Loading...
2003-167-Minutes for Meeting February 25,2003 Recorded 3/11/2003COUNTY OFFZCZAL TES NANCYUBLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERKDS CJ 2003'ifi1 COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 03/11/2003 02:29:00 PM 111ii)[I 111111111111111111111111 Z00 DESCHUTES COUNTY CLERK CERTIFICATE PAGE This page must be included if document is re-recorded. Do Not remove from original document. SOT E S o -< Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1130 NW Harriman St., Bend, OR 97701-1947 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 388-4752 - www.deschutes.org MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2003 Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building 1130 NW Harriman St., Bend This meeting was held for the Board of Commissioners to make its deliberations and decision on Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3. The applicants are Oregon Water Wonderland II Sewer District, represented by Attorney Ed Fitch. The applicants are requesting a comprehensive plan amendment from Forest to Rural Residential Exception Area, and a zone change from Forest Use (F2) to Rural Residential (RR -10), and the application of a Limited Use (LU) Combining Zone. The request also includes exceptions to Statewide Planning Goals 4 (Forest) and I1 (Public Facilities and Services). Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Tom De Wolf and Michael M. Daly. Also present were George Read and Chris Schmoyer, Community Development; David Givans, Commissioners' Office; Gary Judd, Road Department; Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel (by conference call), and approximately thirty citizens. No representatives of the media were in attendance. Chair Luke opened the meeting at 3: 00 p.m. Chair Luke read the preliminary statement at this time. (A copy is attached as Exhibit A.) He referred to plan amendment details that were shown as an overhead projection. As part of the preliminary statement, he asked the Board if they had any pre - hearing contacts to state. Commissioners DeWolf and Daly stated they have none; Commissioner Luke said all he has had is updates from staff. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 1 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) He then asked if the Commissioners have any ex parte observations or facts to state. All three Commissioners indicated they had none. At this time, he asked the audience if anyone had challenges for bias, prejudgment or personal interest; none were offered. At approximately 3:05, Laurie Craghead joined the meeting via conference call. Christ Schmoyer then read his staff report. (A copy is attached as Exhibit B) During the presentation of his staff report, he referred to the oversized map of the subdivision and the general area, and described the location of the subdivision, the area proposed to be rezoned, the existing wastewater treatment plant, Sunriver, the proposed facility, and various roads. Commissioner Luke asked if there are any homes located on the subject site. Mr. Schmoyer indicated there were not, as it is Forest Service land. DEWOLF: So that existing sewer treatment plant would close? SCHMOYER: No. They would replace their existing system and upgrade it, and pump the treated effluent down to section 25. DEWOLF: Got it. And where is the couple of hundred acres that the folks connected with Sunriver are talking about expanding to? I mean, we're aware that one of the other options was piping. SCHMOYER: Yeah. Their alternative option is to pump it along South Century Drive to the east, and then up to the north to Sunriver, to their existing plant. (He then referred to the oversized map.) Section 25 is referring to the property south of South Century Drive. (He continued with the reading of his staff report, about midway through page 2.) DEWOLF: When was that MOU dated (memorandum of understanding, between Deschutes County and Oregon Water Wonderland II)? How long has this been going on? Ballpark is good. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 2 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) SCHMOYER: I think 1997. DEWOLF: (Referring to the statement, approximately midway through page 5.) Because they are subject to that court approval? Is that why it would jeopardize it? SCHMOYER: Yes, it's that voter approval. DEWOLF: I understand that. But are the grants subject to -- I don't understand why, if the rate was $5 more a month, why that would jeopardize grants. Is there an explanation for that? GEORGE READ: That's a good question. The evidence indicates that raising that rate would lower the economic viability, in the opinion of the Rural Utilities Service. They had testimony along that line, but it isn't that clear in the testimony. Perhaps Ed Fitch, who is representing the applicant, can give you a little more on that. DEWOLF: It wouldn't automatically kill the grants, but it has the potential to. READ: That's correct. It has the potential to affect the ability of the neighborhood to pay for it. SCHMOYER: It would require a new vote. The real difference in cost is in the operation and maintenance. (He then returned to reading his staff report; third paragraph, page 5.) DEWOLF: (Referring to the conservation easement.) How large? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 3 of 56 Pages iuesclay, reoruary I -D, zvv-o, Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) SCHMOYER: It goes on to say that if the appraised value, as conducted by the Forest Service with the conservation easement requirements is less than the budgeted amount of $672,000, the difference would be transferred to the conservation organization as a permitted endowment for the property. DEWOLF: But that doesn't say how large the easement is -- 200 feet? 12 feet? SCHMOYER: Oh, it covers the entire property, was my assumption. DEWOLF: So where the sewage is being treated is a conservation easement? What are we conserving there? What sort of habitat are we -- SCHMOYER: It says habitat for deer, elk, raptors and associated species. DEWOLF: They like sewer plants, do they? SCHMOYER: Yeah. READ: The majority of the treatment is done in septic tanks on site and at the existing plant. What we are talking about is the storage of the effluent -- the effluent ponds and spray irrigation areas. So, the testimony was that the Forest Service environmental assessment indicated that those types of things would not have significant negative impacts on wildlife and the habitat in the area. We had testimony from the public at the hearing (of the Planning Commission) that those were things people were concerned about, that those be preserved, that there are significant elk in the area and it is used by wildlife. The theory was that by placing a conservation easement over the entire property, those values could be protected. DEWOLF: What level of treatment are we talking about? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 4 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) READ: Level 1. LUKE: You're also talking about forest issues also, cleaning up the property and creating habitat. READ: I think that the part I left out in that, as Dennis pointed out, is that it is really a mitigation thing. With some improvements you can probably make up for some of the impacts. DEWOLF: Okay. DALY: Is this whole area devoid of trees? READ: Not at this time. Not the whole area, just the spray effluent area. There is a considerably larger area than, as you will see in your packet, where the effluent is going to be sprayed. SCHMOYER: I was just about done. I just wanted to add that I have some handouts that were provided by David Givans (the County's Internal Auditor); and also a letter came in today through the mail in opposition of section 25. (These are attached as Exhibit C and Exhibit D.) I also want to mention that Ed Fitch submitted additional information, a three-page letter and attachment with three exhibits that you received yesterday. READ: We've covered the high points of most of this. One of the big issues through this whole thing is that state law doesn't allow you to have sewer in rural areas. Through our regional problem solving in the south County, we got basically special approval to allow the sewer district to expand. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 5 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: There's already a sewer down there. READ: That's right. But to expand sewer systems in Oregon is illegal, outside of urban growth boundaries and urban unincorporated communities, unless the water is polluted. Then you can get an exception. Here we tried to get ahead of the curve and not let it get that far before we allowed the sewer to expand. The most difficult part was that early on, we hadn't looked at Sunriver as a viable alternative. Through the process, Sunriver Utilities, LLC -- actually it is Sunriver Environmental, LLC -- came forward and said that they were interested in being considered as an alternative for sewage disposal. We did not have the engineering for that site, and we did not really have it put together the way the district did, and we kind of twisted the arm of the district to help us get that information put together. Because in order to approve this kind of an application, we have to prove that it can't go to Sunriver. Again, state law says you don't use forest land for sewer plants unless you don't have an option. Sunriver was an option, so we had to look at that. What became really important in all of that was the cost. Because we had to find, in order to approve Oregon Water Wonderland's application, you have to find that there isn't a viable option, and Sunriver is not a viable or reasonable option or alternative. You can consider costs. I was over my head in the financial analysis from the very beginning, because this is a very, very complicated thing and we are comparing very different types of operations. So, with your approval, we enlisted the help of David Givans, the Internal Auditor for the County, to look over the numbers. I think the slides David is going to show you will kind of give you information on how we evolved in this cost thing, how it kind of moved, and where we ended up. So, we want to add that to the staff report and kind of show you the economic feasibility. Because, in addition to the compatibility issues, there's the economic issues, the threshold decision issue for the Board. DAVID GIVANS: (At this time David Givans gave his slide presentation, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit C.) Minutes of Public Hearing Page 6 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) As George Read indicated, I was asked to help with the financial aspects of this analysis. Economic feasibility became the most critical phase. What increase in the base rate ultimately was kind of how we assessed whether the Sunriver option as presented could cash flow, could break even over the period of its life. They have two different revenue streams; they have their fee rates and they have their connection rates, which are used to fund the plan. The initial capital costs, as originally proposed, just to give you some perspective; we were about $1.7 million in the Sunriver option over the section 25 initially. That was primarily due to trying to come up with a method to pay for the differential in rates between the cumulative Sunriver rates and the section 25 rate into the capital costs. And so one of the things we found out in our discussions was that RUS didn't like that idea. So, in essence that went away. The initial costs that Sunriver originally provided, I guess Oregon Water Wonderland was a monthly cost of about $18.53 to take the effluent, per unit. One of the things that we determined was that we were able to -- they were financing at $10 in perpetuity to create that $1.7 million cost. One of the things we talked about with Sunriver was how they were deriving those numbers. We were able to just objectively look at the numbers and asking them questions, Sunriver brought their monthly cost per user from $18.53 down to $14.64. I think probably since the second or third revision that Oregon Water Wonderland provided, those have been stable throughout all of the projections. There is, as they indicated, an FED reservoir, called a full equalization basin reservoir, which Sunriver has just recently built into its system. The idea was that somewhere down the road, when Sunriver fully maxed out in its user base and is fully built out, and Oregon Water Wonderland is fully installed, they might see some peak flows that would throw them over the use of their current basin. We don't know when that would occur. And Sunriver didn't know. We've left that out in my presentation, but Oregon Water Wonderland has it in theirs. It's just a question. It's a matter of timing. This is just the capital costs, as I showed. Basically, all these component costs, through all the different versions we've received on the Sunriver option, basically stayed the same. The only thing that really changed was the lump sum fee that we basically eliminated out of the capital cost structure. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 7 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: Laurie, are you hearing all this okay? CRAGHEAD: Pretty much. It would be nice if it were a little louder. LUKE: He's using a portable mic. Everyone else will be on the direct mic. CRAGHEAD: Okay. GIVANS: One of the things that we definitely saw increases and changes in over the proposal process was changes in operating expenses. Operations and maintenance, payroll, chemical treatment, increase in reserve levels, and bad debt allowance. Those are probably the most significant changes. What this particular graph shows is the evolution. This was the original that came with the section 25 original proposal. It was for only five years. One of the things we asked for was a longer-term span. Then we started asking questions. Basically, these are the operating costs. It doesn't include the Sunriver charge, but it includes just general operating costs and reserves. As you can see, it just gradually increases each time. Most of that I think was due to new information during the process. One of the things the presentation showed was that these are present value dollars, so it's pretty easy to compare $100 shown here, $100 there. The results are particularly sensitive to rate and connection charge assumptions. So one of the things I did for the Planning Commission to kind of make this easy to understand, is that if you are back here at one of the earlier presentations, to make this cash flow, the Sunriver option cash flow, it was like a $1 fee or $600 in connection fees. When we came to November and operation expenses went up further, it was then $2.75 in fee, or a $1,500 connection fee increase, to make the Sunriver option work. And then the last version that I've seen, what worked best was a combination fee and connection fee increase of $2.25 and a $2,250 connection fee; or a $6.50 fee. That was just the way I tried to make it comparable, to try to give you some assessment as to economic feasibility. And then this is just a summary of some of the significant changes in each of those cash flow presentations that were presented by Oregon Water Wonderland. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 8 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 1uw Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) DEWOLF: My only question is that these are significantly different from revision to revision. How do we know that the 11/14/02 revision is accurate enough, that it is reliable, and that you couldn't go back and fine tune things and get a different number again? GIVANS: I'm sure there are probably new changes, and that has been the process, it's evolving, and management has come to us with estimates. Unfortunately we don't have engineering to corroborate their costs, and we weren't able to get Sunriver to give us any costs to independently provide the operations and maintenance. At this point we are relying on Oregon Water Wonderland's information. DEWOLF: Has Sunriver commented on this? GIVANS: I'm not aware that they have been fully apprised of this all along the way. We've met with them a couple of times during the process. You might want to talk with George (Read) about specific comments. I don't remember their last comments. DEWOLF: We're assuming all this stuff about Sunriver. READ: David, why don't you flip back two slides, and show where you have what increase, the things that changed. The various things that changed were chemical treatment. Basically I believe all of those are reasonable things that changed. So, Sunriver was tuned in at the beginning with all the numbers, and these are the things that caused the changes. We have looked at these and I think they are reasonable. They are unrebutted and unrefuted in the record, if you will. DEWOLF: Okay. LUKE: Does staff have anything else? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 9 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) READ: I have one more thing. One of the things that happened towards the end of this process was, there has been a lot of interest from the Sunriver Owners Association. This has been a difficult process because the applicant is Oregon Water Wonderland Sewer District, and they are a government entity. They are an elected body. Then you have Sunriver Environmental, which is a private company that manages the Sunriver sewer system. And then you have Sunriver Owners Association, which is concerned about sewage going into their community. One of the things I wanted to stress was that if this process showed that the Sunriver option was viable, that would not have meant that we would have required it to go to Sunriver. It would have meant that we would have had to initiate a process to consider Sunriver, which would have required an environmental review and a lot more participation by Sunriver. And I think there has been some confusion that this wasn't going to occur based on this process. I just wanted to assure everybody that we couldn't have done it for several reasons without another application process for Sunriver. And, again, if you were today to say that it should go to Sunriver, let's say you changed what the Planning Commission recommendation was and said you want more information on Sunriver, our recommendation would be that the Board enter into an intent to rezone section 25 property that is allowed if the Sunriver property did not pencil. So, I just want to assure everybody that this wasn't to be the end-all process to require a sewer to go to Sunriver. It was to require the applicant to prove, if they could, whether the Sunriver option is reasonably feasible. And at this point we believe that they've shown that it is not reasonably feasible. DEWOLF: So this evidence has been in the public record, and has been refutable because it has been in the public record and it hasn't been refuted. READ: That's correct. But I just wanted to point that out, because I think there is some concern amongst the Sunriver Owners Association that somehow this was going to make the sewer go to Sunriver. It was to consider whether it was economically feasible to consider Sunriver. I just wanted to make that clear. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 10 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2UU3 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: Ed (Fitch), you'll be doing the presentation for the proponents? FITCH: Yes. LUKE: Will you have other people testifying with you? FITCH: Just Bill (Tye). LUKE: Are there people who are interested in testifying against this proposal on section 25? (Several people then raised their hands) If you are interesting in testifying, please sign up. You can change your mind if you want. Laurie, do you have any comments before we move on? CRAGHEAD: I just want to get a clarification of the staff proposal of the rezone of section 25 on the conditions regarding further study of the Sunriver option. Is that what I was hearing? READ: No. That is not the recommendation that is on the table. Even if the Board chose to overturn the Planning Commission's recommendation, our staff recommendation to the Board is that they leave the section 25 on the table, and require more evidence from Sunriver. The Planning Commission considered that, it was on the table to them, too. But the recommendation of the Planning Commission is that the Sunriver option is not economically feasible. ED FITCH: My name is Ed Fitch, and I'm here on behalf of Oregon Water Wonderland Sanitary District No. 2. Before I go into my comments, I thought it might be helpful to have Bill Tye go over the lay of the land in section 25, what the proposal is, and how it would be used. Particularly, I think one of the questions from the Commission is whether it is wooded or an open area. Bill, I'd ask you to address those issues. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 11 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) BILL TYE: My name is Bill Tye, and I'm an engineer with Tye Engineering. (At this time he referred to an oversized aerial photo of the area and a map of the general area) LUKE: Laurie, for your benefit, Bill has put up an aerial as well as a surface map of the section. TYE: A brief review of a little bit of the history of the area. Once again, Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 -- here; section 25 -- here; and a couple of other things you had asked about regarding the future development out by Sunriver. Originally we were here, and we negotiated with the Forest Service on 25, but the Forest Service said they had a better property over here, higher ground and further away from the groundwater, over here. That was fine, but then we found out Sunriver was interested in developing this part over here, and possibly this, and they were not in favor of that. I think they own this now, and they're planning on here, and this is where we were going to end up. So they were in opposition to us being here. So, then we take a look back at, and this was the original EA (environmental assessment) done by the Forest Service here. And their initial scope said no, we better look at going back here at 25. So, the Forest Service took another look at section 25, and their review indicated that section 25 will work just as well as 17. And here we had some proposed growth. LUKE: For Laurie's benefit, where are you talking about is the original site up near Sunriver had the potential for additional growth around the plant. CRAGHEAD: Okay. TYE: Okay. This is Oregon Water Wonderland. Right now, there is an existing sewer system in this area, the low-lying area. It's a collecting system and a treatment plant here, and a waste disposal field. But this disposal field is about two acres, and needs twenty acres; it's much too small. That's a problem we have right now with the existing system. We have to get a larger area. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 12 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: How many people on the existing system? TYE: There are 270 lots, and I think there are about 200 of them hooked up now. DEWOLF: These are just in Unit 2, correct? TYE: Yes. Unit 1, which lies over here, is not part of the sanitary district. DEWOLF: And will not be. TYE: Can't be, right. Okay. The proposal to go to Sunriver would be this red line. From here we would have to pump. We looked at cutting across here at one time, and we talked with the people at Vandevert. They didn't want us going through the middle. They said we could maybe come through here, but that ended up about three-quarters of a mile through wetlands. So that would be a real problem. So we looked at this, staying to the right, and it would go across also, and we'd have to cross the Little Deschutes River here with the sewer main. Now, if we go to Sunriver, it would be with raw sewage, not treated sewage. We'd abandon the plant and everything would be collected pumped, across the river here. It's five miles up here to the connection to Sunriver. Later reports indicated that if you keep raw sewage in a line without oxygen for more than about twelve hours, it goes septic. It goes anaerobic, and in turn puts out hydrogen sulfite gas, which is a real odor. To keep that from happening, and having odors come out at the far end, we'd have to add a biocide chemical to keep it from going septic on us. That was another $40,000. So that would have to be done. DEWOLF: $40,000 annually? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 13 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) TYE: Yes. There were some concerns about the line breaking or down through here, somebody breaking the line, and we'd have to get in and fix it. These are pump stations. Okay, that's the main line if we were to go to Sunriver. The other option was here, to go to section 25, which is just right across the road. There was 520 acres in this piece, but the Forest Service decided that they would hold on to the portion in the southwest corner. They are not going to sell that to us. This is the blow-up aerial map of section 25. And it's a few years old. This shows several things. One, the tree cover on it. Also the road through it. This has been logged over the years back and forth quite a bit. LUKE: The big road right there -- TYE: This is South Century Drive. LUKE: Right. The other one is no longer there? TYE: No, this is still here. It's been dedicated by the Forest Service. I think the County has been maintaining it now through here. LUKE: Is that proposed to be closed? TYE: No, no. It's staying in operation. This goes down, there's a subdivision down here. It's access to -- LUKE: Laurie, to clarify, this road goes diagonally through about the middle of the subject property. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 14 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) TYE: There is with the Forest Service and our mapping, there's an area here with some wetlands. They are to be preserved there; the Forest Service mandates that. There are some ponds, and there has been some encroachment here, some people cut some ponds out in that area. There are a couple of things on this map. Between these two lines is the higher ground. In this area the groundwater doesn't get within three feet or so. So we can go ahead and irrigate anytime we want to. Back in this area here, the groundwater in some areas does come up to less than three feet. So, we located our disposal spray irrigation system on a pivot, exactly like we did in La Pine. Spray irrigation out here in the middle. We have some buffers 300 feet away from these roads here. Here is where we were going to place our storage ponds, the treated effluent. If we go to this section, then we'd need to continue our treatment at the original site, where it is now. LUKE: Is General Patch Bridge off the picture? TYE: Yes. Up here, at the original treatment plant, we would keep that system or some kind of a treatment system intact, and would do the primary treatment at that site. Then we would pump that primary that primary treated effluent to these ponds here. This would be kind of a polishing pond here, and this is a storage pond in this area here. These are treated effluents. We don't have odors; odors come from treatment plants that are not properly operated. Back at the existing system, we'd have to modify that area. Here we're not foreseeing any problems with odors, but we will aerate those ponds in the wintertime just to make sure we won't have any odor problems at all. LUKE: Bill, this area has been known to get some cold weather throughout the year. When you irrigate when it's that cold, it freezes at the line. So, is there a, will you be spraying year-round, or is the weather a deterrent? If the weather is a deterrent, is there enough holding capacity in the ponds to get you through those cold spells? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 15 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) TYE: We cannot irrigate outside of the growing season, starting about April 15 to May. We have to store about six months' effluent, in this ten -acre pond. Until about October 15. In this area we may not be able to start until May or June, when the groundwater gets -- LUKE: So these ponds are going to be required to hold at least six months of liquid. TYE: That's a problem they have right now. Their ponds aren't large enough. LUKE: Are you over engineered on these ponds so if you have to go seven months, that won't be a problem? TYE: Right. We have some freeboard. Okay, so we have no odor. Also, here, we have to wait until the growing season to start irrigating with our effluent so that the plants, the orchard grass, will be 100% uptake of all the nutrients that comes out of that effluent. So there will be nothing that precipitates down into the groundwater. So we do have to wait until the growing season starts. LUKE: So the irrigation during the growing season is so you don't get penetration into the groundwater. It has nothing to do with the fact that could be irrigating all winter long. The reason is the growing season of the plants. TYE: Right, right. When it starts freezing, you have to shut the pivots down. We have it designed to handle this. The initial phase is 55 acres here. This will have to be completely cleared of the trees, and we plant grass just like in La Pine. As far as screening, some places up here -- this map is several years old, and there is a lot of reprod coming up here now -- we may have to plant some trees, but we aren't seeing it, to screen this. These are only berms here for our lagoon, to hold it. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 16 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) We have found that normally when we build these lagoons, we put them halfway underground and halfway above, and there's enough soil to excavate to build the dikes. Here, with the groundwater a little higher, we're going to have to borrow some material to build these dikes. So we are going to have to dig a pond someplace for a little extra material. Maybe at a site back over here or down here, out of sight, to get a little extra material. LUKE: Are the lagoons to be fenced? TYE: Yes. Now, fencing. According to the Forest Service and our agreements, we have to fence the entire area plus the exterior of our boundaries here. These fences here are a wildlife -friendly fences, just three strands of that steel wire, so that the deer and elk can go through it. And they will also keep trespassers out. We right now have a real problem with people dumping their garbage there, and that's part of the reason the Forest Service wants to get rid of this land, because they don't like to clean up that garbage. And there's some trespassing over here. So the whole exterior will be fenced, and the areas here. Now, the lagoons, there we will have to up the fencing requirement. Normally we would put a cyclone fence. We don't want animals or kids or anybody getting into those lagoons. It's a safety factor there. So we would have to put in some kind of cyclone fence around the lagoons to keep them out. We would fence as part of our wildlife conservation easement, as part of our agreement to fence this, to keep the public out, from running through here. We plan on leaving all the area that we are not using for the lagoons and this as natural habitat. All in timber. We've agreed to clean up this timbered area. There's not too much slash there now to be cleaned up to preserve it for wildlife. We can around the exterior of our spray irrigation plants for the deer and elk. FITCH: I think a lot of the particulars will be dealt with in the site design process. LUKE: As you irrigate here, the grass grows. Are you going to have to mow that, or do you think the wildlife, or maybe run cattle in there. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 17 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) 1 Tom. De No, part of our agreements and the process through DEQ (Department of Environmental Quality) is to harvest and take that crop off, so the nitrates won't decompose back into the ground. So we will have to mow, rake, bale and get it out of there. As to whether or not that is profitable, we hope it will be a break-even for our costs for what we get for the hay. Nitrogen is converted into protein the orchard grass, and the orchard grass does much better than alfalfa. LUKE: Laurie, do you have any questions? CRAGHEAD: No, thank you. FITCH: This issue has been the subject matter of considerable discussion at the local, state and federal level for almost a decade now. In fact, it was back in the mid -1990's that the state legislature approved the regional problem solving for southern Deschutes County. The result of that program was incorporated into the comprehensive plan, anticipating that there would be an expansion of this facility so that the groundwater issue could be appropriately addressed. The memoranda of understanding between the County and the first Oregon Water Wonderland, and the County and the Forest Service, were completed in late 1999 and early 2000. After that, as you know, President Clinton signed in the Bend Pine Nursery legislation, which enabled the Forest Service to make this land available. And in the years 2001 to 2002, the Forest Service completed its environmental assessment. So it's been through a six or seven year process of trying to get where we are now. In addition to that, in terms of the land use process, we've also been engaged in the financial plan. Most of that is through two sources. One is the bond election that was approved by the voters in Oregon Water Wonderland in November 2000, and the second is working with the Rural Utilities Service to have a grant and loan in place, so that the project would be financially capable of being accomplished. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 18 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) Now, the Rural Utilities Service grant and loan package is in jeopardy if the bond proceeds are not available. Those bond proceeds would be in jeopardy if the monthly rate and the connection fee were different than what was represented in the election. So, as Chris pointed out, that if we were to try to impose a different monthly rate or a different connection fee than what was approved by the voters in November 2000, we'd have to go get a second approval. As you know, under Oregon Constitutional law, may have to wait until next May when there is a new election when we can get enough voters to approve a financial measure to get that back on track. LUKE: Actually, November. FITCH: Yes, it could be November. So, the problem with that whole scenario is trying to hold together the financial package with the Rural Utilities Service may not happen. In fact, Ken Durrell has indicated so during this fiscal year on the federal time frame. So I think that if we did anything but section 25 at this juncture, it could seriously jeopardize, and probably would jeopardize, that whole financial package with Rural Utilities. We believe that section 25 is the only viable alternative, both economically and politically. As you know, David went through his slides on the economic issues with Sunriver. And I guess we still have a gentlemen's disagreement on some of the conclusions that were drawn by David. For example, the timing of this additional flow equalization basin. In the only proposal we have gotten from Sunriver during this timeframe, they will require us to pay $526,000, in terms of present-day dollars, when that is required. This has been confirmed and there is a letter in the record from Bill Tye from last week, when it was confirmed. Now, we don't know when it would be required. But it seems to me that it would be imprudent to just not include that in the analysis. It's going to be at some time; it's not going to be never. So, from our perspective as prudent stewards of public monies, we have to anticipate that this cost will be incurred at some time in the future. We put it out five or six years, or maybe it was 2007. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 19 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) Maybe then, or maybe at 2010, but at some juncture that fee is going to be in there, and it's not in any of the calculations that we saw here today. If it were in the calculations, there's no question that the Sunriver option would not cash flow; in fact it would be a deficient sum on a monthly basis. The other couple of observations that I'd make on the economic issues are that these did change. I think George said it well, that there were some reasonable issues that came up in the analysis, and that made the operating costs of going to Sunriver higher. We believe that the best information is what we have available, as in the last graph, from November 14. We'd also point out that from our perspective, when you take into account the flow equalization basin, the additional engineering that would be required, a new environmental study for the pipe going over the Little Deschutes, that all of those costs when you add them in, the actual construction costs of going to Sunriver would exceed that of section 25. So we don't see any significant cost savings of going to Sunriver; we think it would be more expensive from a cost perspective, and we know it would be much more expensive on a cash flow basis. And it would throw into jeopardy the entire bond election. LUKE: Probably the biggest strong point of going there would be the higher level of treatment of the effluent. FITCH: There's no question that there's that benefit. That's why we aggressively looked at it, in cooperation with the County and with Sunriver. I think we must have had at least five or six meetings where we tried to make this thing work, but we don't see it happening from a financial standpoint. We also see a number of political problems with going there. DEWOLF: Can I ask what the different is in the level of treatment? TYE: At the present time, I think Sunriver's permit is the same as what we would have, a level 1 enhanced, where we have to chlorinate. They are probably close to a level 3 most of the time. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 20 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) What happens to them is that during peak flow days, they can't meet the demand. That's what this flow equalization basin stuff triggers. Now, the level of treatment depends on how close you are going to irrigate to homes. With our level 1 enhanced, two or three hundred feet. But as you get the higher levels of treatment, you can get closer and closer to residences. I think you can still irrigate a golf course with level 1 enhanced; that's Prineville. Their new permit is going to require them to go a level 3 continuously or possibly even upgrade to a level 4. Level 4, same treatment, but the screening is higher. DEWOLF: Level 4 is the one that Community Development directors claim you can safely drink, right? TYE: Yeah, you can do it. FITCH: The other problem that we see on the horizon with the Sunriver issue is that there is opposition from the Sunriver Homeowners Association. In the packet that we submitted last week, in fact, there was a resolution to oppose the connection of Oregon Water Wonderland. So we see any trip down that path to be perilous on a political front. We think that there's going to be a problem, as I indicated earlier, of holding together the package with the Rural Utilities Service and with our own constituents on the bond election. Finally, I think the Board of Oregon Water Wonderland is looking at it, and don't see that they could survive if they have this go to Sunriver and try to impose a higher connection fee or monthly rate and remain in office. That's the clear indication they've gotten. It may not be tangible, but it is certainly felt very strongly by them that there is extreme opposition to any change from what the voters approved in 2000. The Planning Commission, as you know, has recommended approval of the rezoned section 25, and recommended a conservation easement. We concur with the Planning Commission's recommendation, and we proposed in a letter than we submitted on February 21 how that conservation easement might work, and also how it would be funded. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 21 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) The District is willing to put up $100,000 up front to basically clean the property up, enhance the habitat, fence the property appropriately, and then to fund $5,000 per year to maintain the conservation easement. We believe that's the best way to go with this so that the people who actually are in charge of that land and who are acquiring it from the Forest Service have the responsibility as well as funding and maintaining the conservation easement. We have no problem with having that as a general condition of the approval, subject to working out a lot of the details with the Planning staff on a site design process. But I think a lot of what the OWW Board has approved is set forth in that letter, and they concur with that recommendation. We believe that the important issue here is to address the issue of inadequate septic systems and the potential contamination of groundwater in this whole area. DEWOLF: Can I ask a question? Correct me if this is incorrect. My understanding is that this is going to serve a majority of homes or potential homes in this area, but not all of them. How many buildable lots are there in Oregon Water Wonderland? TYE: I think there are 1,023 platted lots, but a number of those lots have been combined. So there are right around 1,000 or less buildable lots. There's a map over here that shows all the red lots. They are outside of the existing sewage system. There are 270 lots of the 1,000 on the existing system. That leaves us 730 or some lots that are not on the system. About half of those lots that aren't on the system are built on. They have drainfields. And there are some 150 of those lots that are in a high groundwater area that would not be approved now. They are right in the groundwater. Those are what we are trying to clean up. There is some, approximately 350, vacant lots in the non-sewered area. DEWOLF: If there are a thousand lots altogether, how many lots will this serve? FITCH: It will have the capability of serving all of them. What I think Bill is trying to say is that I think there are some that have a new system, and they may transition in over time. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 22 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: That brings up a question that I asked Monday, and it was suggested that I ask you guys. You have existing lots in high water areas that have septics. According to the information I received on Monday, you are not requiring anybody to hook up into the system. TYE: We will, by ordinance, require them -- and it's a DEQ requirement -- that if you are within 150 feet or 300 feet of the system, you have to hook up. Now, we are also -- LUKE: Now, I want to be clear. You can have some systems that could have been installed last year. Maybe they did a repair or something like that, in a high water area. And when that sewer goes down in front of their houses, their lots, they will be required to hook up. FITCH: Yes. TYE: All old systems. If they have just a brand new sand filter system that they've spent $10,000 on, we can't mandate those people to hook up. In order to encourage connections, we have allowed people to voluntarily connect up within the first year and not have to pay the $3,000 connection fee. So that's going to get the majority of them, especially the ones in the high groundwater areas. They will be mandated to hook up whether they want to or not. DEWOLF: You'll force them to do it for free, no matter what. TYE: Yeah. On the sand filters, they give them a ten-year life from the time it is installed. They have ten years to hook up and not pay the connection fee. Our response from most of the people who have sand filter is that they want to hook up right away and get rid of that mound and that problem. LUKE: One other question on the septic. I've heard through one of the staff reports that there are tanks that are going to be put in the right-of-way. Is that one of the proposals? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 23 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) TYE: We have a choice. That is part of the original proposal, to put a tank between two lots on the property line. When we did the La Pine sewer, there we replaced all septic tanks. La Pine is an effluent system where everyone has septic tanks; we draw off the effluent. That cuts our treatment costs. The effluent then goes to a central pumping station and then to lagoons. We found in La Pine that after a while people build things over those septic tanks, and it's a real hassle to get to them to pump them. So the District here wants those tanks out on the right-of-way, right at the property lines, and one for two lots. We also have given real consideration to an air vac system. There's still a tank there. The existing system at Oregon Water Wonderland is in terrible shape. They tried to put a gravity collection system in high groundwater areas, and it doesn't work. We have high infiltration there, so the conventional gravity system doesn't work. So we have to go to some kind of innovative system, whether septic tank, effluent, air vac, or pump stations in each tank. The advantage of the septic tank on each takes care of a considerable amount of the primary treatment. And then we can get our level treatments added. Although our permit is for a level 1 enhanced, we'll be level 2 or better treatment all the time. There will need to be some kind of a tank at each lot, and DEQ mandates that the system is in charge of those tanks. We have found that if the homeowner has to maintain them, they don't get plugged up nearly as much as when we have to. But DEQ wants the District to have that tank, whatever kind of pumps, be the District's responsibility to maintain that. So there will be some tank in the right-of-way. LUKE: If the tank is in the right-of-way, what does that do to future expansion of the road or utilities? TYE: The tank is only about six feet wide, and you've got sixty feet of right-of-way. So it's going to be right up against the property line. So we won't affect any future road. DEWOLF: If you ever get to the point where you are putting in forty or sixty foot wide roads, they aren't going to be on this system anymore. We'll all be dead and gone. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 24 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2uu.s Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) DALY: What about the distance, the gravity from the house to the tank? If it's clear out there that far, it will be tough to get it to gravity flow. TYE: We'll have some of them three feet deep. We don't like that, as some of them run back. We want to keep that as high as we can. With our gravity effluent systems like in La Pine, then we have to make sure that each house will gravity flow to the front line. DALY: Will you put a pump system in each tank? TYE: Those systems are a little more costly to install, and they get to be a real maintenance issue. We are seriously considering -- and Rural Development likes the idea -- of an air vacuum system. And Deschutes River Woods in Bend has just put one of those in, the first one approved in the State of Oregon. And we looked at that for looking at maybe going to Sunriver. But there's a vacuum tank there, and the system is under vacuum so we don't have to worry about the infiltration into the groundwater. We'll have to take another real serious look at this. There is a large system in Washington. They are real competitive and work real well. So we'll be looking at that as far as the septic tanks, where we have the raw sewage to get rid of. DEWOLF: When all is said and done, and you get to the end of the day, you've got 1,000 homes and a system with capacity for 1,000 homes. There's enough money with this bond to build it all. FITCH: Together with the Rural Utilities Service commitment, right. DEWOLF: So we aren't going to run short of money, and everybody is going to be covered. FITCH: It's in two phases. The Rural Utilities Service has indicated that they are approving the second phase as well. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 25 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2UU3 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) TYE: In the beginning, Rural Utilities indicated to us that our $7 million project couldn't be funded in one year, that it would have to go over two years. We now have some $4 million initial phase guaranteed by them. They are now working through the new farm bill to get us another almost $3 million in loan grant funds. So we're working on those now. FITCH: The current facts as we have them now, there's no question that we only have two choices, Sunriver and section 25. The Sunriver one we believe is fraught with a lot of difficulties. We don't think we would get to the goal of addressing the septic and groundwater through the Sunriver option. Section 25 is a known commodity. We know it's going to pencil out from a financial standpoint. We know it is engineering feasible. And we know it's available through the Forest Service. All of these are known commodities, and we know we can go ahead and get the job done. So we recommend concurrence with the Planning Commission, with the approval of section 25 with the conservation easement. At this time, Chair Luke called for a five-minute break. LUKE: Bill, I believe you wanted to clarify something, for the record? TYE: I've gotten a couple of questions. I didn't do a good job of explaining these holding ponds. In the past there have been several methods. We used to not line them. Raw sewage went into the lagoons and perked into the groundwater. There are a number of them, but DEQ does not allow that now; we have to seal them. The existing lagoons are sealed. Here we're looking at sealing these ponds with a 16 -mil polyethylene liner. It's thicker than an inner tube. These will be completely sealed so that there's no possibility of any leakage. And we'll have to do yearly leak tests on them to make sure they don't leak. La Pine used a PVC but then you have to cover it because of the sunlight deteriorates it. But here there will be a polyvinyl liner that won't allow it to leak. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 26 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: You'll have a fence around it so that the elk can't get in there anyway. TYE: Deer are real tough on them. They can poke holes. LUKE: Your elk fence will have to be at least six feet or more. TYE: Around these lagoons, yeah, we'll have to put up a fence. We don't want dogs or kids or anything else in those areas. LUKE: The question was asked of me; are you just fencing between the roads, or are you fencing this sensitive area in the bottom also? TYE: We are supposed to go ahead and fence the entire boundaries, and both sides of the road. Originally we were only going to do this side here, because that's where we're working. But now, for the conservation easement, we have to go ahead and fence this off to keep people out and keep them from dumping. BRENDA PACE: I'm Brenda Pace, with the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission felt a little at a loss with this project. There seemed to be so much difficulty in getting clear numbers, and even in trying to justify the price of $38 a month as a user fee in the district. So we decided that the only way that we could justify getting an exemption to the Goals, and justifying having this property adjacent to homeowners who may feel disadvantaged the way it is, was to place a conservation easement on it. I'm happy that the district has accepted that idea, and I'm happy that they are proposing $100,000 to clean up the site. The site is in a little worse shape than we thought it was. But still it's very valuable for habitat, according to the Fish & Wildlife Service's biological assessment. What we don't agree with is that the conservation easement under their proposal would be only over the non-active portions of the property. The main reason for that -- Minutes of Public Hearing Page 27 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: Are you speaking for the Planning Commission, or are you speaking for yourself? PACE: I'm speaking for myself. Well -- LUKE: You've used "we" a couple of times, so we need to clarify who you are speaking for. PACE: I believe that I was giving the opinion of the Planning Commission as a group when we voted for it. At least insofar as this was a reasonable justification for a Goal exception. Beyond that, I am happy at the $100,000 that has been suggested to clean up the site. And I'm happy about the $5,000 a year to do that. However, I don't believe that the conservation easement will work without some sort of an endowment to fund inspection of the property. We are dealing with a district that has operated a failing facility, and we're dealing with one that has been cash-strapped generally, and over time the tendency is for an organization such as this to have the possibility, certainly the likelihood, to not fulfill all of those responsibilities. And that's what a conservation easement is all about, is to try to make sure those are enforced over time. An endowment is necessary for any reputable non-profit to join with the County in a conservation easement of this kind. So, I would ask that we continue on the route to have an endowment to go with this conservation easement. DEWOLF: How large? DALY: I don't understand what an endowment would do. What would it do? DEWOLF: Proceeds from an endowment would pay for the testing and what have you. But how large of an endowment are you talking about? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 28 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) PACE: We have to think about long-term sorts of investments in order to justify endowments at this point. But an endowment of $50,000 for instance would provide about $2,500 a year. DEWOLF: At 5%. If they are committing $5,000, and I am assuming that's part of this $38 -- PACE: But this is only for inspections and patrolling, and then any working with the district that would have to take place. Because they are basically committing to take care of the property, so what the conservation easement would do would make sure that this happens over the very long term; and not become a burden to the County to do enforcement as well. LUKE: You know, it bothers me some. This is an independently elected body that manages that board. They are responsible to their citizens in the district, and to start out with a proposal that you don't trust them to keep their word, bothers me. Independently elected bodies, that's their job. And I know there have been some districts that have not lived up to that responsibility, but to start out not trusting them kind of bothers me. PACE: I've never thought of a conservation easement as starting out not trusting, because we simply don't know what the circumstances -- LUKE: Conservation easements are great. But to say we need a fund to check on them to make sure they are doing their job, that's what kind of bothers me. PACE: Well, then, the conservation easement doesn't have any ability to function. I mean, the conservation easement is there because we want to make sure that the area is maintained as habitat. That's our justification for looking for a Goal exception. If it hasn't any ability to function, then it's a worthless conservation easement. It doesn't do anything for the property. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 29 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) And we're talking about thirty or forty years from now. It's not this body of people that we are talking about. It's an entirely other group of people who were not a part of this process, didn't hear about the conservation easement, didn't know the reason for it being put in place; they would be a whole different body of people. So when we are thinking about this over time, it becomes more relevant also. DEWOLF: I didn't take it as any sort of casting dispersion. I took it as a funding mechanism to have this be in place in perpetuity. PACE: That's right. DALY: What's the $100,000 then that they're coming up with? DEWOLF: It's to clean it up at the beginning, as Ed explained. DALY: There's $5,000 a year for maintenance. LUKE: It may not take $100,000 to clean it up. Maybe it takes $80,000 to clean it up, leaving $20,000 that stays in the fund to help maintain it. There are a lot of things that can happen. DEWOLF: Correct me if I'm wrong. What I'm understanding that the suggestion is that rather than just an agreement to pay $5,000 per year, is to set up an endowment with the funds from the endowment making up that money to take care of it. PACE: When I said a $50,000 endowment, that produces about $2,500 a year. So, to produce the $5,000, you have to have $100,000 endowment, at a 5% rate of return. FITCH: I think the board is just trying to be consistent with the Planning Commission's recommendations. It was to get $150,000 to implement the conservation easement; at least that's how we understood it. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 30 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) And I think the Planning Commission had two alternatives. One is to put it in a fund right now and then just draw interest from it over time. But I think the need is to address the property now, because it does need some clean up and it does need some plantings; and it does need some screenings and fencing. We thought the best way to implement the conservation easement is to put some capital in up front to make the property enhanced for wildlife. And then the $5,000 per year would was to implement it over time, and to maintain it consistent with that $150,000 recommendation from the Planning Commission. So I think we were just trying to be consistent with the Planning Commission and do it in the best way as to act as good stewards of the land. But we do think it needs a lot of work up front. If we put all the money in an endowment fund and just draw out the interest, we wouldn't get the job done now. So that's the problem that we see. LUKE: I would also point that we have juvenile and adult crews that do those kinds of jobs for a very minimal amount of money. (Referring to the juvenile and adult corrections departments.) They are available for public projects. FITCH: And as I said, if it costs less, we can keep the extra in a reserve fund. LUKE: I have a list of people here, but they didn't tell me if they are for or against. We're still on proponents. Are there any other proponents who would like to testify on this? MIKE BRANNAN: I'm Mike Brannan, and I'm president of the Sunriver Owners Association. And with me is Bill Chapman, who is our General Manager. WE are certainly in favor of section 25 as the correct option to solve this Oregon Water Wonderland sewer problem, because we are opposed to using the Sunriver sewer system as a solution to this problem. And we voted as a Board of Directors at our December 14 meeting unanimously to oppose it. Bill has a memo that he has given for the record. Bill, I'll turn it over to you. BILL CHAPMAN: I was going to summarize some of the items that are in the letter that was put into the record. (At this point he read the letter; a copy is attached as Exhibit E.) Minutes of Public Hearing Page 31 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) C M100A It was mentioned that the effluent odors that come out of the Sunriver treatment plant on a relatively frequent basis when we have high populations in Sunriver, which, as you gentlemen all know, is basically Memorial Day to Labor Day, Thanksgiving, Christmas and spring break. We have some 4,124 residential lots in Sunriver, and there are only 290 lots that are just vacant lots. We obviously have many condos and villages, plus all of the resort and all of the commercial properties that are attached into this. We also currently have Crosswater with 99 lots coming into the Sunriver treatment plant, and we have Vandevert Ranch with I believe 23 lots coming into it. Whenever the population does get high, and during this past two years we've had many times. I have letters from one particular owner who owns property adjacent to the sewage treatment plant. LUKE: Are you going to submit them? BRANNAN: I will give them to you. I'm not going to read them to you. The gentleman who wrote them is George Sullivan. In January of this year they had an odor release that was very offensive, and he wrote to both the Sunriver Owners Association and to Jane West at the DEQ regarding this problem. The same property owner had a similar problem in January in 2002. Again he wrote to the SROA and to the DEQ. I further have a letter written by a broker from Sunriver Realty to the director of the plant explaining the fact that she lost the sale of a property, and I'll quote her, "The Realtor showing the house called from outside and said he was expecting to write an offer. When I called him back later, he said the prospective buyers walked outside after he spoke, noticed the odor and changed their minds, and he lost the sale." So it's a serious problem, and we put up with it every time there are a lot of people there. DALY: You know, this sounds an awful lot like what Eagle Crest had, and we put a moratorium on them. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 32 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: Eagle Crest, though, didn't have a sewer system as such. They had an expanded septic tank system. I think there's a major difference. Laurie, do you have any questions on anything so far? CRAGHEAD: No. LUKE: Is there anybody else who is in favor who has signed up? I assume then that everybody else is opposed to it. We'll go to the opponents then. Okay. Norman Jellum? JELLUM: I'm just here to observe. JEFFREY SCOTT: I live at 55471 Richard Way, which is approximately due east of the center of the project. We submitted this in writing on February 25, and I'd like to just read it. My name is Jeffrey T. Scott, and my wife and I reside at 55471 Richard Way. I have included a copy of the map for you -- I've already pointed it out where it is. As you can see, our property lies virtually adjacent to the proposed activities. It appears from the notice that no sewage treatment plant is planned for the site, but rather it will be an area to hold effluent from the existing plant and retention ponds, and apply such effluent to the subject property. Our concerns with this plan are as follows. One. We have been told, and it is logical, that groundwater generally flows from the Big Deschutes River on the west towards the Little Deschutes River on the east. If this effluent found its way into the aquifer, it would likely migrate towards our lot and to that of our neighbors. LUKE: Are you on a well? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 33 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) SCOTT: Yes. I would like to know what studies have been done on the possible effects to the underground aquifer, and what guarantees can be made to ourselves and the local property owners that our drinking water will not be contaminated. Two. What studies have been done to make sure that there will be no possible odors to the surrounding property owners? My wife and I recently moved to Bend to fulfill our life's dream of living a quiet lifestyle in an area of unspoiled natural beauty. Conserving excess land, which is part of section 25 for management of various wildlife species, is a worthwhile cause as long as you guarantee us that we won't be tasting or smelling the effects of this plant for years to come. We strive to be good neighbors and we're not opposed to controlled growth based on sound engineering principles. However, any deleterious effects to our property would force us to seek appropriate legal remedies. I hesitate to be labeled an opponent of this, but we have serious concerns. We just moved in here, we love the property and we love the area, and we don't want to be smelling this. I have a concern or a question. Bill Tye previously testified that there would be no odors. And now I've just heard people from Sunriver Owners Association saying that their sewage treatment plant is developing or generating some serious odors in those areas. LUKE: We'll ask Bill come back up to address that after we get through the people who have concerns. LUKE: (To George Read.) Can you come up here for a minute? We're dealing with a zone change and exceptions, and those kinds of things. But won't there be other public hearings on this site plan? When they get ready to site this system on the property? READ: The site plan may not need a public hearing. It could be done administratively, or it could be done with a public hearing. That's generally based on how complete the application is, and what we hear back. But the criteria are not -- Minutes of Public Hearing Page 34 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: Let me ask another question. There would be a public hearing if, when you send your notice out about the site plan review, you still have to send notices, don't you? READ: That's correct. LUKE: And if there are objections from the neighbors, there will be a public hearing. READ: There could be a public hearing. We don't send everything to a hearing. Most of what we do we can handle without a hearing. If there's an issue raised that shows it has a problem meeting the criteria in our Code, then we would send it to a public hearing. LUKE: The criteria he raised about smells and the effects on groundwater, is that not something you'd review? READ: No. The fact is that if DEQ permits this, then that is probably all we can require. We're not in the approval process through DEQ. So, probably not. DALY: George, isn't it true that basically what we are doing here is taking a lot of septic systems and putting them into a sewer system so that hopefully it will relieve the groundwater contamination problem? READ: The answer is yes. I mean, if you want my opinion, the net result is a huge environmental improvement. However, the place of impact is changing. I guess the questions raised probably could be directed to the applicant. LUKE: Do you have anything else you'd like to bring up? SCOTT: I think that's about it. It's just that I'm somewhat shocked that there will be no engineering or detailed studies on the ground water flow associated with this project. LUKE: Minutes of Public Hearing Page 35 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) He said that this is not normally required. The Commissioners could require -- READ: Could I please