2011-2940-Minutes for Meeting June 08,2011 Recorded 7/7/2011COUNTY
NANCYUBLANKENSHIP,F000NTY CLERKS vu 20~~-7940
COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 07/07/201108:29:42 AM
111111111~~1111111
211-a 0
Do not remove this page from original document.
Deschutes County Clerk
Certificate Page
C
1
< Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.or
MINUTES OF WORK SESSION
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 89 2011
Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone and Alan Unger; Commissioner
Baney was out of the office. Also present were Dave Kanner, County
Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; and, for a portion of the
meeting, Paul Blikstad and Kevin Harrison, Community Development; Mark
Pilliod, County Counsel; and eight other citizens including media representative
Hillary Borrud of The Bulletin.
Vice Chair DeBone opened the meeting at 1: 32 p.m.
1. Consideration of Economic Development Fund Forgivable Loan
Application (Alchemy Solutions).
Eric Stroebel, EDCO, explained the applicant and the request.
David Deitz said that the management has a great record of success in this
industry. The parent company is putting a lot of money into this business.
Roger Lee stated that there is substantial capital investment taking place. They
are relocating from Boulder, Colorado and will be hiring locally.
Commissioner Unger explained that this is the best kind of investment that can
be made for the area, and he wants to support small business and economic
development locally. Commissioner DeBone agreed that this is worthwhile.
UNGER: Move approval of the loan request.
DEBONE: Second.
VOTE: UNGER: Yes.
DEBONE: Vice Chair votes yes.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Page 1 of 3 Pages
2. Discussion of Upcoming Latham Mine LUBA Remand Hearing.
Paul Blikstad said the remand hearing is before the Board on Monday, June 13.
He gave a brief overview of the item, referring to an oversized map of the area.
The original decision dates back to 2008, and it has been in the courts in one
fashion or another ever since.
State law requires that the applicant ask for the remand process, which was
done on April 13. A written decision from the County is due by July 29. The
issues are very specific per LUBA. They upheld the County on several
important issues, including the amount of material that can be mined. The
scope of dust and noise issues was upheld on the County's behalf as well.
The remand had to do with parameters for mining on the site. The question is,
does mining of the tuff require an amendment of the ESEE. This is a big deal
for both the applicant and opponent. Mr. Blikstad said that he is the staff
contact and the full record is available, and suggested that he will work with
Commissioner DeBone so he can be quickly brought up to speed on this issue.
Discussion then occurred on the assignments of error and remand issues, with
reference made to a matrix (a copy of which is attached for reference). By far
the biggest issues is how to deal with the headwall and whether, or the extent
of, mining of the headwall was contemplated in the ESEE, and whether
additional mining is appropriate or allowable. Restricting mining of tuff or the
headwall could mean that the owner would not be able to access and mine
pumice, which is allowed.
Also discussed at length was dust control and what would be considered
reasonable precautions to prevent dust issues. This is addressed somewhat
under State law. Mr. Blikstad pointed out that dust has been the biggest issue
for those living in the area, over concerns of noise and traffic.
Clarification of the points that can receive testimony and the process to reach a
decision will be provided before the hearing. There is a fairly tight time limit
for a final decision to be made.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Page 2 of 3 Pages
3. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules.
Commissioner Unger said that he is attending the Deschutes Economic Alliance
meeting and will be on the committee. This week he will attend a Regional
Solutions meeting as well. He is also scheduled to attend a northwest water
resources conference in Vancouver.
Commissioner DeBone indicated he plans to attend a meeting in Gilchrist that
should include Klamath County representatives. He did not attend the last DEQ
meeting, which appears to have been canceled or rescheduled elsewhere.
4. Other Items.
The Board went into executive session under ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor
negotiations.
The meeting ended at 3:15 p.m.
DATED this ZZX,, ' Day of 2011 for the
Deschutes County Board of Commission s.
--~6xcw ye
Tammy Baney, Chair
Anthony DeBone, Vice Chair
ATTEST: a&,-
Alan Unger, Commissioner
Recording Secretary
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Page 3 of 3 Pages
r
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200, Bend, OR 97701-1960
(541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - www.deschutes.org
WORK SESSION AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 89 2011
1. Consideration of Economic Development Fund Forgivable Loan Application
(Alchemy Solutions)
2. Discussion of Upcoming Latham Mine Hearing - Paul Blikstad
3. Update of Commissioners' Meetings and Schedules
4. Other Items
PLEASE NOTE: At any time during this meeting, an executive session could be called to address issues relating to ORS 192.660(2) (e), real
property negotiations; ORS 192.660(2) (h), litigation; ORS 192.660(2)(d), labor negotiations; or ORS 192.660(2) (b), personnel issues.
