The URL can be used to link to this page

2020-67-Minutes for Meeting January 27,2020 Recorded 2/24/2020�wTES co o' �{ BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon (541 ) 388-6570 11:00 AM Recorded in Deschutes County C J2020-67 Nancy Blankenship, County Clerk Commissioners' Journal 02/24/2020 11:01:13 AM co 2020-67 MONDAY January 27, 2020 ALLEN CONFERENCE ROOM Present were Commissioners Anthony DeBone and Phil Henderson, Commissioner Patti Adair was absent (excused). Also present were Tom Anderson, County Administrator; Erik Kropp, Deputy County Administrator; David Doyle, County Counsel; and Sharon Keith, Board Executive Assistant. Several citizens, staff, and several identified representatives of the media were in attendance. CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chair DeBone called the meeting to order at 11:02 a.m. ACTION ITEMS 1. Smokejumper Center Follow -Up Presentation County Administrator Anderson introduced the presentation and reported on the consultant process reviewing the center. Joe Studer, Senior Advisor and Rika Nelson, Executive Director of Discover your Forest presented the update. A copy of the presentation is attached to the record. The feasibility study also reviewed funding options. Mr. Stutler asked the Commissioners to consider the options. BOCC MEETING JANUARY 27, 2020 PAGE 1 OF 7 Commissioner DeBone supports education for the community and a facility such as this would fit with the history of the area. Commissioner Henderson inquired on the funding as it was originally presented to the Commissioners as a Forest Service project. Ms. Nelson stated there is still interest however building support and operation has changed. Mr. Stutler would rather have local funding. Ms. Nelson stated Central Oregon Visitor's Association supported the feasibility study and has an economic interest in the center for the Redmond area. Commissioner DeBone recommended a discussion during the joint meeting with the City of Redmond. Commissioner Henderson spoke on the goal for the team to seek out private funding. Commissioner DeBone stressed the creation of a well-rounded community attraction that will draw visitors during shoulder seasons. 2. Veterans Village Project Discussion Commissioner Henderson introduced the concept for a homeless veteran's facility to be located just south of the DC 911 / State Police building on the public safety campus in Bend. Presenters included Erik Tobiason, Kathy Skidmore, JW Terry, Representative Cheri Helt and Sam Davis. A copy of the presentation is attached to the record. Commissioner Henderson commented on the benefit of the kit homes that are proposed. Representative Helt commented on the importance of addressing the homeless population in Deschutes County and the process of securing funding for this project. Commissioner DeBone inquired on the staffing plan for the project. Mr. Tobiason reported on the costs of the development and the process of fund raising. Operational costs are estimated at $160,000 per year. Commissioner Henderson spoke on the work needed to be done with the City to begin the project. Representative Helt reported on the state of emergency for homeless shelters in the state. Commissioners Henderson and DeBone expressed general support of the project. County Administrator Anderson recommended that since the Board wants to move forward, a feasibility study needs to be prepared and a land lease should be considered. Commissioner Henderson suggested an initial memorandum of understanding for the project. Mr. Tobiason will work with Property BOCC MEETING JANUARY 27, 2020 PAGE 2 OF 7 Managerjames Lewis to draft the documents. Facilities Director Lee Randall noted that city engineers will need to assess utility infrastructure on the site. Commissioner DeBone stated again that he is supportive of the project. Representative Helt stated this is a crisis and hopes for a 10-year lease with a five-year option and requests this is addressed immediately. The Board once again expressed general support for the project. 