comment? Absolutely those will be done, and have already been done in looking at the site. I need to say that absolutely they have already been done by DEQ, to look at the site to see if it's feasible. And they will be done. They are just not within our authority. The authority is the Department of Environmental Quality process. What we look at is how far are they set back, are there trees, is there screening, those kinds of things; not necessarily the water quality issues that fall under the purview of DEQ. DEWOLF: I mean, the whole thing with Eagle Crest was a DEQ permitted deal. The whole thing with the tallow plant was a DEQ issue. It's not ours. LUKE: Not too far away at Stagestop, we just went through a thing with them for DEQ, under an enforcement order. They are improving their system now, and we're helping them get some grants and stuff. They aren't very far down the river. READ: But you might have the applicant talk about what studies have been done to date. The other thing I can tell you, and I think it was brought up in the applicant's presentation, is that these things are regularly monitored. Right now we are doing it -- our department is doing it on behalf of the La Pine Sewer District in conjunction with DEQ, to monitor everything underneath that field, and to monitor the uptake of the nitrates into the grasses to make sure that the amount of protein created in the grasses is equal to the amount of nitrogen going in. So, those studies do occur, and those things do occur. We are involved with them through our environmental health division. But it is not a land use issue. LUKE: Elizabeth Stearns? (Ms. Stearns declined to speak.) Minutes of Public Hearing Page 36 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: Randy Allen? RANDY ALLEN: My name is Randy Allen. I live at 55315 Homestead Way. I'm up against the Forest Service land on the west side, looking towards the treatment plant. I'm looking west from my back porch. Just off to the left a little bit. I'm playing a little catch-up with all of this, which has been going on for a year or two or something. There are a lot of people who had not been notified. I'm concerned with the water conditions around there. LUKE: You live right up against the property and you haven't received notice? ALLEN: I received this last one, here. But some of the stuff that other people have been getting, I have not been getting. And I'm playing a little catch-up, trying to figure out what's going on in my back yard. Because I'm going to be the closest one to it, and the way the wind blows I'm going to get all of the impact. I'm concerned. I've got two wells. They are shallow wells, one is 18 feet and one is 14 feet. I excavate for Mark Latham, and I have taken a piece of equipment down there. In the summertime you can dig down there and hit water at nine feet. I don't think that anybody realizes where the water levels are at in the summertime. And when winter hits, the water is on top of the ground. If we have a bad snow or a lot of rain, it's on top. It takes a few weeks. I have ducks landing in my front yard. LUKE: I want to point out that if you put these pictures in the record, they stay there. ALLEN: You can have them. Those pictures were taken about two weeks ago. Of course, my camera says a different date on them, but I just picked them up yesterday. That happens early in the morning. We get up, and -I've been watching those elk for ten years. Last year we had 36 of them. You'll see out my back porch, they are sitting right on top of my septic tank. I've got a sand filter. Those came out last week. There are a lot of elk in that area, and a lot of deer that migrate through there. So now I'm going to have a fence, Minutes of Public Hearing Page 37 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) possibly. They are going to have a lot of maintaining to deal with that fence with all of those elk. Because they kind of stir up things around my house. And I know they have a problem down at Water Wonderland, and it does need to be addressed, but I'd rather not have it in my back yard. I bought that property years ago, back in 1987, and thought that the Forest Service would never sell their land. But I did go down to talk with the Forest Service last year when I got downwind of this, and had a little chitchat with them. And they tell me that there is a lot of stuff that's thrown out on the land, refrigerators, washing machines, and stuff, which I do see that occasionally. But you have that all over the State of Oregon. You have that all over the United States. You just deal with it, you know. Their reasoning on that was to sell the land so they can build a new office. That's what they told me. And I'm scratching my head. That's a cop-out. If they are going to sell that land, they might as well sell all of that land in the State of Oregon, and keep going throughout the 52 states. If they don't want to maintain a healthy forest. DEWOLF: Fifty-two? Did they add some? ALLEN: We'll round it off to 50. How's that. I'm a little nervous. DEWOLF: We're trying to help you relax. LUKE: You're doing okay. ALLEN: So, I worked in the timber industry in Mill City for 23 years, so I know a little bit about trees. And these areas where they are going to have these ponds, there's quite a bit of timber in there, and that's where all those elk sleep and eat. Come hunting season, they're gone. They come right back after hunting season. So do the deer. LUKE: Minutes of Public Hearing Page 38 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) There will be no hunting in this area. You know that. It's part of the wildlife conservation easement. ALLEN: Right. So what I am saying is, there are a lot of people who use that back there. They walk their dogs; they walk all over out there. And they see all these little varmints running around. I'm concerned with the water. You know, we're drinking water out there at these levels. I don't think anybody has made an impact study on what's going to happen out there when they start irrigating this stuff. LUKE: Actually, I think that was brought up, that there have been studies done by the DEQ. And Bill is going to address that when you guys are all done. ALLEN: Well, I've been pulling samples out of my well. And I'm going to continue to. And right now there is no bacteria and no nitrates. DEWOLF: You draw at nine feet? ALLEN: Well, fourteen and twenty. DEWOLF: And no nitrates at all? ALLEN: Not at this point in time. Which I'm lucky, and it's good water. So I'm going to continue to drink it. But I think there needs to be more study on this, because we're so close. And I would like to see maybe you guys going out there and you could understand how close this all is. Because it's kind of hard when we're sitting in a room like this to absorb what is going on out there, and what could happen out there. Until you actually see it, there is a strip right behind my house where they have already logged it, and there's already reprod coming up. It's an L -shape, and there's a lot of timber in there still. They're going to be cutting all that down, too. And they will probably be getting money for it. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 39 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: The only place the timber is going down is in the circle. That was he testified to. Only where they are going to irrigate, which is that one circle, which is quite a ways away from you. For the sprinklers to work. ALLEN: What I'm saying is that there is still a lot of timber in there. They are going to be cutting some of it down. LUKE: Sure. ALLEN: And it's going to cause a big opening in there, too. DALY: They've got to cut some down. LUKE: George, do we need to take these pictures into the record? Okay. ALLEN: I've got a lot more pictures if you want me to send them to you. Because there are a lot of animals back there. And I think we need to consider them, too. Like I said, I'm playing catch-up, and this is the first meeting I've been to. So I'm trying to understand both sides. On the other side, I'm going to be the one smelling all this and I don't think there has been enough study done on all this stuff yet. LUKE: We'll try to have some of your concerns addressed before you leave. Mark Halverson? MARK HALVERSON: I'm Mark Halverson, and I reside at 16523 Beaver Drive, which is just south, down Foster Road to the end of the street. That subdivision down there is Deschutes River Recreation Homesites Unit 8, Part 6. There are about one hundred lots down there currently, and about 22 homes at this point in time. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 40 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) I'm the president of the Beaver Special Road District, which is Foster Road from South Century Drive down to the subdivision; we are responsible for maintaining that road currently, Foster Road. Bill mentioned earlier that he thought that was a County -maintained road. It is actually a Forest Service road that we, as private individuals out of our road district tax base, maintain. LUKE: So the road that goes right through the property, your road district is responsible for its maintenance? HALVERSON: That's correct. It's 2.1 miles down to Beaver Drive. Then we maintain the cross streets in the subdivision down there as well. So, Bill had also pointed out something else as far as the initial impact when this all came about, as to what OWW should be doing. And I think everybody is in agreement that something should be done, whether it's the Sunriver solution or section 25. I think good points have been raised and there has been a lot of valid points on both sides. What concerns me is his opening statement when he said that the U.S. Forest Service and OWW initially felt that the Vandevert site was the most appropriate. But because Sunriver Resort, not the Owners Association, was opposed to that option. That one just kind of went out the window. And I've yet to hear anybody address that as to why, since that seemed to be the most appropriate, does not have neighbors around it, does not have the groundwater issue that's been addressed with these other sites, or with this site in particular, section 25. But because a major player in our community is making a statement that this is not appropriate because they want to end up buying that spot to develop it further and it may have a negative impact on Crosswater and so forth. Then it all just dropped. And that part does bother me. And it should bother everybody in this room. Because where that site is, as I mentioned, we don't have Richard Way, we don't have Homestead Way, we don't have Blissful Acres, we don't have Oregon Water Wonderland # 1, and we don't have Deschutes River Recreation Homesites. All of these entities border this particular site. So, I'd like to hear someone address that sometime tonight if not down the road. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 41 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) As far as the elk issue, it is -- and the pictures do address that -- last night my twelve year old and my wife were driving down Foster Road, just 200 yards off South Century Drive, a small herd of twelve elk crossed the area. And now I'm seeing fences going around 480 acres, encasing this area, and I have a concern with that as well. And I've addressed that in writing before, so I won't dwell on that. LUKE Bill, please address this, how these wildlife fences will be set up. HALVERSON: Regard Foster Road; obviously being the president of the Special Road District, I have questions and concerns on that. I've yet heard anybody indicate the amount of traffic that will be going on there, what kind of cooperative use are we going to be doing, or maintenance use of that road. I'd like to see that addressed as well by the applicant. LUKE You'd like the sewer district to work out something with the road district on their travel down the road, and how much they are going to be on the road, and that kind of thing. HALVERSON: That's correct. The odor issues, I know you're going to get on to that, but I think that everyone has a concern in that area. And I've mentioned I think five subdivisions that border this proposed area. Sunriver has by far one of the state of the art systems, and yet they have an issue that is being downplayed by the proponents of this, indicating that we are going to have absolutely no odor. And I find that difficult to swallow at best, and I don't know how that argument can even be made. Then the last thing that I have, and I have not even heard this prior to tonight, the cost. We have seen some great charts tonight regarding the cost of hooking into Sunriver or developing the system, and yet we just heard moments ago that they don't even know what kind of system they are actually going to propose. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 42 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) Whether it's vacuum, septic tanks between two lots, a septic tank on a lot, and I'm not an owner in Oregon Water Wonderland, but if I were and I was hearing that the people who are proposing this sewer system don't know what kind of system they are going to install, I would find it very challenging at best to decide, based on economics, which was the big thing that downplayed one decision and made this be the alternative area. Yet no one knows what kind of system and what kind of answers are going with that, so how can they determine a cost. With that, I'll close. Thanks for your time. LUKE: And I don't know, because I was kind of surprised. I was under the assumption that this was always the piece of property, over near Sunriver. But when the Forest Service is looking at trading a piece of property, they look at what kind of public opposition is going to be generated. And I'm sure there was more significant opposition to that site who stepped forward who maybe didn't step forward here. You guys are stepping forward now, but at the time of the exchange or the decision by the Forest Service to sell, that may have a big thing to do with it. Did you guys testify to the Forest Service during that time? HALVERSON: Yes, we did. And members of Blissful Acres, Oregon Water Wonderland #l, my subdivision, Richard Way, yes. I would think, Dennis, if you talked with the Forest Service and asked for their records as far as how many people were in opposition at that point in time regarding changing from the Vandevert site to this one, I think you'd be amazed at how many people were there. In fact, I know that they were there. I can get the numbers, as I know you are busy. LUKE: That's the last name on the list. Is there anyone else? SCHMOYER: I'd like to pass a sign -in sheet around for those individuals who want to receive a notice of a future Board decision, and who did not testify. RICH HADLEY: I'm Rich Hadley, and I'd like to apologize for not being here to sign up. I had a COVA (Central Oregon Visitors Association) meeting. Mike, you were absent. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 43 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) I live in OWW 2, and I'd like to address a little bit about what Mark spoke to, as to what the cost of this operation is. For two years prior to this operation even getting off the ground, I've been concerned about costs related to this project. I guess the Sewer Board has kind of put me as a proponent. I said no, I'm not a proponent, show me the numbers and I'll be the biggest advocate you've got. I've never seen the numbers, and my background was commercial lending before I came to Central Oregon. So I want to see numbers that have detail related to them -- interest rates related to different deals. All they've done is backed in the numbers and spit out a number at the end that doesn't mean anything to people who look at numbers. The other thing that concerns me a little bit -- like I said, if it makes good economic sense for the community, then I'm not opposed to it. And I'd just like to see that. Number two is that they talk about a free hookup all the time. Well, I think that is misstated to a large degree. Yeah, you can tie into the line, but for every home in there that hooks up to it, it is my understanding that they have the burden of bringing the line from the house down to the roadway, and putting in a septic tank. And from my best projections that I've gotten from different excavation guys, that free hookup could cost from $2,500 to $3,500 per unit, depending on if it falls, if it's raised, or what it is. DEWOLF: So it's $3,000 instead of $6,000. So it's accurate to say that the hookup is free. HADLEY: Actually when you tie into the line, from there to there, they aren't' going to charge you to take your sewer somewhere else. But it's going to cost you a bunch of money -- DEWOLF: But after that additional year, that $2,500 to $3,500 is going to have an additional $3,000 expense to address after that first year. So there is a value. LUKE: And what happens when your septic tank fails in five or ten years, and you can't repair it? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 44 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) HADLEY: I'm not saying that there's not a -- I just think it's a misstatement when you say "free" hookup. It's not free to the community to hook up to the system. It's going to cost them a fair amount of money. To say that the people who are on sand filter systems, a large percentage of them are going to hook up, I think is inaccurate. I think that if you just spend somewhere between $12,000 and $16,000 to do that, are you going to spend another $3,500 this year to hook up? I don't think so. Especially if you can operate for several years for free without having to hook up. Are we going to have enough people on the system to support this debt? I'd like to see that somehow. They keep telling me that there are lots more people hooking up. All of them are putting in sand filter systems. So there's actually a smaller number that will be tying in right away, I think, than what's out there out right now. LUKE: But there are also lots that are not currently buildable that will be buildable because the sewer is in. HADLEY: I don't disagree with that. LUKE: The other thing I want to point out is that the County didn't come to the Special Sewer District and say, "do this". The District has been working through this process, and working with their residents, and actually went to a vote. Without any of that, we wouldn't even be here today. HADLEY: I'm glad to speak to that as well. Because when they put that on the election, which I went to Susie Penhollow and said, hey, what's up with this? They talked about raw sewage floating on top of the ground, which was inaccurate. They talked about polluting the Deschutes River, which there was no evidence to support at that time. They talked about a whole bunch of issues that were in support of this thing. So that anybody that saw it who had no background voted for it. They were fined by the Attorney General for the way they applied this to the voters. I think if it could have been done in a fair fashion, it wouldn't have passed. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 45 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) DEWOLF: You know, Al Gore was saying that kind of thing about Florida, too. But Bush is still President. And ultimately we have to live or die by the results of those elections. HADLEY: I don't disagree with that. They told me I could hire an attorney to stop it and try to go back and figure it out. But I said, I'm not the keeper of the people. We've got the Sheriffs Department to correct wrongs that are done out there in society. It seems like this was done wrong and should have been redone. It wasn't, it hasn't been redone, and it won't be redone. Yeah, we can live with it. As I said, I'm not an opponent to this thing if it makes economic feasibility. They don't know what it's going to cost to buy the Forest Service ground. I'd just like to see the numbers. And when we talk about free hookups, I'd like to make sure that the people know that it is really not going to be a free hookup. It's going to cost you some dough to hook up to it. And then, we ought to have a survey done as to how many people are going to hook up to it right away. I mean, there are simple things we can do to figure out how many people would be supporting this system that's out there. You spoke about a number of lots. The number of lots in there isn't that large. I mean, we could buy those lots and turn them into parks or something a lot cheaper than doing this system. But if there is a study that shows that we are causing adverse effects to the aquifer or something else, then maybe we bite the bullet and go ahead and do it. To my knowledge, there are no studies to support that. In fact, regional problem solving, some of their stuff, when they concluded here a few years ago, suggested that if anything the water table was getting better. There are hot spots of nitrates in south Deschutes County. One of them is where Crosswater drains into the Deschutes River. I wonder why that is a hot spot. I mean, there are some real obvious reasons why certain spots are hot spots, I think. But for our specific area there is no research to show that we've got a hot spot or a real significant problem with nitrates right now. So, again, I'm back to just the economics of it. Does it make sense, what are the real costs? I sat down with someone, I think it was you, at one time, and talked about what will be the cost of this. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 46 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) One of the people on the sewer board looked at the cost and at that time they were coming to the numbers that I had suggested two years before it came to pass, which was about $100 a year. I'm willing to pay that. Maybe a lot of people in there wouldn't be. There's a lot of surveys that could be done to see if the community is really behind this, because the way it was passed I think was an unfair situation. That's all I've got to say. Thank you. LUKE: Anyone else wish to testify? Some interesting questions have been raised. ED FITCH: There are good answers for all of them. First, on section 25, George was right. This has gone through engineering studies. One thing that we did mention is that in conjunction with the installation of these holding ponds and the effluent system, they are going to have to put in monitoring wells. The effluent that is put out on the property will be monitored all the time to insure that there is no contamination of any groundwater. LUKE: Bill, what have you observed in the underground flow of water? Which way does it generally go? BILL TYE: In all three directions. We are kind of on a plateau; some goes towards the Big Deschutes, some towards the Little Deschutes. Groundwater studies have been done. We are required to install monitoring wells around those areas, on the site. FITCH: The other thing I wanted to point out is that there is a difference between the two systems, when they talk about odors at Sunriver. They are at the actual sewage plant. And these are during peak periods when the facilities are at their maximum. LUKE: You won't have solids at these lagoons, just liquid. What do you do to treat it? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 47 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) W/9 These will be facultative lagoons. They are anaerobic and aerobic. Some work underground and some you have to aerate. Essentially we are the same as treatment plant. They'll do the primary treatment at the old site. Only the treated effluent will be pumped to this site. And odors occur only where there is improperly treated sludge. Sunriver's site doesn't have odor during a normal treatment process, when they are able to maintain it. When there are big fluctuations, it gets out of whack. WE don't have the big three-day weekends at Oregon Water Wonderland. And also the lagoons don't have a problem. Sisters is exactly the same. They just put in exactly the same system. FITCH: The other thing that was raised was in regard to section 17. That was the subject matter of an environmental assessment by the U.S. Forest Service, and they issued their assessment in the fall of 2001, and after six months they issued a finding of no significance for section 25. The Forest Service chose section 25 over section 17. That was something that was done last year, and is beyond the appeal period, and it's a final decision. So we have to live with what the Forest Service did. LUKE: Do you know why? FITCH: Two reasons. One is that they did see the benefit of section 25, given its proximity to Oregon Water Wonderland. And the savings on that basis. The second reason, they did see opposition to section 17, and they foresaw that this thing could get bogged down for years in administrative appeals in the Forest Service system, which would in essence kill the project. So I think those are the two reasons they chose section 25. The last thing, in terms of the road maintenance district, we have no problem working with them on some appropriate shared cost, given our use of any of their facilities. That's something that can be worked out. DEWOLF: I have some other questions that came up for me. One was the fences. I mean, this whole entire thing isn't going to be one big, solid fence, is it? The entire 400 acres? Minutes of Public Hearing Page 48 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) TYE: Under the Forest Service EA, they require three strands of this solid steel wire. The animals can go right through it. It's not barbed wire; it's a smooth wire fence. DEWOLF: You've got a different issue with the ponds that you are lining. Those would have cyclone, tall fences. Elk fences. TYE: It's the top of a dike, so about six feet around the perimeter. [1811.41 A question was brought up about the cutting of trees. Of course, you will cut the trees in that five acre irrigated part. Will you bring in a forester like Earl Nichols or someone to advise you on what other trees need to be taken out to maintain a healthy forest but at the same time create a sufficient habitat? Is that part of your plan. FITCH: Yes, and that would be worked out with the conservation easement. It's a good suggestion. DEWOLF: What about the purchase of the Forest Service property itself? Is that all part of the bond that was passed? FITCH: It's part of the financial package. DEWOLF: You must know somebody who has those numbers. FITCH: WE already have the price. But we think that there might be a reduction in price due to the conservation easement. LUKE: By putting the entire thing in a conservation easement, you have in effect reduced the value of the property because of the uses that are allowed on it. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 49 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) FITCH: Correct. DEWOLF: There's one thing t hat I'm not clear on, that Rich brought up. He doesn't think there will be enough people hooking up to pay for it. Is there a district -wide assessment? FITCH: No, it's a user fee. DEWOLF: So people who do not hook up don't have an impact? FITCH: The bonds are district -wide. DEWOLF: So the operation and maintenance of it is the $38 per month. DALY: The question he had about the free hookups. Are the folks going to have to put in their own tank, or is the District going to do that? LUKE: Let's walk through the process, Bill. You get your sewer system in, and I currently have a septic tank, and I want to hook into the system. So, the District is going to come in and install a tank on the property line, probably in the right-of-way. But I'm then going to be responsible to get from my house to that tank. TYE: We don't have the funds to work on private property. In La Pine we have some State help to do that. LUKE: Sisters had the same problem. People had to pump their tanks, and then we worked out a deal at one of our landfill transfer sites where the people could spread it and let it air out, and then we used it for fill. Then the tanks either had to be collapsed or filled. But that was all private money, though. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 50 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) DALY: So the actual cost that he was concerned about is not $2,500 to $3,500. I've been in this business, so I know about these costs. It's basically the trench from the house to the tank, and the filling and removal of the old tank and the pipe. You may have $1,000 in it. FITCH: There is no tax in conjunction with the bonds. The bonds are going to get repaid through user fees. So it's like a revenue bond. DEWOLF: So people who don't hook up to this, there's no financial impact to them. FITCH: That's correct. LUKE: It's very important to me that those lots that are in the marginal areas that are on septics, where the ground water is very high, and the septics are in that groundwater, those people need to hook up to the system. TYE: All will be required to comply except those who have just put in sand filter systems. DEWOLF: We had repossession in there, and deeded it to Habitat to Humanity with the condition that they can't build until the sewer system is in. DL: lots in marginal area, septics in that area need to hook up. LUKE: According to the instructions I read, the Chair can entertain other questions if anyone has anything they want to put on the record. CATHY JELLUM: I'm Cathy Jellum at 55479 Big River Drive. I'm wondering if they know how many unbuildable lots would be deemed buildable after this process. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 51 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) TYE: There are over a hundred lots that cannot get septic approval at the current time. And there are about that many in that high ground water that are polluting. LUKE: There's no guarantee that all of them can be buildable. Some could be on swamp land. JELLUM: My other question is, you addressed the sand filter issue. You said the people who are currently putting in sand filters - what about those of us who have sand filters that are three or four years old? TYE: According to their present rules, you have ten years to hook up from the time your sand filter was installed. They figure a ten-year life. It's actually in the district rules, in conjunction with this. It was part of the bond measure. LUKE: There's no question that even with a sand filter, you are better off with a sewer system in a high groundwater area. JELLUM: And another really quick question. ON this system, do you have any others that are the same and can tell us for sure there isn't going to be an odor problem? LUKE: He just mentioned that the City of Sisters has theirs in for about a year. La Pine has the same type of system, since 1985. They spray behind the Wickiup Junction area. JELLUM: And the water, the same thing. Any problems? DEWOLF: That's the reason that we put the sewer system in La Pine, and why we are building the new neighborhood specifically, is because of all the septic tanks that were failing and the people there, creating the nitrate issues in that area. So, it's to help remove that possibility. iviinutes or Fublic Hearing Page 52 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) LUKE: Also, as they mentioned, they will be using monitoring wells around this site. We have the same type of thing at the landfill. The monitoring wells are constantly being evaluated by the DEQ. If there's a rise in the level of pollutants, they want to know why. And they may even require them to go upstream to drill another well to see if it's above your site. As they monitor this, if something does come up, DEQ is going to require you to figure out why. READ: The concern I had is the statement that not all sewer systems have smells. All sewer systems have smells, and there are certain times of the year that they are worse. That's my understanding. In terms of when the district said they wouldn't have smells because we aren't going to have treatment there, I don't know. You've got to ask them that question. I don't think I agree with that. However, the smells are generally at certain times when certain things go wrong. And those things generally don't go wrong. It just sometimes happens. So, I didn't want to be kind of on the record as to it not going to smell. Generally they do, but not often. LUKE: When there's a standard operating procedure for the system, when it's working properly, the smells should not be really bad. READ: Things can go wrong at systems. It's usually short-lived and usually is taken care of quickly. Systems are not supposed to have a constant smell. DEWOLF: There are two things here. Because when things were going on at Eagle Crest, my phone was ringing off the hook. There were smells present that were driving people crazy, and we got a ton of phone calls. I've never gotten a phone call from anyone near the sewer system in La Pine, or Sisters. READ: DEQ has received some complaints on smell in La Pine. The plant itself. Generally at certain times of the year when something goes wrong. I don't understand it, but somehow it flips over. The temperature changes to the point that the smelly stuff on the bottom comes to the top. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 53 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) DALY: What you are saying is that it isn't a perfect world. FITCH: We have never represented that there weren't smells at a treatment site at Oregon Water Wonderland. We're trying to say, not out on section 25, which is only effluent, already treated water. Most of the problem with odors will occur at the treatment facility, not out there where the water is put on the ground. LUKE: Should the record stay open for written testimony? CRAGHEAD: May I make a request? I am wondering, on page 19 of the original burden of proof, it talks about the ESEE analysis. I don't see it, and particularly I don't see social energy having been analyzed. And I'm not sure exactly which document is considered the environmental analysis and the economic details. Is there some more detail on what that ESEE analysis is? It would be helpful. FITCH: I think we did incorporate a lot of the environmental analysis that was in the analysis performed by the Forest Service. We supplemented it with additional information in the burden of proof statement. We've added additional information through the process. I think the staff has analyzed it, and to the best of my knowledge, prior to today they have not raised that as an issue. CRAGHEAD: Haven't raised which as an issue? FITCH: That there was insufficient information for the ESEE analysis. CRAGHEAD: It would jut be helpful for me if you could point out to me where the social, energy has been discussed. LUKE: Laurie, I'm going to leave the record open for a week. When you come back, you can be in contact with the applicant to get the information you need. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 54 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) CRAGHEAD: Sure, that would be great. That means, then, that anybody would have an opportunity for rebuttal. Iwe" We would leave the record open for a week from today, Tuesday, at 5:00 p.m. Ed, do you need time for rebuttal after that? FITCH: I don't think so. LUKE: A couple of days? FITCH: That would be fine. LUKE: We would leave time for rebuttal, which would be the Friday, at 5:00 p.m. CRAGHEAD: Would you clarify the dates again? So we're having a week to submit new evidence. That's Tuesday, March 4, 5:00 p.m. Then Friday, March 7, at 5:00 p.m. for rebuttal. CRAGHEAD: What if we have people who want to rebut the new evidence submitted? LUKE: The new evidence is due a week from today, March 4. The following Friday, March 7, is rebuttal from anyone. The following Tuesday at 5:00, March 11, will be for the applicant to have final rebuttal. Okay? CRAGHEAD: Okay. DEWOLF: Then we'll make a decision within a couple of weeks after that. Minutes of Public Hearing Page 55 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) 101,14 We're closing the public testimony for today. And leaving the written record open. READ: You need to set a time and date certain to meet, for your decision. (A brief discussion followed.) LUKE: We can meet to make this decision on Wednesday, March 19, at 11:00 a.m., here. Being no further discussion on this issue, Chair Luke adjourned the meeting at 5:55 p.m. DATED this 25th Day of February 2003 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Dennis R. Luk � , C air Tom DeWolf, Commissioner ATTEST: Michael M. Daly, Com ssioner Recording Secretary Attachments Exhibit A: The Board's Preliminary Statement for the Public Hearing Exhibit B: Oral Staff Report for PA-02-5/ZC-02-5, OWW S.D. Exhibit C: Oregon Water Wonderland II Sanitary District, Sunriver Option Discussion of Analysis and Observations (Powerpoint Presentation) Exhibit D: Letter from John and Barbara Haywood dated February 20, 2003 Exhibit E: Letter from Sunriver Owners Association dated February 24, 2003, with attachments (two letters from George Sullivan and a reply to Mr. Sullivan from SROA) Minutes of Public Hearing Page 56 of 56 Pages Tuesday, February 25, 2003 Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3 (Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sanitary District) PRELIMINARY STATEMENT FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Introduction This is a de novo hearing on Land Use File Numbers PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3. The County believes this proposal is a legislative matter because it could affect multiple properties. However, we are treating it as a Quasi -Judicial matter with respect to notification and process. The applicants request a comprehensive plan amendment from Forest to Rural Residential Exception Area and a zone change from Forest Use (F2) to Rural Residential (RR -10) and apply a Limited Use (LU) Combining Zone. The request also includes exceptions to Statewide Planning Goals 4 (Forest) and 11 (Public Facilities and Services). Burden of proof and Applicable criteria The applicant has the burden of proving that they are entitled to the land use approval sought. The standards applicable to the applications are listed on the overhead projection screen to my right and to your left. Hearings Procedure The procedures applicable to this hearing provide that the Board of County Commissioners will hear testimony, receive evidence and consider the testimony, evidence and information submitted into this record. The record as developed to this point is available for public review at this hearing. Testimony and evidence at this hearing must be directed toward the criteria set forth in the notice of this hearing. Testimony may be directed to any other criteria in the comprehensive land use plan of the County or land use regulations which any person believes apply to this decision. Failure on the part of any person to raise an issue, with sufficient specificity to afford the Board of County Commissioners and parties to this proceeding an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals on that issue. Order of Presentation The hearing will be conducted in the following order. Staff will give a presentation and then the proponents will have an opportunity to make a presentation. Opponents will then be given a chance to make a presentation. After both proponents and opponents have made a presentation, the proponents will be allowed to make a rebuttal presentation. At the Board's discretion, opponents may be recognized for a rebuttal presentation. At the conclusion of this hearing, the staff will be afforded an opportunity to make any closing comments. The Board may limit the time period for presentations. Questions to and from the chair may be entertained at any time at the Board's discretion. Cross-examination of witnesses will not be allowed. However, if any person wishes a question be asked of any person during that person's presentation, please direct such question to the Chair after being recognized. The Chair is free to decide whether or not to ask such questions of the witnesses. Pre -hearing Contacts I will now direct a question to the other members of the Board of County Commissioners. If any member of the Board, including myself, has had any pre -hearing contacts, now is the time to state the substance of those pre -hearing contacts so that all persons present at this hearing can be fully advised of the nature and context of those contacts and with whom contact was made. Are there any contacts that need to be disclosed? At this time, do any members of the Board need to set forth the substance of any ex parte observations or facts of which this body should take notice concerning these applications? Any person in the audience has the right during the hearings process to rebut the substance of any communication or observation that has been placed in the record. Challenges for Bias, Prejudgment, or Personal Interest Any party prior to the commencement of the hearing may challenge the qualifications of the Board of County Commissioners or any member thereof of bias, prejudgment or personal interest. This challenge must be documented with specific reasons supported by facts. I will accept challenges now. Should any Board member be challenged, the member may disqualify himself, withdraw from the hearing or make a statement on the record of their capacity to hear these applications. Hearing no challenges, I shall proceed. (STAFF REPORT) ral Staff Report for PA -02-11 2-5 OWW2 S.D. For the record, my name is Chris Schmoyer, I am an Associate Planner with the County Planning Division. The matter before you this afternoon is a public hearing regarding a request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning on property identified as tax lot 1900 on County Assessor's Index Map for Township 20, Range 10, referred to as the Section 25 parcel (Outlined in Bold Blue ink on the GIS Zone Map Provided). • The file numbers are PA -02-5 and ZC-02-3. • The applicants are OWW Unit 2 Sewer District who are being represented by their Attorney Ed Fitch today. • The property is currently owned by the US Department of Agriculture, US Forest Service. • Notice of this hearing was provided to surrounding property owners and agencies, and published in the Bend Bulletin Newspaper, in accordance with Title 22, the Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance. • Copies of Staff's Memo to the Board are provided on the table near the entrance to this room. The applicants request a comprehensive plan amendment from Forest to Rural Residential Exception Area and a zone change from Forest Use (F2) to Rural Residential (RR -10) and apply a Limited Use (LU) Combining Zone. The request also includes exceptions to Statewide Planning Goals 4 (Forest) and 11 (Public Facilities & Services). The purpose of the proposal is to allow for the expansion of Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 sewage treatment facility onto the property (Section 25), which will include, effluent ponds and the spraying of effluent onto approximately 100 acres of the subject property. The purpose of the proposal is to allow for the expansion of Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 sewage treatment facility onto the property (Section 25), which will include 2 effluent ponds, a small structure and the spraying of effluent onto approximately 100 acres of the subject property. The applicants propose 2 alternative projects to be considered if the primary proposal is not approved, which will also require exceptions to Statewide Planning Goals. The first is to make improvements to the existing sewer Oral Staff Report OWW2 Sewer District February 25, 2003 Page 1 of 6 system, expand the lagoon system and disperse the effluent at an irrigation site on the property. The second alternative is to pump the sewage to the Sunriver wastewater treatment facility via a main force line along South Century Drive. Section 25 is situated south of South Century Drive and OWW Unit 2. It is situated adjacent and to the east of OWW Unit 1 Subdivision. Big River Drive abuts the property along its north boundary and Foster Road runs through the middle of the property from South Century Drive. Zoning surrounding the Section 25 parcel consists of Rural Residential (RR - 10). To the west of Section 25 is Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 1 subdivision. To the east of Section 25 are rural residential lots and to the south is Pinewood Country Estates. For the purpose of the County's review of these applications, there is actually only 1 alternative to Section 25 and that is the piping of effluent from OWW2's existing facility site to Sunriver. This is because the first alternative and the primary proposal are virtually the same under applicable land use regulations. Criteria/Process Essentially, the proposed changes are necessary because the current zoning of Forest Use (F2) does not permit the establishment or expansion of a sanitary facility. The proposed zoning of RR -10, however, does allow sewage treatment facility as an outright permitted use (DCC Section 18.60.020 (B)). The goal exceptions that pertain to this request involve 2 of the 19 Statewide Planning Goals, which in this case involve Goals 4 (Forest) and 11 (Public Utilities and Services). Goal 2, Exceptions, provides the criteria necessary for considering an exception and is also applicable to this request. The primary criteria for a reasons exception are as follows: 1) Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply. 2) Areas which do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use; 3) Comparison of impacts generated at the proposed site with those at alternative sites; and Oral Staff Report OWW2 Sewer District February 25, 2003 Page 2 of 6 4) The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. Note: Compatible, as use in subparagraph (4) is not intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses. An exception to Statewide Planning Goal 11 is required because the request proposes to expand an existing sewage treatment plant. BACKGROUND Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 (OWW2) is a large rural residential subdivision south of Sunriver containing over 1,000 lots. OWW2 has a sewer district currently serving 286 of these lots. The existing sewage facility is in poor condition and does not comply with current Oregon Department of Environmental Quality regulations. Additionally, there are many failing on-site septic systems and numerous lots that cannot support an on-site septic system due to the high water table in the area. Therefore, OWW2 Sewer District must take action to resolve this problem and is proposing to do so through submittal of these land use applications. The Regional Problem Solving (RPS) Section of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 23.44, identifies OWW2 as an area of focus for resolving the ground water issues in South Deschutes County. The County Board of Commissioners entered into separate memorandums of understanding (MOD's) with OWW2 Sanitary District and the Forest Service. The MOU's are agreements between the parties that establish standards of cooperation for implementing solutions of the County's RPS project. In the MOU between the County and OWW2, Deschutes County agreed to provide support for expansion of the OWW2 Sewer District facility by assisting the District in: 1) Determining whether any suitable private lands are available for expansion 2) Acquiring suitable National Forest land for expansion, if there are no reasonable alternatives on private land. 3) Identifying and obtaining funding sources for expansion of the sanitary facility. Oral Staff Report OWW2 Sewer District February 25, 2003 Page 3 of 6 Item 1 In the MOU between the County and the Forest Service, both parties agreed to ..."support and assist in efforts to identify suitable National Forest land for expansion of the Oregon Water Wonderland II sewer system, if there are no suitable alternatives on private land". The Forest Service has issued a decision approving the transfer of the subject property to OWW2. Procedural Background/Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission held a work session on this matter on October 24, 2002 and a public hearing on November 14, 2002 that was continued to December 12, 2002.. At these hearings, oral and written testimony was provided by the public that expressed a mixture of favor and opposition to both the primary and alternative option, Section 25 and piping of effluent to Sunriver respectively. The issues and concerns expressed by the public, in part, include potential odors from effluent ponds and the spraying of effluent onto approximately 100 acres of the property, decrease in property values of lots adjacent or near the site, negative impact to wildlife in the area, ground water contamination from sewage lagoons and removal of trees, and Highest impact to Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 1 without any benefits to OWW1. Concerns were also expressed regarding the environmental impacts of piping the effluent to Sunriver and the costs involved in treating the effluent within the pipes leading to Sunriver. The public also expressed concern about the uncertainties of future OWW2 District sewer rates and control of monies associated with the Sunriver option. At their January 9, 2003 Meeting the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval to the County Board of Commissioners the applicants' primary proposal regarding the rezoning of Section 25, which is to include the recordation of a conservation easement by the applicants, the County and a local non-profit organization to protect Section 25 that would involve the management of the excess land as habitat for deer, elk, raptors and associated species, fire control and timber and for the control of invasive exotic species and dumping. In making their recommendation, the Planning Commission addressed the following primary issues pertaining to this matter: 1) The issue regarding whether or not Sunriver can reasonably accommodate OWW2 Sewer District's sewer system, considering economic factors. [OAR 660-004-0020 (2(b)(B)]. Oral Staff Report OWW2 Sewer District