Meeting dates, times and discussion items are subject to change. All meetings are conducted in the Board of Commissioners' meeting rooms at
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572.
Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible.
Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7-1-1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY.
Please call (541) 388-6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information.
06
!
I
'O N
i
Q)
a
i
I
6g.
i
L
oL,
I
Q
~
I CA
V
~
'
I
N
N
O
V%
ct
a~
E
s
o
~
o
L
~o
ri
Al
fo
-
a
DESCHUTES COUNTY/ CITY OF BEND
Business Development Forgivable Loan Fund
APPLICATION -
The Deschutes County Business Development Forgivable Loan Fund and City of Bend Business
Development Forgivable Loan Fund disburse moneys for the purpose of increasing employment and
capital investment with each respective jurisdiction. The Fund has been established to offset the
costs of business relocation to and within Deschutes County, including moving of equipment,
purchase or construction of facilities, and site improvements such as the extension of public services
and utilities. EDCO has been designated by Deschutes County and City of Bend as the administrator
of this fund. The magnitude of funding is dependent on job creation (typically $1,000- $2,000 per
job).
This application may be considered a public record and thus be made available for inspection by the
public upon request. Under Oregon public records law, certain trade secrets and proprietary
financial information may be withheld from disclosure. If the applicant wishes for such information
to be withheld from disclosure, please submit a separate letter containing that request. EDCO,
Deschutes County and the City of Bend agree to withhold such information from disclosure to the
extent permitted by law.
Key Requirements Are:
• Grantees must create at least five (5) new primary, permanent family wage jobs and shall
retain those jobs for at least one year.
• Optional: Documented capital expenditures willincrease strength of application. Grantees
are urged to document the investment of taxable investments (new equipment, building
improvements) to demonstrate expansion and growth commitment. Please provide a
quarterly capital investment projection.
Number of Employees: 10
Company Request: $26,000
EDCO Recommendation: $26,000 (13 jobs at $2,000 per job)
Proposed Job Creation by end of Q4 2012: 13 new employees
Average Pay for New Employees (all positions, excluding commissions): $75,000
Capital Investment: $2,000,000
Industry: Software Provider-Mainframe Migration
Website: http://atchem3§olutions.com
Responses to the questions below need not be finned to the s paw pmuded, but
please keep total appluadm mzter h to no more than 12 pages.
Section I - General Information
Date: March 31, 2011
Company Name: Alchemy Solutions, Inc
Location (City/County): Bend,
Business Type: Software Provider-Mainframe Migration
Industry Type: Software
No. of Employees: current: 10 expected new.-13
HQ Address: 550 NW Franklin Ave Suite 358, Bend OR 97701
State & Federal Taxpayer ID: 26-3598423
Company Contact: Jim Hamer
Title: President
Phone: 541-323-2855
Email: jharrer@alchemysolutions.com
Parent Company:
Website: http://alchemysolutions.com
Section II - Company Profile
1. Please provide a brief overview of your business.
Alchemy Solutions is a global, world-wide solutions provider enabling companies dependent on the
IBM Mainframe infrastructure, to migrate to a Microsoft Windows NET platform resulting in
significant cost savings to our clients. Alchemy-provides the software, project management and
customer support to achieve a successful migration.
Our workforce is highlyskilled in Microsoft server (.NET) as well as IBM Mainframe (Z/OS,
AS400) platforms.
Section III - Project Activities
1. Please outline the proposed activities for these funds. How will access to the Business
Development Forgivable Loan Fund support your strategic objectives, while increasing your
employment and investment in the Central Oregon region? Explain why public funding is
necessary for the success of this expansion or relocation. Please be specific. How will
these funds help your company grow and add jobs?
We plan to expand our operations in Bend considerable over the next several years. We have
invested $1.8 million dollars in the purchase of a new building on Chandler. Before we can move into
the new building we'll need to build-out a new server room. In addition, with the new staff we're
hiring we'll need to purchase furniture, computers and expand our phone equipment.
The new building will also be equipped with new state-of-the-art video conferencing capabilities
allowing us to conduct video training sessions to our global customers from the Bend location. We'll
need to invest in new HD video displays and well as a new Microsoft Lyric server.