3. Sisemore Road Legalization Discussion Assistant Legal Counsel Adam Smith, County Engineer Cody Smith, and Road Department Director Chris Doty presented. Commissioner DeBone asked County Counsel Doyle to provide a summary on the purpose of today's discussion. Doyle indicated that the Board wanted to ascertain if staff would be directed to engage with the Hudson Family Trust and its representative. Adam Smith stated staff remain supportive of their position that a 60 foot ROW is in the public interest. Commissioner Henderson is open to a discussion with the Hudson's about what happens next. Road Department Director Chris Doty commented on concerns that may be addressed re: parking restrictions on Sisemore Road. Attorney Stephanie Marshall submitted an additional packet of information including a letter and photographs. Commissioner Henderson is interested in having staff meet with the Hudsons. Commissioner DeBone supports the 60-foot right of way. Mr. Doty offered to have a conversation with Dr. Leslie Hudson and attorney, Stephanie Marshall. Dr. Hudson commented as the newly elected chair of the Planning Commission he realizes the need to rewrite the County's comprehensive plan and personally he also doesn't want to be forced into litigation and hopes for a way through this. Commissioner DeBone is not supportive of making the road narrower and the road was intended to be 60-feet. Commissioner Henderson hasn't seen evidence to change it but would like to listen to Dr. Hudson's ideas. Mr. Smith stated it is ultimately the Board's decision and is also prepared to meet with the Hudson's. BQCC MEETING JANUARY 27, 2020 PAGE 3 OF 7 4. COVA Presentation Joey Hamilton and Julia Thiesen of the Central Oregon Visitor's Association presented the mid -year report. A copy of the presentation is attached to the record. S. Monthly Treasurer and Finance Report Chief Finance Officer Greg Munn and Camilla Sparks presented the Deschutes County treasury and finance report as of December 31 2019. The report is included in the agenda packet. A dashboard that is linked to the Finance system was displayed as found on our Deschutes County website. 6. Rule Advisory Committee for National Register Program in Oregon Discussion Planning Manager Peter Gutowsky presented and reported on his participation on the rules advisory committee upon an invitation from the Oregon State Historic Preservation Office. There are twelve members representing the Association of Oregon Counties. The committee will review the state rules for proposed changes to the Oregon Administrative Rules governing Oregon's administration of the federal national register of historical places program. Mr. Gutowsky stated there are four meetings scheduled for the committee and would present proposed changes to the Board for consideration as the governing body. The Board expressed support of proceeding. BOCC MEETING JANUARY 27, 2020 PAGE 4 OF 7 7. Preparation for Public Hearing: City of Bend Plan Amendment to Allow Sewer at Outback Water Facility Community Development Department planner Matt Martin presented information in preparation of a public hearing that is scheduled for the BOCC meeting of February 5, 2020. The City of Bend has submitted an application for a plan amendment with a goal exception to allow sewer outside of the Urban Growth Boundary. This sewer line would solely serve the subject city property at 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend. 8. Preparation for Public Hearing on Redmond UGB Amendment Community Development Department planner Cynthia Smidt presented information in preparation of a public hearing that is scheduled for the BOCC meeting of February 5, 2020. The hearing will consider an Urban Growth Boundary adjustment and amendments to the Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps. The applicant requests a comprehensive plan amendment to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. This matter concerns the land exchange between DSL/County/City. OTHER ITEMS: Assistant County Counsel Adam Smith reported on the Sisemore Road meeting with Dr. Hudson and Stephanie Marshall. Dr. Hudson shared his concerns specific to signs, parking and fencing. Dr. Hudson's position will be put in writing and presented to staff within a day or two. BOCC MEETING JANUARY 27, 2020 PAGE 5 OF 7 COMMISSIONER UPDATES Commissioner DeBone reported on the EOCA conference call this morning regarding the carbon bill. • Commissioner Henderson attended the Housing for All meeting and reported on a proposal of a regional housing council. • Commissioner DeBone stated the Blues Intergovernmental Council meeting is scheduled for tomorrow with a conference call option. • Commissioner DeBone noted the request to review the applications for the Project Wildfire Steering Committee and recommended holding interviews for the business applicants. Commissioner