February 25, 2003 Page 4 of 6 2) Discussion regarding the compatibility of the proposed sewage facility on Section 25 with adjacent uses to address public input on impacts on surrounding uses. [OAR 660-004-0020 (2)(d) and DCC Section 23.68.020 (h)]. Regarding the first item, the Planning Commission determined that the users within the OWW2 Sewer District are limited to a $38 per month sewer rate resulting from a November 2000 voter approved Bond election. This was also based on the ability to pay established in the1998 Rural Utility Services (RUS) data. This is a formula used to determine the ability to pay based on income levels. No evidence was provided to contradict that the ability to pay has changed and therefore the $38 per month was accepted as the rate threshold. While the evidence indicates that the Sunriver option is about $578,000 cheaper than the Section 25 option, the District contends that the operation and maintenance of the Sunriver option is over $10 per month more than the $38 per month rate would allow. Review by County Staff indicated that it is difficult to get an apples -to -apples comparison of the two systems and that the $10 per month differential could likely be reduced significantly depending on assumptions ($2.50-$6.50 per month depending on several variables). Nevertheless, all rate estimates would exceed the rates established by the voters and could jeopardize the loan and grant package of funding approved by the RUS. Increasing hook-up fees was also considered to offset the cost differential. However, the District indicated that increasing hook-up fees would require a new vote and since the real difference in costs is operation and maintenance, increasing hook-up fees is only a short term solution and may not be lawful. Further, there may be additional costs under the Sunriver option resulting from chemical treatment of the main force line piping to Sunriver, which may total $40,000 per year, not including equipment costs. This is because of the possibility of Hydrogen Sulfide build up in the pipes due to the distance of piping to Sunriver. Staff would note that while there is no certainty that this would occur, independent review by W&H Pacific (letter dated 12/10/02) indicated that it was prudent to anticipate this need. There is also the possibility that the District would have to pay an approximate $526,000 for their proportionate share of the cost of having to add an additional 250,000 gallon flow equalization Basin (FEB) to the Sunriver treatment plant in the future. The District included this tank as being needed in about 4 years. Oral Staff Report OWW2 Sewer District February 25, 2003 Page 5 of 6 Staff would note that there is an indication in the independent review by W&H Pacific (letter dated 12/10/02) that the proportionate share of this tank is $93,000. Even with additional engineering, the rates of flow will still be a guess because there is no way to know what the rate of growth will be. The District indicated that the Sunriver option would require additional engineering, environmental review and public process that could jeopardize the RUS funding. Due to these concerns and uncertainties the Planning Commission found that the Sunriver option could not reasonably accommodate OWW2 Sewer Districts sewer system considering economic factors. To address compatibility issues under item 2 above, the Planning Commission recommended that the Board of Commissioners include a condition of approval requiring the recordation of a conservation easement by the applicants, the County and a local non-profit organization to protect Section 25. The Planning Commission stated that the conservation easement include the requirement to manage the excess land as habitat for deer, elk, raptors and associated species, fire control and timber and for the control of invasive exotic species and dumping. And, that if the appraised value as conducted by the Forest Service with the conservation easement requirements is less than the budgeted amount of 672,000 [dollars], then the difference be transferred to the conservation organization as a permitted endowment for the property. Oral Staff Report OWW2 Sewer District February 25, 2003 Page 6 of 6 1 70 c M L. O O L cu t U CO 0 L cu M 4-- O c O U 0 w z Z) U) c O Cu L O u co .Cl) co c EO O CLCL 0 CO) cn U .co) 0 LL 0 0000 000000 0000000 0000000 1 70 c M L. O O L cu t U CO 0 L cu M 4-- O c O U 0 w z Z) U) c O Cu L O u co .Cl) co c EO O CLCL 0 CO) cn U .co) 0 LL 0 0000 0000•• •0000•• 0000••• L Q L U) C) c O 0 CLCl) M� m AW (n O M Q� U E CU CU.,� O � Q. O 00 Q W • 0 `ei N • Com• O CU cu • Com• O O co E O CU cr W • U) a CL U) U) 0 LL 5`1 a� a� 0 .C: co d' cn cn y— O O U L - cm N C: co CU a) a) 0- 0 0 C: U O O c m cu O ca O E to* cm .C: co 2 cu CU U O 4-0 cu U a) co A, O O cn 6 c ,O m 0 cm .C: _E I— U) w 0 CL0 U) _ U N O LL 0 so** •00000 •00••!0 •000••! LGI O O O O O O O O O O O CD O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q O O O O O C .- N N N O a _ a 0 .N U .co) O LL H LL Q D 0 U � 0 a t� 0 W N O v� ii v U U N-49 = O U W) N N 0 O U '.nn■■ O O O O O O O O O O O CD O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Q O O O O O C .- N N N O a _ a 0 .N U .co) O LL H LL Q D 0 ••00 4) V co C X � Q m Vi CL a, o (1) m CY) a a c 4) V co X � Q (1) Vi O a, o a) m cu LM CL 04)Lm i C. U c cuE cu cn 0 CU O CL CU 0d - W E -4-0 cu cu cu .0 E A, u . . . N N cn N L .� 0 cn co U re .C: 0 cn cu U Ll cc 0 • 0000 00••00 000••0• 0000000 0 0 0 N N O M N C N O O O O O N N Q 0000 M rY cn Gn co� cn I e Oe fe Oe Oe, Oe 6, Oe IP/ Oe, �r O� 9f Oma. ,cf 02, rs j O� Fj 19e 2j 02. 1f Oe� Of Oe 60 02. 1pO Oe 'Co" O� 90 Oma. so 02. AO oe FO OF, a� 0 Q. CL C: 0 U 0 H LL 0 0 0 O O O O O N Q 0000 I e Oe fe Oe Oe, Oe 6, Oe IP/ Oe, �r O� 9f Oma. ,cf 02, rs j O� Fj 19e 2j 02. 1f Oe� Of Oe 60 02. 1pO Oe 'Co" O� 90 Oma. so 02. AO oe FO OF, a� 0 Q. CL C: 0 U 0 H LL • ••!o •0••!i •00•••• 0000000 "0 L ■ —� O L> O Uj C. � Ct3 • — O 0_ O � C •- 4� �- '0 O U) E O co c/ cu CU CU }, W � •U L C/) CU Cu OL.� U C). ttS •O � Cf) U � O U) O, O U V e s s e •••••0 0000.00 •0000•# F.1 El 04 Aw N O CL C 0 N 7 U A2 a O LLL. 1' LL 0 _N N N � O Ncq O O O O O O O O Gn U� U� N O CL C 0 N 7 U A2 a O LLL. 1' LL O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O © O O 00 O N N O CL C 0 N 7 U A2 a O LLL. 1' LL 0 0000 000000 0000000 0000•• b Ln (D U) 0 C. a c 0 N U) U N O LL F— LL 1 h w .�� -Zi � zXa-t z a ri.0/V6 777 -a-70- z1'Zco Gime C2���i�no�'u FEB 2 5 2003 14OtNTY 001 G On SUNRIVER OWNEi*S ASSOCIATION MAINTAINING SUNRIVER AS A PREMIER RESIDENTIAL AND RESORT COMMUNITY PROTECTING AND ENHANCING ITS QUALITY OF LIFE, NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND PROPERTY VALUES. February 24, 2003 Deschutes County Board of Commissioners C/O Community Development Department 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97701 RE: PA-02-5/ZC-02-3 Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sewage Expansion The Sunriver Owners Association (SROA) is a customer of Sunriver Environmental, LLC as well as the Sunriver community governing body. As such, SROA has a duty to represent our members' interests in this matter. At its December 14, 2002 meeting, the SROA Board of Directors voted unanimously to oppose the use of the Sunriver sewage treatment plant for processing Oregon Water Wonderland (OWW) sewage. SROA is particularly concerned about the effect such use would have on plant capacity and operations. The Sunriver plant was not designed for expansion and is located in the middle of a residential area. Sunriver residents have experienced pervasive offensive odors produced by the plant and are concerned that increased flows might worsen an on- going odor problem. SROA is concerned about the ability of the plant to handle increased sewage loads while continuing to meet treatment standards. Since effluent from the plant is used to irrigate local golf courses, treatment failures have an impact on many more Sunriver residents than just those who live near the plant. SROA is also concerned about the financing of Sunriver treatment plant improvements to accommodate OWW sewage and increased costs to operate the facility. SROA is opposed to any solution to OWW sewage problems that causes rate increases for owners. Further, SROA is dismayed that the Sunriver treatment plant could be seriously considered as a regional treatment facility with so little examination of the impacts such an expansion might cause. In fact, a majority of the Planning Commission members stated that the Sunriver plant was their preferred choice and was not recommended by them only because of economic factors. Throughout the entire planning process to date, scant attention has been paid to the Sunriver treatment plant option, except to ascertain whether it is economically feasible. We believe this was due to fundamental flaws in the planning process. ��� P.O. BOX 3278 • SUNRIVER, OREGON 97707 • (541) 593-2411 • TOLL FREE (888) 284-6639 • FAX (541) 593-5669 Further, the public record does not address this issue. The applicant's Burden of Proof statement assumes no adverse impacts because, "This treatment and effluent disposal would be processed in the existing Sunriver sewer system which already has land use approval and is an ongoing system." The Supplemental Burden of Proof only addresses economic issues related to the Sunriver option. Subsequent correspondence from the applicant's attorney mentions potential chemical treatment necessary because of the transport of raw sewage over five miles, but only in the context of how this treatment will affect treatment costs. In conclusion, we believe a planning process that focuses exclusively on the impacts of locating a sewage treatment facility on a 480 acre site with 500 foot buffers between treatment facilities and adjacent properties, while completely ignoring the impacts of expanding the use of a 5.7 acre facility surrounded by residential areas with virtually no buffers is fundamentally flawed. We also believe excluding Sunriver residents from the earlier stages of the planning process contributed to this skewed approach. SROA shares an interest in resolving potential ground water pollution in South Deschutes County. We applaud the County's regional approach to addressing this issue. If regional sewage treatment facilities become one component of a solution, we will consider such facilities with an open mind. However, we oppose importing sewage to the Sunriver treatment plant because of on-going operational problems that have impacted many Sunriver residents and the less than desirable location of the plant. For the Board of Directors Michael D. Brannan President William D. Chapman General Manager January 16,2003 Sunriver Owners Association Board of Directors PO Box 3278 Sunriver Oregon 97707 Dear Sirs: Once again I am writing to the board and enclosing a copy of correspondence to the DEQ office concerning odors from our Sunriver Disposal Plant. I feel that complacency on the part of Sunriver LLC is playing a role in not taking extra care during some phase of the plant operation. After my last complaint the odors were minimal for a number of weeks/ months. I would hope Kelly Walker or some representative from our association could once again express concern about this on going problem. Thank you. Sincerely 94te� LJI&-- George Sullivan N 19009 Little Spokane River Rd. Colbert, Wa. 99005 cc: Jane West DEQ 4► Sl1NRIVER OWNERS ASSOCIATION MAINTAINING SUNRIVER AS A PREMIER RESIDENTIAL AND RESORT COMMUNITY PROTECTING AND ENHANCING ITS QUALITY OF LIFE, NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND PROPERTY VALUES. January 28, 2002 Mr. George Sullivan N. 19009 Little Spokane River Road Colbert, WA. 99005 Reference: Sunriver Environmental, LLC Waste Water Treatment Plant Dear Mr. Sullivan: Thank you for your letter of January 14, 2002. We are, indeed, aware of your concern. Over the past year or more, SROA has had meetings with the utility company management (the water and sewer companies are owned by Sunriver Resort). The utility company has taken steps towards minimizing or eliminating the concern you have expressed. One step was to acquire 175 acres of land along Cottonwood Road and east of the railroad that borders Sunriver. This has been developed for winter wastewater storage as well as solids disposal. The regulatory authorities are the State of Oregon's Public Utilities Commission (PUC) and the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Sunriver is a non-profit, private community and we have little or no direct local regulation authority. Please be assured, however, that we will continue to monitor and evaluate the situation as well as urge the utility company to move towards improvements as soon as possible. Thanks again for your concerns. We sincerely want your trips to Sunriver to be pleasant and hope you will chose to live here full-time in the future. Yours very truly, Shirley Mildes, President Sunriver Owners Association Cc: Tom Luersen, Managing Director, SRLP Terry Penhollow, Sunriver Environmental, LLP Board Read Book P.O. BOX 3278 • SUNRIVER, OREGON 97707 • (541) 593-2411 • TOLL FREE (888) 284-6639 • FAX (541) 593-5669 January 14, 2002 Sunriver Owners Association Board of Directors PO Box 3278 Sunriver Oregon 97707 Dear Sirs: I am writing to the board concerning an on going problem that is degrading the quality of living in Sun River. It involves the seemingly ever increasing odor coming from the Sunriver sewage disposal plant. I understand, after discussing the problem with our enviornmentalist (Kelly Walker) and Mr. Terry Penhollow (the plant manager) that Sunriver Utilities is a private entity and SROA does not have jurisdiction or regulatory control over the treatment of the sewage nor the odors arising from the treatment. This seems unusual seeing fact that the plant is located in the middle of the residental area. I am not a permanent resident of Sunriver at this time, however, I may be in the future. I have owned a residence for 12 years. I was in Sunriver, at my home, approximately 12 weeks in 2001. The odor was not pleasant 9 times and not accptable 8 times (gasmask time). I understand that when Sunriver has its greatest influx of population (4th July -New years -Holidays) that the plant has an extremely difficult time treating and liquifing the solids, hence odors. We are all aware of the growth of Sunriver and the ever increasing resort vistations. It would seem only logical the treatment facility would need to grow accordingly. Mr. Penhollow explained that Sunriver Utilities is endeavoring to upgrade the system, but it'could take some time (3-5 years). I do not feel this time line is acceptable. Because most of the home owners near the plant are not permanent residents the tendency is to endure and not waste vacation time trying to solve odor problems. I was advised by Kelly Walker that the D.E.Q. may have permit control over the plant since SROA does not. I contacted Ms. Jane West at the Bend office of the DEQ. Ms. West suggested that a formal complaint be filed in order for it to be on record at the DEQ office. She also followed this with a phone call and discussion of the problem with the personnel at the plant. The intention of my writing to the board in to create an awarness and hopefully have the SROA monitor and investigate the need for local regulation of the plant. Come to the Source Sunrivcr Lod% Sunrivir i/tllaoc Mall Bend's Ohl ;Mill District SUNRIVER PO Bo 36 ?0 Swiriver, OR 9--0- P: 5411593-7000 F 5411593-51 )_3 1-800-54--39 20 BEND 805 SIV Industrial 11,71' Ste 201 Bend, OR 9-702 P.541/322--000 F 541/322-7004 1-866-322-1-01-0 wwwswtriver— realti."OM January 22, 2003 Terry Penhollow Director of Utilities Services Fax: 593-4643 Dear Terry: I am a Broker with Sunriver Realty and have a listing located at 14 Top Flite Lane. There have been some negative circumstances during showings of the property that I feel you should be aware. During the Multiple Listing Caravan of Realtors, when the property was first listed in July, there was a strong odor from the treatment plant. It was a topic of conversation as the Brokers were leaving the house. Just recently during the Holidays the house was shown. The Realtor showing the house called me from inside and said he expected to write an offer. When I called him back later he said the prospective buyers walked outside after he spoke with me, noticed the odor and changed their mind about writing an offer. Please let me know if there is anything being done to eliminate the odors coming from the treatment plant. I sincerely hope that you can give me some positive information that would be of help in getting this house sold for the owner. Sincerely, Joan Iselin Broker C: George and Carol Sullivan Kathleen Sullivan Mike Brannan SROA Jane West DEQ