Finally, we plan to build a state-of-the-art training room in Bend, equipped with portable docking
stations, desks and dedicated servers enabling us to fly in our global business partners for on-site
instruction. This training facility will also allow us to expand our worldwide consulting practice
enabling us to hire more consults, trainers and administrative support for our growing high tech
practice.
Section IV -Grant Terms and Conditions
1. Total Emplo..yment
Grantees must create at least 5 new primary, family wage jobs (at $35,090 per year) and shall
have retained those jobs for at least one year. Please provide a quarterly projection of
expected job creation, including titles and/or descriptions. Also indicate expected average
wages for all: A) new jobs to be created and B) for total company employment (i.e. sum of
all wages divided by total employees, new and existing).
Current headcount for Alchemy Solutions:
13 People, Average Annual Salary is $75,000
Immediate hires for Bend, Oregon
VP Marketing
Office Admin
Marketing Product Manager
Events Marketing Manager
Support Engineer
Software Developers (2 needed
Additional head count planned for Q3 time frame:
4 - Professional Services Consultants
2 - Sales Engineers
Business growth will dictate future hiring opportunities.
2. Capital Investment (Oldtiorral~
Although not required, capital investment plans are a helpful indicator of future plans and
viability of expansion or relocation execution. Grantees are asked to document the
investment of taxable investments (equipment, new construction). Please provide a quarterly
capital investment projection.
Purchase of the Fraser Building on Chandler was a $1.8 million capital expense. Tear-down and
moving expenses from the Franklin building is budgeted at $25,000.
Tenant improvements and the build out for the new server room is budgeted at $45,000.
New computers and servers to support this growth is budgeted at $50,000.
New Video Conference capabilities is budgeted at $30,000
3. Primary Employer Test
Grantees must be private firms in manufacturing, high-technology, or technology-based
businesses which have more than 75% of customers outside Deschutes County. What
percentage of your customer base exists outside Deschutes County?
100%
Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division
117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 31, 2011
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Board of County Commissioners
Paul Blikstad, Senior Planner
Land Use Board of Appeals Remand Order and Hearing for the Latham mining
site, application nos. CU-07-102, SP-07-46 (MA-08-3, MA-08-4)
BACKGROUND
Latham Excavation submitted applications for a conditional use permit and site plan for surface
mining activities at what was/is an existing pumice mining site on Johnson Road (see staff's
original memo to the Board dated October 30, 2008, attached). The Hearings Officer's decision
was appealed to the Board, and the Board agreed to hear the appeals (the applicant and
opponent both appealed the Hearings Officer's decision). The Board's written decision was
mailed out on April 30, 2009.
Both the applicant and the opponent Hoffman appealed the Board's decision to the Land Use
Board of Appeals, which remanded the decision in five of the 20 issues appealed by the
Hoffmans and three of the four issues appealed by Latham. The Hoffmans appealed to the
Court of Appeals LUBA's decision that upheld the County's decision regarding the interpretation
of the definitions of noise and dust sensitive issues. The Oregon Court of Appeals upheld
LUBA's decision. The Hoffmans appealed the Court of Appeals decision to the Oregon
Supreme Court and the Supreme Court denied review. LUBA then issued its official Final
Opinion and Order, which is dated May 17, 2010.
The applicant, by letter to the Planning Division, requested that the Remand process be
undertaken. That letter is dated April 30, 2011. The County has 90 days from the date the
letter was received (also April 30, 2011) to hold a hearing and issue a new decision. The 90-
day deadline ends on July 29, 2011.
County Legal Counsel previously provided you a link to LUBA's Final Order and Opinion (LUBA
Nos. 2009-061/200-062) and the Board of County Commissioners' Findings and Decision
(mailed April 30, 2009). 1 am submitting for your review the following:
■ Staff's matrix laying out the remand issues
■ Vicinity map showing the location of the mining site
■ Applicant's geologic profile maps
Quality Services Performed with Pride
The remand hearing before the Board is scheduled for Monday, June 13, 2011. Also, a work
session with the Board is scheduled for Wednesday, June 8, 2011.
Please contact me at your convenience if you have any questions. I have paper copies of the
LUBA final opinion and order, and the Board's written decision, should you need them.