Henderson will review the applications. OTHER ITEMS Continued: • County Administrator Anderson reported the Health Services Department is holding an all staff meeting tomorrow morning. • County Administrator Anderson reported on the marijuana tax distribution and that the Department of Revenue and DOJ are reviewing. County Counsel is preparing an administrative claim/request for declaratory ruling and will submit with state agencies this week. BOCC asked County Counsel to reach out to DOJ attorney ahead of filing the claim. EXECUTIVE SESSION: None scheduled. BOCC MEETING JANUARY 27, 2020 PAGE 6 OF 7 r,r Being no further items to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:23 p.m. DATED this Day of 20 for the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners. � F1 P ,TTI ADAIR, CHAP "' IV/ Cr '' ANTHONYE E, VICE CHAT PHILIP G. HE�iDER ON, COMMISSIONER BOCC MEETING JANUARY 27, 2020 PAGE 7 OF 7 \)I E Sgy COGZ �L -' -� Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703 (541) 388-6570 - www.deschutes.org BOCC MEETING AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 11:00 AM, MON DAY, JANUARY 27, 2020 Allen Conference Room - Deschutes Services Building, 2ND Floor - 1300 NW Wall Street - Bend This meeting is open to the public, and allows the Board to gather information and give direction to staff. Public comment is not normally accepted. Written minutes are taken for the record Pursuant to ORS 192.640, this agenda includes a list of the main topics that are anticipated to be considered or discussed. This notice does not limit the Board's ability to address other topics. Meetings are subject to cancellation without notice. Item start times are estimated and subject to change without notice. CALL TO ORDER ACTION ITEMS 1. 11:00 AM Smokejumper Center Follow -Up Presentation -Joe Stutler 2. 11:30 AM Veterans Village Project Discussion 3. 12:00 PM Monthly Treasurer and Finance Report - Greg Munn, Chief Financial Officer 4. 12:20 PM Sisemore Road Legalization Discussion 5. 1:00 PM COVA Presentation -Julia Theisen 6. 1:30 PM Rule Advisory Committee for National Register Program in Oregon Discussion 7. 2:00 PM Preparation for Public Hearing: City of Bend Plan Amendment to Allow Sewer at Outback Water Facility - Matthew Martin, Associate Planner Board of Commissioners BOCC Meeting Agenda Monday, January 27, 2020 Page 1 of 2 8. 2:20 PM Preparation for Public Hearing on Redmond UGB Amendment - Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner COMMISSIONER'S UPDATES EXECUTIVE SESSION At any time during the 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, ORS 192.660(2)(b), personnel issues, or other executive session categories. Executive sessions are closed to the public, however, with few exceptions and under specific guidelines, are open to the media. OTHER ITEMS These can be any items not included on the agenda that the Commissioners wish to discuss as part of the meeting, pursuant to ORS 192.640. ADJOURN Board of Commissioners BOCC Meeting Agenda Monday, January 27, 2020 Page 2 of 2 ES Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - https: ://www.deschutes.org/ AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT For Board of Commissioners BOCC Monday Meeting of December 18, 2019 DATE: December 8, 2019 FROM: Joe Studer, Senior Advisor—(541) 322-7141 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Redmond Smokejumper Education Center; follow up report to Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners on feasibility study and recommendations for future actions. A Power Point Presentation will be offered and attached. ATTENDANCE: Joe Studer, Deschutes County; Kassidy Kern, Deschutes National Forest; Maurice Evans, Deschutes National Forest; Rika Ayotte, Discover Your Forest. 1� N GJ V Q O C 4J GJ — E XQ N O E L N C N ma's — ca O N O y_ L 'N O 3 tN i N � U U N O E cu i U N O (B O U a1 4 -+ biA E Q E0 Q 4- 0 O to O U f� i E .3 � •L co � � � N _0 a) .v -� =3 O > �- O U v O Q m O O O c Q (A 4--J O N M i o o s ,� Q o N N - O N N O cv = �O 4 Y t > U O > tw C -0 O tw _N �> v C: fB N •� i fa Q m i O N _ w 0 a W = U c M 00 � N m M i! - 0 O OLn r-I 0 O tn 0 N �N -i ih L 000 00 rn � ih N Rt 00 ct' (/� 00 (3) N M Ln O J to O U- O Ln f6 rl OO O co Ln +-+ .