Loading...
2013-1205-Minutes for Meeting October 07,2013 Recorded 10/30/2013DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL NANCY BLANKENSHIP, COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL ~201 RECORDS CLERK U 2013.1205 10/3011013 09;36;10 AM Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes County Clerk Certificate Page 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 MINUTES OF WORK SESSION DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MONDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2013 Present were Commissioners Alan Unger, Tammy Baney and Anthony DeBone. Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; Nick Lelack, Cynthia Smidt, Community Development; Laurie Craghead, County Counsel; and citizen Liz Dickson, attorney for Central Oregon Irrigation District. Chair Unger opened the meeting at 3:35 p.m. 1. Discussion of Upcoming Cline Falls Power Plant Appeal Hearing. Cynthia Smidt gave an overview of the appeal, as to whether the declaring of historic is for the entire site. Central Oregon Irrigation District filed a Code enforcement case against PacifiCorp for altering the property. Goal 5, historic resources, comes into play for this site. There are different opinions as to what is a historic resource. It was determined that some structures were historic, but the Historic Landmarks Commission considers the whole site of historic significance. The predominate issue is what a historic resource. The complicating item is the inventory note that says only the designated structure is to be considered. The memo and decision are an interpretation of a few sentences. What is not clear is the meaning of "site"; is it the name or the listing of components. Assignments of error are listed in the appeal, and the appellant feels the ESEE was improperly relied upon, ignored the plain language of the inventory, and there is no map or description for the entire site, and feels the Historic Landmarks Commission lacks authority. The appellant also sites due process errors. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 7, 2013 Page 1 of 8 Laurie Craghead stated the Board has to determine what the note means and how the ESEE fits in. The ESEE does not determine whether a site is historic or if the property is just to be protected. It may fit into legislative history. Nick Lelack says staff feels the entire site was to be protected, but the note puts this into question. The Historic Landmarks Commission feels the same, as does the property owner. Commissioner Baney asked if the note should be plural. Commissioner DeBone wants to know just what they are protecting and what was changed. Mr. Lelack said Goal 5 requires significant resources be protected. The County went through processes in the 1980'and 1990's to adopt ordinances to decide what might be protected. When the comprehensive plan was re-adopted, these stayed in place. It is the County's own call. Some have not yet been interpreted. Commissioner DeBone stated that it appears the switchyard is the structure in question. Ms. Craghead said the Board is to decide what the site is, and it is up to Code enforcement to take it from there, if there has been a violation. Ms. Smidt said that many things have changed at the property over the years and were not addressed at the time. A staircase was removed, and other things were altered. Nothing was brought to the County's attention before this latest change. The user may have not considered this part of a historic structure. Commissioner Baney asked if utilities are regulated differently. Ms. Craghead said they are not in this case. Chair Unger asked who is expected to keep things at a certain condition; would that be the owner, the tenant or others. Who protects the resource, and at what state is the resource supposed to stay. Ms. Smidt said the owner could volunteer to take care of the property but is not required to do so. Ms. Craghead added they have to get a permit to alter the property. Mr. Lelack said the owner does not have to maintain a property, but needs a permit for any changes. This could mean a resource could eventually be destroyed by simple neglect. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 7, 2013 Page 2 of 8 Chair Unger asked about environmental issues, such as PCB's or other hazards near waterways, or if something was unsafe. He asked how those are taken into account. Ms. Smidt said there are some exceptions for public health and safety concerns. Mr. Lelack stated that owners are allowed to make changes to comply with federal regulations. Ms. Craghead said the applicant is attacking the 1992 regulations. They should have applied for the proper permits. Mr. Lelack stated some information applies to just one part of the site, and some refer to the entire site. Defining the site is the key issue. Commissioner DeBone asked if there are photos of the site before there were changes. Staff will try to determine what exists. Commissioner Baney asked for a copy of the ESEE and Ordinances. A hearing is set for October 21. There is no time limitation on a decision. Ms. Smidt left the meeting at this time. 2. Other Items. Mr. Anderson stated there have been ongoing discussions about the transfer development program for northern part of county (Cyrus). Mr. Lelack said that a presentation was provided by Jon Jennings of the DLCD at the community meeting. The next work group meeting is on October 14 at the Sisters library. It is not a public meeting, but is open to the public. The next question, coming from Matt Cyrus and others, is whether the Board would support any legislative changes regarding the County receiving the TDO. It has been suggested this be opened up to other counties, which would have to be outside the valley. It has basically the same criteria as that of destination resorts. This would take the pressure off the County. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 7, 2013 Page 3 of 8 Commissioner Baney said that Jefferson County representatives were at the last meeting, and indicated the TDO could come to Jefferson County. Chair Unger noted that is where they came from in the first place. Commissioner Baney stated that if this were in front of other economically disadvantaged counties, they could take the heat. Maybe they should discuss this with other entities. If they change the census data from 2009 to 2013, Deschutes County is on the list, but there are others as well. Some were already on the list and have not moved off the high unemployment rate. Chair Unger said he does not want the County to have to do this on its own. Mr. Anderson stated that Jon Jennings of DLCD should be doing this. Commissioner Baney agreed, saying that they want the County to make it easy for them. There should be some overnight accommodations there to add to the vitality of the project, but this is way beyond super-siting. Maybe the County can go on record regarding the fact that there being a lack of clarity but the State still wanting to convene is a recipe for disaster. There is no defined outcome of what is being sought. Commissioner DeBone wanted to know what is being asked, and who the respondent is. It does not seem specific. The Board is getting opposition letters from people who think there is more being asked that maybe there really is. Mr. Lelack said that DLCD hired the facilitator, and the work group has no control over the agenda. Jon Jennings is proposing meeting dates. Mr. Lelack said they need to have something specific on the table for community meetings. Commissioner Baney asked if it is standard for the County to help with legislation or proposals. Mr. Lelack replied, not to the extent they are asking. Usually advice is about a technical perspective, with Code serving as the model. The County cannot be involved in writing legislation like this. Commissioner Baney asked what is being risked if the County says it will be involved only when there is something solid to react to. At this time, it is not a good use of time. There is a lack of clarity. She would rather respond to something specific. The County can step back until there is something solid on the table. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 7, 2013 Page 4 of 8 Mr. Anderson noted that the statement should go to the Representative. Otherwise, they are going to think the County is not helping to find any middle ground. The Board so far thinks there should be a local process. This is supported by the community as a whole. Matt Cyrus was resistant to this, and wants an entitlement and outright permitted use. It is not necessarily appropriate for the Board to say anything more. Some things are important to the Board, but beyond that, it is up to others. The County has a limited role. Representatives are tasked to drafting legislative language. The County needs to preserve its neutrality to have