E5
J Community Development Department
Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Health Division
117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend Oregon 97701-1925
(541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764
http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 30, 2008
TO: Board of County Commissioners
FROM: Paul Blikstad, Senior Planner
RE: Appeal of Hearings Officer's decision on CU-07-102, SP-07-46 (MA-08-3, MA-
08-4); also file nos. A-08-14, A-08-20, for Latham Excavation
BACKGROUND
Latham Excavation submitted applications for a conditional use permit and site plan for surface
mining activities at what was/is an existing pumice mining site on Johnson Road. The
applicant's original proposal was to expand the surface mining operation at the site approved in
1995 (through site plan SP-95-10), and to include drilling and blasting at the site, and to
construct an office and shop at the site. The applicant modified the request to remove these
two aspects of the proposed use, based mainly on concerns of the neighbors. The amended
applications thus included:
• Seek approval for extraction only within the footprint of the area approved for extraction
in the approval for SP-95-10.
• Approval for excavation of Bend Pumice and associated overburden materials and
aggregate materials incidental to excavating pumice and overburden materials.
• Approval for processing and sale only of materials extracted on-site; no processing or
sale of materials brought in from off-site.
• Recognize importation of materials from off-site for eventual use in reclamation.
• Elimination of any approval for drilling and blasting.
• Show alternative locations for screening and crushing of pumice and overburden
materials.
• Eliminate the office and shop and other structural accessory support facilities on site.
• To allow for use of a portable scale for weighing excavated materials on site.
The modification includes the following refinements and clarifications to those proposed
at the original February 19, 2008 hearing:
To allow for crushing of welded tuff and other incidental rock materials
encountered in extraction of pumice and overburden materials.
To provide for extraction, processing and sale of sand and horticultural materials.
Board Memo - Latham Excavation
Page 1 of 3
Quality Services Performed with Pride
• To provide for washing of tuff, sand and horticultural materials.
• To modify the maximum area of the slots to be 5 acres.
• To note on the site plan the locations of the area where materials being brought
in are being deposited, where haul roads exist and what vegetation will be
retained.
• To show the type and location of portable weighing scale that applicant proposes
to use.
• To show compliance with DEQ air contaminant discharge permit requirements for
applicant's roll crusher.
The applicant's revised burden of proof from February 19th lists the following as part of
the request:
• To add on-site processing, including crushing, of pumice and pumice overburden
materials within the same footprint approved by the site plan approved by SP-95-
10.
• To include temporary stockpiling on site of excavated material for sale to
consumers.
• To recognize that the pumice overburden is being mined for sale rather than
retained on site.
• To allow for hauling of materials up until 5:00 p.m. during the time period
November 15 through February 15.
• To recognize that the weather station has been removed from Sites 355 and 356
and installed on Site 303.
• To recognize use of a water tank for water storage on site.
• To allow for use of a portable scale for weighing material to be sold.
Two public hearings on the applications were scheduled before the County Hearings Officer.
The first hearing occurred on February 19, 2008, and the second on April 15, 2008. In between
the hearing dates, on March 20, 2008, the applicant submitted modifications to the applications.
The modifications were included in the April 15th hearing proceedings. According to the County
Procedures Ordinance, the modification applications restarted the 150-day review period. The
Hearings Officer's written decision on the modified applications was mailed out on July 31,
2008, approving the applications, with 18 conditions of approval.
The applicant filed a request for reconsideration of the Hearings Officer's decision on August 12,
2008. Notice of the reconsideration request was mailed out by staff, and a decision on the
reconsideration was issued by the Hearings Officer. Her decision was mailed out on October
14, 2008. During the 12-day appeal period following the Hearings Officer's original decision, an
appeal of her decision was submitted by opponents Hoffman, through their attorney Paul
Dewey. According to the County's Procedures Ordinance, the reconsideration request is
handled first. Because the Hearings Officer declined to reconsider her decision (the
reconsideration decision left the approval as written), the appeal by Hoffman carries through to
the reconsideration decision.
The applicant filed an appeal of the reconsideration decision as allowed by code.
Consequently, the Board has two appeals to consider in this proceeding.
Board Memo - Latham Excavation
Page 2 of 3
The County Code and State law require a maximum 150-day review period for land use
proceedings with the County. Staff has calculated the review period, and with the modification
applications, together with the time extension requested by the applicant at the April 15th
hearing, staff believes that the 150-day review period ends on December 11, 2008.
APPEALS
As indicated above, there are two appeals of the Hearings Officer's decision (file nos. A-08-14,
A-08-20). The applicant's appeal requests an on-the-record review by the Board. The
opponents appeal includes a request for de novo review by the Board. Staff believes that given
the time constraints for a hearing and decision on these applications, it may not be possible to
complete a review of these applications and issue a written decision by December 11th.
Staff believes there are outstanding policy issues that should be considered by the Board.
