape?

Q16. 3.28.a.3 Why is a “desire” included in a set of standards? What impact would this new subsection have on application reviews?

Comment 17: 3.29.a.2, 3, and 5 The rules for trellises make no sense at all; e.g., how can a trellis be installed over the top of a deck or patio?

Q17a. Why are all trellises now required to be affixed/abut to the principle structure, installed over the top of a deck or patio.

Q17.b. Can a typical black metal trellis be placed?

Q17.c. Can a pergola be installed over a porch?

Q 18. 3.31.a.2. How would patio colors be determined to “comply” with Section 1.01. Which 1.01 provisions are specifically mandatory compliance criteria?

Q19a. 3.32.a.1 and 4 What does “viewable” mean? Visible? Something else?

Q19b. How will owners be able to select the functions and quality of speakers if they come only in black white, and faux wood?

Q20. 4.02, 5.02 Why are extensive fences allowed for commercial owners, but single-family homeowners can’t use even small amounts of fencing to protect their native shrubs and flowers? Why is the aesthetic impact completely of no concern to the Design Committee in the one case, but seems to be of utmost significance in the other?

Thank you for your careful consideration and thoughtful responses.

Paul Conte

7 & 8 McKenzie Lane

_________________

Community Associations Institute:
* CAI Certified Board Leader
Earth Advantage Accreditations:
* Sustainable Homes Professional
* Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Specialist

National Low Income Housing Coalition Member