legal standing for a review. Beyond that, it is a slippery slope. Mr. Lelack said this response was summarized in a response to the legislature. Mr. Anderson noted that they are not listening. Chair Unger stated that they have a problem to fix and made some promises, but do not have staff to handle the process. Commissioner DeBone noted this is a hard spot to be in; asking for professional opinions makes it difficult. Representative Huffman wants this to move forward, so perhaps he should be contacted. A lot of people are providing feedback. Commissioner Baney said they need to know the right thing to do. She wants to be sure the TDO's are something the County wants. The County was not asked this, and should not just insert itself. It changes the need for them to go to the legislature if the County agrees to receive the TDO's. Mr. Lelack stated that this should probably be opened up to other counties. They would still have to adjust something in regard to economic impacts. Perhaps AOC could get involved and make suggestions. He can respond to Representative Huffman and Jon Jennings regarding the Board's feelings on this issue. Citizens don't know who to contact and there is a lot of confusion. He can suggest that perhaps other counties be given this opportunity through DLCD. Chair Unger added they need to look at the methodology and why Deschutes County should get these if other counties are viable. Commissioner DeBone noted that is still asking Mr. Lelack to be involved. Mr. Kropp suggested that DLCD pursue this instead of someone from the County. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 7, 2013 Page 5 of 8 In regard to a Goal 11 area-wide exception in south County, Mr. Lelack asked who the applicant would be, the County or DLCD. If there is an appeal later, this could be a problem. He asked how Klamath County fits into the picture. Mr. Anderson noted that it would be a parallel process, and perhaps the two counties can do it together. Mark Pilliod joined the meeting at this time. Mr. Anderson presented a letter from HousingWorks regarding the issuance of bonds. Mr. Pilliod stated that they wish to issue bonds through the Central Oregon Housing Authority to facilitate the remodeling of a couple of properties. Statute authorizes them to issue bonds as an obligation of the Authority. Commissioner DeBone said NeighborImpact is selling Healy Heights to HousingWorks. Mr. Pilliod noted that there is some level of board involvement in the Housing Authority. Statute is clear, though, they can do this to obtain favorable tax treatment. One step in the process is that the IRS requires Board of Commissioners' approval of the certificate that allows them to move forward. They had a noticed public hearing, evidently with no testimony or comments received, so now it comes to the County. It is unusual for the Housing Authority to issue bonds, but it is permitted. Commissioner Baney said that the loan proceeds would go to Larkspur Housing as the borrower. This is different from HousingWorks. Mr. Pilliod explained that the Authority issues the bonds and the borrower is the LLC; this will provide revenue to service the bonds. Commissioner Baney noted that she wants to be sure no one in HousingWorks is part of Larkspur. She is concerned about transparency and private involvement with public funds. Chair Unger asked why the County is involved in this. Mr. Pilliod said that the closest analogy is hospital bonding. The Hospital Authority issues the bonds for St. Charles, and it is the same correlation for tax-exempt bonds. Deschutes County is officially on that Board but there is no obligation placed on the County. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 7, 2013 Page 6 of 8 The interest is there because the County is responsible for the establishment of the Housing Authority, but this is a separate legal entity and has statutory authority to do a lot of things, including issuing bonds. The County is not responsible for servicing the bonds and neither are its officers. It is an element in the checklist for tax treatment purposes. Commissioner Baney stated that this involves public funds, and a new executive director who is a private developer, Mr. Kemper. She wants to be clear on who gets the funds. If there is an LLC and he is a principal, the County should care. Mr. Anderson said per the letter, HousingWorks put together the plan and arranged for the rehab work, and