These are:
• what constitutes a noise and dust sensitive use;
• whether the expansion of the proposed surface mine requires a revised ESEE
(Environmental, Social, Economic and Energy) analysis by the Board;
• whether the use of the term "processing" in the ESEE analysis (at site 303 as well as
numerous other sites in the County) was intended to allow crushing;
• the degree of protection to be afforded under the visual screening standards of the
code and the manner in which the topographical exception should be applied;
Staff believes that there are also issues related directly to the site itself that warrant review by
the Board. The opponents have listed 17 alleged errors in the decision, and the applicant has
listed 5 alleged errors. Staff will not repeat those here, but they can be reviewed in the attached
notices of appeal.
Staff has a very large file on this matter, which is likely over 2,000 pages in length. Most of it is
available for review on-line, so rather than copy it for the Board, staff will copy only the most
pertinent parts for a Board determination of whether or not to hear the appeals.
I am submitting for your review the following:
■ The applicant's and the appellant's notices of appeal
■ Hearings Officer's decisions (original decision and reconsideration decision)
■ The County's 1990 ESEE analysis for site no. 303
■ Vicinity map showing the location of the mining site
Please contact me at your convenience if you have any questions.
I have a very large air photograph from the record that shows the property in relation to the
surrounding area and development, which I can bring to a work session.
Board Memo - Latham Excavation
Page 3 of 3
4-4 a)
0 by
a a~
4-.
0 :
° bA
i
N cd
N 4. a)
bA
> o °
4-4 *Z rn >-b
cd
O
C-)
U
i~, 'd O
bU
bq 0 f~. Q
cn
4-4
~
Cd
W. b
d 0
0
a
-cs
°
cd
p
1
En
N
W
a~ to
Cd
p
a
~
10
"
to
Ha~
d
'
a '
a
y
04
w 0
Cd
r,
0
4-4 4-4
0
ate'
o~
o
+
~
g4
'dam
0 0
o~ cc
C
w
o
~
o o
cn
.d~-d
'S 0 cd
0
:3
+
4
rr
~
4
r 3w
3
U
O
C
s-,w
o
s
.
4
.
~
one- 4~
on
o
w
'lb
w
0
(S
P-4 M
w
0
t= 0 C14
0 °
Cd
c
~
~ o
t
o P.
~ E~
-
a,
-C~
o
E" o b 0
4
U
Cd
d
O
cd a~
$-4 v
c
M
-4
a~
bn a~i
o
to
C
a~ 010
0 ,
o
0 4-4
U)
44-+
'0
a~
5
0
.00
M
d
b
U
4
• ° cd
° c
0
A
0 ccd
p.
s
•
I
a) 'd
0
Cd
u H -0
0
0
a)
ai
o' er
a~
w
3 W
o
~ Q"
0 P, 0 0 Z
!
o
U
W (u
O
w
0
d ~
W
4-i
~
0 O 4,
1U. a) r rn
cd
.
f w
Ln
4-4
a~
GQ a
i
o
, r,
J
co 4-4 cd
cn
Cd
W
M s~
o
°
cd 0
0
r o
~
O
En +J
W
.fl
-0
cd
cn by
U
'
a) O °
a) N cd
a)
d)
.-1
wa.
0 F 0
+
c) -I'- 'n
r- a
rn
4•.
0
a,
cC
a
cd 'O d
4° Q, 3 v
c)
O to
O ~ O
-+5 o
0 ~orn
o ~
¢~U0
V
~
0
o
'v0~i ~ o ~
r0,
O S-7
O
+
U ca ,
0 s" cri
o
o
a~
cd cr 3 W
0 E-1
-tzj
b
~ cd
W
N
,
N' vOi
to
o
o
l\
0 s+
O
O O O> "d
N
to
V
O
U o O
a.
~
° - 9 _Q 0
C~ rn 3
cd y
4-4
N
r-+ ' ~ N rn vi 's' G~
£i 'O
a~ 0
.m. o 4.
tl , ,
O N 0
ry) cd vi .0 N
> a~ 'b t. CJ >
a~
J, ~ ~
cl,
Cd > 41, i
0
O
N O
00
O O co" p
> -y
N 0 c6 3 bn
7~ O
0
a~
0 o C%]
O
a) 03
°
C.) o H
o
zs o
O
CV N N C%
a4s,o~
a,
0
N
N
bA
RS
a
~ an
o
"
~
U
S
~ R3
. S
.