that should be transparent. However, it is not based on the certificate. Commissioner Baney emphasized she does not know who is getting the money. Mr. Pilliod noted that he spoke with bond counsel but did not ask that question. Chair Unger added that this is confusing. He wondered about whether there was a public hearing since the minutes have very little detail. Mr. Pilliod said that he has no idea how the hearing was handled, and asked the Board if they want Mr. Kemper to come to a work session to talk about this. Commissioner DeBone stated that he is not that worried about it, but it would be good to know who Larkspur is. Chair Unger asked that Mr. Kemper be called to clarify this. Mr. Anderson said he would do so. Commissioner DeBone noted that he supports the legislative concept of adding geothermal to the alternative energy requirements list for new construction of public facilities, the 1.5% amount. Chair Unger said they are required to do some kind of similar project to offset the carbon footprint of whatever is being built. This comes up almost every legislative session. Some people don't want their support of solar diluted by other forms of energy, but there should be more options. This could be brought up at the AOC regional meeting. Being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m. Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 7, 2013 Page 7 of 8 DATED this Day of ob e~ 2013 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. Alan Unger, Chair Tammy Baney, Vice air ATTEST: zAd ° 10(m ( _ r Anthony DeBone, Commissioner Recording Secretary Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Work Session Monday, October 7, 2013 Page 8 of 8 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 3:30 P.M., MONDAY, OCTOBER 7, 2013 PLEASE NOTE LATER TIME 1. Discussion of Upcoming Cline Falls Power Plant Appeal Hearing - Cynthia Smidt 2. 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 roams at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. Ifyou have questions regarding a meeting, please call 388-6572. Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This eventilocation is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible, please call (541) 388-6572, or send an e-mail to bonnie.baker(ddeschutes.ore. v N N L L c ll~ L CL i I J N N L 'V .r c 0 N N Y I Lo 0 E co z ~w O 405 SW 6th Street Redmond, OR 97756 p: 541.923.1018 f: 541.923.6441 www.housing-works.org October 3, 2013 BY MAIL/EMAIL Board of County Commissioners Deschutes County 1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 200 Bend, OR 97701 Re: Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Ariel Glen and Healy Heights Projects), Series 2013 Honorable Board of County Commissioners: The Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority (the "Authority") intends to issue tax-exempt conduit revenue bonds to finance 140 units of affordable housing in Deschutes County. The purpose of this letter is to notify you of the bond issuance and, pursuant to Section 147(f)(2)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), to request the approval for the bond issue from the Board of County Commissioners of Deschutes County, as the "applicable elected representative" for Deschutes County, the jurisdiction in which the Authority is issuing bonds. The Authority intends to issue its Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Ariel Glen and Healy Heights Projects), Series 2013 and to loan the proceeds of the bonds to Larkspur Housing LLC, an Oregon limited liability company of which the Authority is the managing member. Larkspur Housing LLC will acquire and rehabilitate (1) the 70-unit multifamily apartment complex presently known as the Ariel Glen Apartments, located in Bend, Oregon and (2) the 70-unit multifamily apartment complex presently known as the Healy Heights Apartments, located in Bend, Oregon. As required by the Code, the Authority published a notice in the Bend Bulletin of a public hearing for the projects and the bond issue at least two weeks in advance of the hearing. The hearing occurred on October 1, 2013. Attached for your reference are copies of the notice which was published, the affidavit of publication, and the minutes of the public hearing, along with the Certificate of County Commissioners approving the bond issue. We respectfully request that the Board of County Commissioners review and execute the certificate in order to approve the bond transaction as required by the Code. OCT - 7 2013 IL The bond issue is scheduled to close on December 12, 2013. We appreciate your review of the attached documents and return of the executed certificate at your earliest convenience. Please let me know if you anticipate any issues in meeting this schedule. Please call me or Faith Pettis of Pacifica Law Group LLP, bond counsel to the Authority, at (206) 245-1715 if you have any questions. Very truly yours, OREGON REGIONAL HOUSING Thor3las J. Kenlptr Executive Director CERTIFICATE OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY APPROVING BONDS ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL OREGON REGIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY We, the Board of County Commissioners of Deschutes County, Oregon (the "County"), CERTIFY that: WHEREAS, the Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority (the "Authority") is a public body corporate and politic of the State of Oregon; and WHEREAS, ORS 456.175 provides that a housing authority may issue bonds for any of its corporate purposes; and WHEREAS, the Authority intends to issue its Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Ariel Glen and Healy Heights Projects), Series 2013 (the "Bonds"), in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $7,000,000 and to loan the proceeds thereof to Larkspur Housing LLC, an Oregon limited liability company (the "Borrower") of which the Authority is the managing member, in connection with the acquisition and rehabilitation of (1) the 70-unit multifamily apartment complex presently known as the Ariel Glen Apartments, located in Bend, Oregon and (2) the 70-unit multifamily apartment complex presently known as the Healy Heights Apartments, located in Bend, Oregon, and the payment of issuance costs with respect to the Bonds (together, the "Project"); and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held pursuant to the requirements of Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), with respect to the Bonds on October 1, 2013, in Bend, Oregon, following timely notice being published in a newspaper of general circulation throughout the County; and WHEREAS, we have received a written summary of the public testimony; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is a County-wide elected legislative body representing the County with respect to the approval of the Bonds for purposes of Section 147(0(2)(A)(ii) of the Code. NOW, THEREFORE, we approve the issuance by the Authority of the Bonds, the proceeds of which will be loaned to the Borrower to finance the Project. This approval is intended to comply with the requirements of Section 147(f)(2)(A)(ii) of the Code in order to permit the issuance of the Bonds. In providing this certificate, the County shall take no financial responsibility and incur no financial liability with respect to the Authority's issuance or repayment of the Bonds. C.\UsemVkempoWpData\Lwal\M=so0\Winoom\Temporary Internet R1%Co WL0utlook15819VJPBC.My Commissioners Certlficate - CORHA 2013.ooc nn nne -W A-^ - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have executed this instrument this day of , 2013. Alan Unger, County Comrissioner Deschutes County, Oregon Tammy Baney, County Commissioner Deschutes County, Oregon Tony DeBone, County Commissioner Deschutes County, Oregon REVD D LL6AL COUNSEL -2- FLPOJY.000 13110/02 MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING Proposed Issuance of Tax-exempt Bonds October 1, 2013 1. Call to Order Pursuant to notice through the media and in conformance with the Public Hearings Law, Executive Director Thomas J. Kemper called the hearing to order at 3:02 p.m. II. Individuals Present Thomas J. Kemper Lori Hill Keith Wooden III. Discussion Kemper opened the public hearing by announcing the reason for the hearing. The hearing was open to public comment regarding the proposed issuance of tax-exempt bonds by Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority dba Housing Works to finance the acquisition and rehabilitation of the Ariel Glen and Healy Heights Apartments by Larkspur Housing LLC, of which the Authority is the managing member. Estimated bond amount would not exceed $7,000,000. Both apartment complexes are located in Bend, Oregon. The hearing was opened to public testimony and written comments. There were no written comments submitted and no members of the public in attendance. There being no public testimony or written comments the hearing was closed by Kemper at 3:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lori Hill Acting Recording Secretary Page 1 of 1 Affidavit of Publication STATE.