N n
•
ZI~..t~"
-i
O o
o
O
,c O y bq
U N
N
O
U
N
06
i
~U b
3
U
~1
00
o
A,
4~
~
a~
.
(U
o.~
s
C4-4
o
o
U
j
Qt U N
N
s
1
4-
0
O 'd
O
to bA
~
U 1•
•
~
~
~ • N
a
~n
'
c
d
U ,Oy
y
cri v
N
~
O cd 'C3
O O
1-4
U
y
N
O
.
Q"'d °
0 r
i
N
0
g
,
X "d
s; U p
to
p
0
U
~
o
O U
GA b
"a
p o
o
~n
O
U
-ca
p p
U U
U
an
+J
o
s~.
w
Q
°
a
cn
~
°
~
o
~a`'a
°
vo
r
b
x
p
Q
O
x
+C4
l
w
Cd to
O o.
o
o
is N
'
Cl)
x
°
o
9.1
°
o
v
W
p
d) -+S U
o
'o
a~
m
o n
W
HMO o
~
o.~
o
o~ o
o
p ~ U~ o
o
4-
8)
N
(1)
k4r)
s-4 a)
to "
00
p+, O
1
o 0
w u
N Ln
N
p
v~ TJ 'd ¢
cd
' C>
> 73
"C$
Cd
cn 'C
a.
0
3
U
aki
H
to
rn
0
M
U
C~
o
~
*
w p
O
b4 • crj +rr
~
O
~
U
4~
+
+
O
d C/)
4] O
O
U
p
R O O
+
as
~
~c4Z4
Cd
.
N U •
~O a)
cd
b O
U
r
r" O~ 0 p vi
~
•r
,S ; 0
~
~CS O
N
a)
UQ
toO
~
d
~
N
V] c
i~ .O
U c
~
~
"C3
a,
3
to
~
+L~ o
Cd r,
P,
i
U
N W
to
0
_
U v~ ~
O ~
O
O ~ N
0
Cd nz)
kf)
U DD
O
N
N
N 4
^O
N
C;3 ti 4
N
+ a) ~
V
O O bA
r
O O
U'
+
>
y +1 ~ -
rl
bb
to
06
o
~~?a
C
Y
En
o
o
_
-o
o
bA o
ti
o
a) 0
o
C;3 Ln
o
b s
U
vvi
x N
bA
tCd
~
a~
Q ~n
-0 o
b
bo
En
O o'.o
.W
p's o a
b
O o
3 3
cod.
W (A
o x
O T,
b bA
.o
'
-o
U
CC
a
a
te
a)
U
U
o s~ o
~
G
~
4; 'b
a
-
rte'' 0 k
"Cl
+
o
.4- 1
N O
~
4-4
cd
T,
^
m to
144
1
El P. r
p
cd W
A
0
Cd
U
~O
Ou i~+ 'i'
o
ri
o~. by O
cn
-
,
O
b4 c+-, 0
+
4
4
rn
a)
N
O
O
v
cd
N a)
N U Q
0
" U
= U
O
C
N
U
c
S
H
~ v s0+
..S
c
~
^ a) s.
°
°
a)
cd
U r
. 4~
d"
a
v
a
p c~
,ty 0
E-i v
0
,
c
i c
i
w p-1
01
4-r
0
d-
a)
C~
a
o
o
CIO
v
bn
CIS
~
ti °
a
0 o
s
0 °
O a• 3
?
~ ' OA
bo
Ei
a~
o
-0
o,
~n
. cd
cN O
Q
En
(D
a
cn)
Q
cd
'd c d
O
O
cd
Q"
~
'
+
cd 0
a) C)
a) a~ 4,
O
cn C
.
~
bA
cd N
0
N
O
to
O
a)
0 4-4
O
cn
'
a) O
O
a)
ti
0
cd .
~
0
O
. r
14
j
am
d
cn
ti
OU
U
c
,
0•
0 ti
d"
~
c~ j
V)
U
O
4
U) c
7
ca
7:$
t
.
by
O
th
w
U N
y
C O
4- U
'
a)
it
O
U
i.
V]
O
O
a)
7S 0
UU
~
y
.
U
-
-
4
•
0
C
to
0
x,
S A
~
U
'+.r
O
I
O
U
cd
cd
4
I W
Q °
U
ai
bb
Q
CIS
U
IQ)
V
N
H
- Q
12 14
d O W
to
~ ~
4-4
~
0
°
o
°
~
o
4
En
o
o
•
0 0
-
C's
0
~ H
-0
o
0
III,
0
CIII,
°
0
v'
a
'
CA
Po w
4)
+
0 >
o.+:~
• 0 s-
v~
"d~
d
te
Ei
o
M o o
p U
d
O °
4..