( EGON, COUNTY OF DESCHUTES I, Polly Schoenhoff, a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not party to,pr interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of The Bulletin 1777 SW Chandler Ave, Bend OR 97702 a daily newspaper of general circulation, published in the aforesaid county and state as defined by ORS 193.010 and ORS 193.020, that Acct Name: HOUSING WORKS Legal Description: LEGAL NOTICE, Central Oregon Regional Housing Authority dba Housing Works (the "Authority") will hold an open public hearing for the purpose of considering the issuance... a printed copy of which is hereto affixed was published in each regular and entire issue of the said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to wit: 9/15113 . Page G5 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is Tt and correct. Dated at Bend, Oregon, this 16 day of September, 2013. Signature AdName: 20399953D State of Oregon, County of Deschutes / r Subscribed and Sworn to before me this day of 2013 by Ly, Notary Public for Oregon OFFICIAL SEAL KENDRA L STOKES NOTARY PUBLIC•OREGON COMMISSION NO.460590 EllS10N EXPIRES AUGUST 12, 2017 r~ O y V V1 lmllmom~ 424 C4 H t/1 O G~ Q2 CU a 0 PMM4 a~ A y G~ MPM4 0 c~. a O i Q L 4) 4-0 N N ei L V IX A Discussion of the Metolius Transfer of Development Opportunities Sisters, Oregon Oaober 1, 2013 Presentation Purpose • Providegeneral levels ofcontext and background. • Describe how the current discussion originated, • Identify Wor group and Workgroup functions. • Provide additional detail regarding provisions in the elating law. providea high level comparison of existing legal provisions with Oeschutes County and Aspen Lakes. Quick Background Overview • Melogus Areaof CrMl iStMe Cmcern-)eRmson County, Oregon, 2009. • MetollusTransfer Of Development Opportunities (TOds). Interest in Resort Type Development Expansion on Lands in Deschutes County. NO 3536 (2013). Legislator contact with land Owners. Document Reproduces Poorly (Archived) Metolius Area of Critical State Concern The outstanding resources that the land Conservation and Development commission believes warrant special state protection are: • T r"iva, and I..d lnPNer,andlhe pwntayaM puality of water that the v W.. W1 JepeM ori; •The sank nb tithe Ponderosa pN (oasts, stream; Mmes aM aast scopes pt the 6stada than novae this a sPecbl pba for all visitors: and • 1lw wgdbYe rtgoumes lnand around the bash, Including deerend sdkwinterard trankbalsthatu limportant huntly oppatunkiesandthat an .0 an IM lmpartsnt triWlresoura. Why We Are Here cafe lawmakers request W explore Deschutes County as receiving area far MetoliusTDD4. Pmposed Legislation from M13 session is completely off the ubk. Leg"t,n mgardi the MetoOUSTDO's lgxly to be irnrod.W in M14. Metolius TDO Workgroup Workgmis Membership • ReprssematNeloM HUgman-famener • OesclwtesCOUnty - City of uaurs • Aspen Lases Oevebpmen(LLC • Aspen lake Community 3urnsundingC rrunwdly Nlerniers Local goal Estate COmmuplty • DesrhwsC my farm Bureau • CaMral Oregon UM Witch • 1000 FMnds of Onxpn - uau Agencies Role of the Workgroup • Inform Legislators regarding possible rew9onsto existing law. Opareting unwiar Wvambar Z tIm*ams. • LacWWwm woxMabe wkNwldwhh"Wth"u * tame Maauanandatism TheTask FOroe hss rep author#y to appmua 1awcNnges or authorise aM dawdopmem pmpwal. Core Workgroup Items Iamsto ldentey& Vndemand iosslbk aaro meodat nItems • ~h tM Sate aalk`/ • Cou k.la,seraaareeise repMlne Ma Matoeus TDD exl ft*law Wo ,xl Iawi x*s"re %areas for tM MetotiWiWS? If=: MatoeusTDO Uw wo kT w WMSareaulrendy eeeble as eoamial re Mm al for the tM Metollus TDD'sT wMt is the minimum amoalt of revision necassaryto aapanda TD areas forrtMMetolIwl~s TD('si should addetonal mh w aim be omsidol ? State Policy 1514 a ew pr4 pb NNrsw MQtanf¢ 41 Fadwa r4mlMe ax11aO b waaiM M nnanM rya A mwa Imbw6 b IYnbr >MUaiM IMM~tlmM~anrhPMam rma<awawht Irly msMw~ i~u.vs~.hm~~a n.w.a~roosawei.w~ bm MlLM rv/M~ar6 IgsiwW hrlga~l iunMMNww~uhn pWmhrwNOh MrerWn tpnnuaels N[ INanvukxua brevemkCMipMn In aruatlutanq~we W Wlbayd al EMwa W a.uf wawNV M wMr04r MiwuniwwrM1~aNiyS ~paa as 4savarq b~ q breNS a.a. Key Legislation Mewl WAM 0f QtkW StM C0lrern . 