~k °
a)
0
y
c
c~
~
c
0 cd
7:$
0 0
cd
In a)
b~n~
3
° o
a)
a ate,
U
a
3
8°,
s . 'd
O
°
s",
64
U
'
+ U)
ter t-' cn
sU. .a x+
N O
N
~O
O
U
p
d
cd
O
O N
O U
EA
0
EA
PQ
~D
4)
0
0
N
t
- •
(U
a)
C7
bn
cd
cd C,3
a
U 4i cd
0
U
a)
v U O
/
rn
4-+
O
kn
a)
a
c ^
~
o
rn
co
4- N
C N
:3
00
~
~i
0
o
o
U Cd
~
j 44
a: N
N ~
rU U 00
cd a) C~
L~
C/] r.+ cd
a)
3
t7
'0
0
0
.
;z
c
U
~
°
Qr
,
0
iy.y
i
N
^
ter.
o
U O
~,0
0
aa) 7~4
'
O
o
C;3
~
"
W)
-
V)
O
o
0
Gq
D
N
00
N-
s3, a)
4;
O
v~ 3
ai U
O
U
O bA
;j
a U
U U O
N
~
0
C;3
U
.O
N
0
a)
°
~ ~
cs'
O 0
~
En
U 0
U
-0
Q)
cq3
U a)
42)
z o
0
7s
~
co kn
U
rD 8
c-)
O
F-~
06
v°i O
4- 00
H ti
N M
U
cd O
U ~5
En
4.
C)
41.
4)
N
0
4
~
cd
V)
.
-0 U 4
0
C's 0
m
+1
~
°Q
4-. V) cd
a
`j Q
M
d
'
C°
U 0
0 En
0 ~ 4d
a~ ~ 3 0
-cl
o
a4 CIS
4-4 ¢+'O
U
o
a
o
i
O
U
o
N
a
i
°
° ~
ti
a0i .0
-
:3
Q
E
°
t4,
~
.
v
i
z. ,
bA
~
U
4?
°
aj
cn
N
O
n O N o
O
~s
U
moo,
~
-o
°
Cd
~ ~ o
bpi
3
cd
o
U
ov U
o
o D
C~
N
ll~
+1 0
M
0
o
U
0°
U
w a
H
i.
H 0 6'
0 c v
n a
c
F-4 0
~ --6
1 4°
U 4
0l
4-4
0
cd
a
N (d
cd
~ (d
U V
En cd
O
o
w 4-
N U
'D £
,.a 0
~
R to
0
cu
>
w
h
o
i bA
vi c
0
'a
O
c fir
O Cd
N
cn
0
N
~.cn
"
N
O
W
~.fl
0
+
- p+
s,
p U
0
5
p
'
O
W
°p.~
N Cn ti
cwt..
O
~
to '
y
to
N
~tb
~ ri TS
cd
U
"41
0
-0
0
C)
d
0 "
i
C) 4:1
0
4)
C
d O
;:s
O
n O
r p
Q
-0-
-
~y
(
m
4- '
_
w
O • ~
v~
Q
0 4)
= W
by
°
7:1
i-.
d ~
m -0 ~1
(d 0
ell
r r O
,C! Cd
• r-I Q-1 cd
O
w
o
"
5
o • V
~
5 o
cd
4
4
0
o
C/)
4r N
o
°
V
l
d
c~i
~
C;3
3
2(
•
o
-
C
d
::3
cu
a~ En~ 3
00
a
Wpb
y+,
s
En
p (d a bb
en (d
U Q
a
ue,
as
o
N
0 p -1,-
s~. U
-
N
~
~0C
J
.