118332eee(200e) MId1UD6SACT • Ile ma)xw% • He 3314(2009) • He 3M (3021) Transfer of Development Opportunities One or Two "Small-Scale Recreation Communes' 'A smalFSnaY naeaton community authoma,l under senora 2 so 5, dwpter 636. Oregon laws 2009, may be esfablW arlyo mnluM with a tmoswr a develop t opportunityfmma Metdius revert sne' How the Existing Law Works • Dependant upon a number of factors designed to protect the ewimnmeM. Only possible at certain locations within particular counties. • SPenfies the types of uses that may and may not occur. Requires a decelopa to carry out on-site and off-site measures if appioval if obtained. Small-Scale Recreation Community Can r°ism°~i°.a w~.dmd' q.umw.+s'w ~a~e a.+~wee a:wY.a w u~ m+s.r.uY. ~r u~~w nw..wwwa . ~~a~yy ~awwew~;~ta awMw W W wweppbYfai. yw.LL ee~a..uwa Y.~xtwni4l T~. aA 4+eMa gwtiudi Y..r>www,sa wwspmw.s.s aawa.wrwwYae.rww.amK dMmMe~vhpew`mvy raaMWaraYK Can feat Y WaMMYe - a+uwMraww.m.r.eYam iasw M.FMa1W /iaueMaM YYAIMMYMYYarw. ' . Small-Scale Recreation Community MuRtMs Maven as pdmarypurp« Frans 4owrngMbdgMgwas. 515 MWpnnwlbespwabBMe prepnsyawven aR4reswr« nManmaene « nm«bn ppkota a nnrby W blk Inds Mrt wtl be weA Br MdMdwkbaeMemmm«dtg • Bahryakwkfpr MrAaiwblewnatlasaM envarnmnikleenstl«amn. • MnMSaad na andnbwlwinafpreNmw,aM asa WddMdwundw OF Mapurn •atees Ma Wkdi.:rbn suiMaNSaMOMerd«tlapnwnMiM mwnµ wkas Mw WM4RwfM preWbnaof Ne i22B. Water Quality EAstlngwater law requires a permit from OWRD. EFdsdng TDO law Imiudes multiple pmvisi«s relating to water useand protecting v quality. Locally Inventoried %*AldRfe Habitat off Limits. • Especial"nsitive Big Game Habitat per Goal 8 Off Limits. Natural Resources May not be sited in areas that are locally imsnmried as: Open spare, scenic and hissorlc areas and natural resources; FAuarme resources; coastal shorelands;or BeachesaMdunes. Significant: natural resource functions and values on the site must be preserved. Natural Resources-Farm Lands protected to Farm & Banat uses are not eligible for `Small-Scale Recreation Community." Public Process • subject to numerous criteria In statute. • Subect to foal review protests as a conditional use on forestland. • Subject to LMI land division & development standards. Potentially Eligible A smallsnk recreation oommlm7q-•mug be shed on land that Is within a coumymat has, on June 29.2009•. a seasonally adjusted average annual unemployment rare over the or coMm IOnlenda mmthat' thllocercem Jthe olomwntrare form vim state overmesame period, as reported bythe Employment Department' • muuw Mmexwmm1aaesms. inewyln+4d'uvenvdkdnz.LVm M ymteawKakdws List of Potentially Eligible Counties eased on &nnom*yAdjumn Unempbymem btc ~.,n ww• a t .b Drilling Down - Deschutes Summary MN STWS emanate hem the Metaws A. of U10I1 ee taiwem ee3gm . • Sbte law prtxhbes when, WMrt ana how an aPpaxtw fora'Smaa Scale Re3xatlen cnmmoW "be appw be eeS ecounties, IrwWdex OMChuW ®lelkw0n,ax nael{ibkx xcelse [M a3etpew suMermrmw Wwasmixe b201~ NCombi eno Wnaplxe cpmbtDNtM NetolbsTOO'awhh pen VUkee ke3EkiwtorOrpinex whh eMxr 6M owner. • leyWnbn4Bwlf bbe lMmEYW in 201aro raise tM CUmmtlaw. ' TM T00 WwlyrouD wU MIpaENCe the Lep'shxrt WM1NM1eror rxt ehanpa IDtM bw rmb senx. Metolius TDO Law, Cont... WrWYrsw uu m.nlm/.W bV YW ruY•y.m ~lM1~ aMSS.Mriw~w..sa'wawrrei~r+ew. nr.rer lnw.sa °.~.mv 4.'.wrrr~mnwli.f.Nfln.mF ~rPdYF Wul....ihansnleau,.af. N •.crrr.Yymr asl~awlruW m_ nRFlwa® ~e•tn m..rrr. ~ •orw'R rn ~°Y+r••~•au,w~i.rww~w r~.w. eru.O Ywmn~a.wr.r.Y. r..p.r~r.• r... •r weW ~Yh°h~r.wf _w.~nrmrrmF~rr lr.mr.Yr WrwnY VrsrfY~w rirK ~r•an.y~r h .P_ w~ ~~i rwrw~•rvl Mm.a°w WSr..~ Wlww.lry.r.Y.i.yr_ryl°RlurnW Metolius TDO Law, Cont... qs ~Yr~w~~F~vi+l~'°'YYr.FfhYU/. w.t P~YeYlr~lf~r..YY•rMV lY~r.rwlM.Y_a_ 'l.y.rfrw YNpYlyYfa •r r_!~ dYrY•l•_Srr, vIr ~f w~ rw~i y~.WlFW.WY l•4 .w.YYwi i~w n.uwirY~l jirrtlwlaY.~r YYr R~ lwYY-°a•F~.Iri.aFM~~rfrFyw~Wyw.Y.yr~lyY~~ ~w Y~°PYY•.~•l..eW.~ 4 Y~i•.YY• w~_.N•rr~'°lliinlrhSN. Yn~si ryrwYw~Mal, i~FAI~r~M •rn•~lrY4~Yn.1~YF .r~i~KYY~WYwW ml~ ..YF~w.lWYPF.•.•.rY Y..". .layqu.•Y.yymiswYlYrn..plf v.. f•• r .+rY~e~lf•Fr..Y.ff'•.F W Ywrdafrti.r•~ulm.b rYY Yff _r ln..f • w lnnY YYpY Y_ M Metolius TDO Law, YI / mm qn r.....F. M. wW.F nr..wn m+F... M wl...me a m s. w,..«...+m..wwA.r ras PI~F n.M1.MrFhav.M,~.urcP..resn:.Fw.~kr WTeLLJ.V.nbNAUUInirW.fl[O.M W Y4 ~+IxrrpPY.~4 u.MUkmalYmm~..r. Y.FaypM. wx+®mn~r4rbM IH.m..+.Mn.Mbawn PrmuJpW~aq~.. IEMeixfS: ,o.ww Metolius TDO Law, Cont...