)
En
o
o
0
o
o
~
:
En
0)
S
t8
+1
-
0
cd u
+1
Cd
'
0)
C/I
4-
0
Q)
C,3
acdi
0
0
-0
C,3
,
rn
0
0
a
O °
,0 C)
° cd sO+ 'd -
C) (1) cd
cn
U O cn tO.
c U)
b N 'd to
3 cd c~ to
bA W o TS
cd +sj b
U
O O N cd 4-1 f
-60 0 >1
O
bA bU
r, to cj -C;3
o QoQN o ono ° +
GO 0
bo
J:4 ;c3d o 9"
U C'4 0 4-
to C4-, (L) 0
n Q" ^ • Q 'o 00 > O N cad cd G~ N
O O ~Tf O O
Cd C,4 4- bo
kr) u f~ 4 crs rC4. C-)
06 0
o O. -C 0 cd 0 O" 0
- 4:1 a - o C/I -0
O\
4-4
O
00
0)
th
Cd
a
L a4ham E)ecao *11*i
C a-o7-iozt sp, 07 m WO
http://lava5.deschutes.org/mox5/indexintranet.cfm?action=mox52_view_printablemap 5/31/2011
Print Map Page 1 of 1
a
.s
r
ap
m
~O
am:
2
z
E
W
r
v
r
ws _
~N
L
fl. ~
_NN
a z`
s m~
0 0:
Os El
v
LUBA 2009-061 & 062
04218
d t~
W It) Y) I n n tr)
L 43 {3
3
Q
i
of
0
L ~
D.
v ~
.0
V
- - - aun A-4jodo w yangg -xa,ddy
m
~p
K
mW
U
Q
C
0
W
0
N
DL
i
~o
0 0
N -
x
7 E-
N'=
O Q
0
N
N ~ s
V
X
L
aE
42
N
Il o
i0
!L N
N
A u
v
~
S.
SL DA
m N O
lia. 0
Nr>
0
I I
1 1
s
1
b
u
N
r
=a
N
17- E
0
3
v
a'
m
L
toe-u--
vN
a' }1
m~
0
A
i t
= LL
D 4 r .
C
E
0 0 c6
s°
'41. E
E
a
a
c~
G.
~ v
i u
i =
i w
i
i
E
S 3
i
~ L
' N
i
a
I m
L
i ;
s
i
v
oos.u - ;
0 O
nm ' N N
m ro m m i n tg LJBA 2009-061 & 062
i ` i
04219
n
L 43 ~
R
i
SL (D 4-1
0 N O 0
In
Lo Lo
ro to
- - Puri iC-4jado.W y.:~noq •xcudd y
U
3
CI
= N
0
0
0
v
~
r
V
O
~
O
N
Q X
}.1
06 LU q
^
D..
~ ~ W
V•
O
z iL .0
N
L L
_
7
I-
t1. 11. U
N
E
O }i
E
(ri
t
U
0
w
ot
0)
i
R m
r
+~1 m ~~m
C -
V ~
r V O ~ 0
1Y O
K Ol ~ 9i
b
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
~g
E a
a'w
N
9 4' to
i
i
N
LN
E
~N
N 1
E
= L ~
~tDN
i
1 1
i i
i,
t
tll
3
m 7 t
N E
o~
N E
0 0 b b
0
N
N 0
Y
u
2
ra E
m m
U
pCE
'C N
= a.
E"
i p
N~
0
i
3
L ~
U cH
a~
o~
m ~ 3
L A
N N L
3 i
J ~ v
E m
43 03
im
C.
W
v
c
3
M
3
L
m
r
C
7
N
m
m
v
C.
C.
OO£ -U Pull X4jPdcUJ 43-+0 - _ - i
N - ~ N ~
E
i
L i
N
N 0 0 O N p 0 1 ib b LUBA 2009-061 & 062
po g
d to N N 04220
1 1 I i 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
TT
I
to
I
E
N
L 4'
as
~ m
U
U
DL
U
0
N
n w
ii
0 41
i
O
N 0 O 9 b p O b
t9 n to 0 n
Gull R-vado b 4%nog -xa,ddy
-1N
F- E
0 ~
vN
E
mN
o~
ajN
Q VU V
L11
N E
L
m m.2
t m
3
N
t
0
u0
.C N
~ n
r
~N
H E
0
. B
3N
a
v
._yR0 L
W
O
n
N
to
i
,
t()
to
0)
i
~
,
E
N
N 3
Ea
m~
>m
t~ 3
C.
a
m
a
,
,
,
i
a 3
u a
a
U
43
C.
1
E j
EI
m IT)
ooE u ~n ~a-,ado~,d ~.,oN _
b
J. or
Nps
_
R=
o~oR9
o' up
tl
~RaeO°~
o$oP
aRa~~.
a
^L ~
ii tV
N 31 to
3
0 VVJ t~
E
a~
m
L~
38
S
6 L
N=>
H~
O
I-'
a U
~
b
dm N 0 W
p
0 H1 dr W N 0
0 0
~
LO
r~
ro m ti) CQ
to
c
a NLUBA 2009-061 & 062
ro to
1