� 0- OAS O i N N =3 +J 0o N C J � O X v O O O m _J W O Q 0 U H V) v 4- (ID E V) w C O U 4 C O u 4- E N O O 0 pS /- 49 %" VP F,Y W M 4a CL V c O V CL O 4) 0 Li n L Q CL Al 11 Ln O ,O Ln V) 0 V) LL O U O V) N b.0 c i C V) L c . . N U f- O 4.0 U � MO m +J m (3) N L. � U C6 � V) 12L C 2 • u E O G� U 4- L bn a) J O z E M V ~ 0 m 0 w H V 0 0 z O U 0 z LU 0 D 0 U cn cn W w z LL O oc W m z z O O O rn 0 w Q D c re O Q F— z F- O a_ LL O W 0 z Q oc O O O ('*-4 Q0 0 w LL Q 0 z Q 0 w LL H z Q cr O CL V) J O w a V) w LL O O O 1 d- z 0 z D LL _U J om 0 E- oc O a V) _I O i- . 00 01 O m 00 O z Q U O m Q z 0 z LL J O F- . N V 0- L N 0 UO O ',-, > � '0 N U f6 — — � V C6 -a V ate-+ •- N f6 E W +-+ E t% N N O O L O �--+ � = m V CL •m u > O �F- N N V _. O m tB O ate-+ L .}: L Q O — V O � L Q N O 4-+ V . N a-' LL =3 O }, O t N L 0 4- +, .N C6 N cN 1 A0 O Q >• N V m a-.+ 4 m m r ate--+ O O a � m O 4-N '''' to . L 4-, m 0 V V V ' — i Ca L E 0 O (0 - _ CL .i �O N N m c: N N N _Ile a--+ O m can � Ln V -0 O v __ � z N ca � N � � L �. � vi �' -0 N V WE m • t 75 +' N •N O L Q 0 I- O `n : p L N Q p L O CO a N ca 0-Q V V Q �O 0 W ,ru E � Q > O � E . 4A v U C: O O N N O O N L N O • i bA N C c O ca U O -+ O Q i :3 i O a'' }, U O :+_ > can C U •— Ln N U -0 N -0 c m O — O O O c Z O m 4-J — N 'U -�-+ cn "� Ln C: " N C6 C: — O fB O0 -0 O U ca ca � i cn � L Q) O p N t3o ca E c:O E; ,N (a)u U N �O a-J dA V i L cn ,��+ +-� 'X O `a- 0 W a O a..+ O O E a� s U 0 4- a + L U a-J p CL= U O U N .c V O4-0 cv .0 O - }, 4- U U � L1J O U.: y.. O N cn c6 -L .L o _ O � `n O bup 4- �O cn 3 C OU N chi) O O LT U O Z Q O +�- d O e • e O -0c J.— aA z� ».Q �O >-o �a..r clu O� 0-0m 3: ��cnO\ �U OO �� >- G� -0-0 1 — Q 3 (3) :3 c—I = C6 >• x L ' 4-+ v O DC a- V)-CL U LT .0 u.w cn O (1) t Lo of > Q N OU = a. 0 M o �V �sU OU N c6 :�- i >. _ � 'v . d' ri � M ca . _ V)- L.L V)- a- U LL U u. CO 0 0 f'L• a_+ C: O •ice--+ X m 0 O N p C: Q 4A U m N L U LO O O 'V O m =3 U v v 4-J O 4-J p N O cr O � 4-J N 4-J � Q U L O Q a O NO x s 4-' cn •- L N O Z >` � C N Q Ul C: 4-J N (Ji •ice Q� CT (1.. O o a ri N N 0 N fY •3: 4Lri Veterans Village Discussion Outline Background: It is proposed that a facility for homeless veterans be established on County -owned property immediately south of the 9-1-1/OSP building in the public safety campus in the northern part of the City of Bend. The concept is for a community building which includes a kitchen, showers and gathering space, and a number of small stand-alone cabins for sleeping/basic living. The cabins would only have electricity for lighting and heating. Questions for Board discussion and staff direction: 1. Sale/Donation versus lease — Giving title to the property may assist the sponsors in obtaining investment, by providing long term certainty. Leasing preserves the County's ability to expand public safety uses as service demands increase over time (Note: one general concept previously discussed involved moving the DCSO Search & Rescue operation to this land to allow expansion of other DCSO operations. Also, the land has been envisioned for emergency response staging in a major disaster) 2. Partnership Entity — Who would be the development partner of the County? The Heroes Foundation may have limited property development expertise. COVO, if a willing partner, may fill that need. Are there other potential partners/sponsors? 3. Feasibility Study/Business Plan — Should this be a first step before finalizing development actions? 4. Level of County Involvement —What are the expectations of county investment in the project? a. Limited to making land available? b. Architectural design/engineering? c. Contribution toward construction cost? d. Contribution toward site development costs (utilities, street improvements, etc? 5. City Partnership —Will the City take the lead on any necessary comp plan/zoning changes? Or will the County and/or partners take the lead? a. County advocacy in land use process? 6. Development entitlements — Land Use approval/building permits - who takes the lead and pays? 7. Public communication/outreach — Who is the spokesperson? Involvement with fundraising? 8. State Homeless Legislative Concept — the state may take up legislation in the coming session that could provide up to $40 million for shelter projects, and also override local zoning restrictions. Tie in to Vets Village project? 9. County Behavioral Health — partner in scoping and programming? 10. Other Issues? a. iopej W V /\ V) N n , W W L O — W W N O ~ U I L U O N U L V) N i pip (Q � N 4A L (U — � N � 4J N — O U N 4-1 i _ �> N N 0 f6 .� 4-J fB bn •� '0 OL 4J � N O Q Uf6 ? C� C N�, 4-1 > C)i O Tj N —_ �U Q • • � 2 L = d-J U t� N N ^N W Vi U U W V � � V � so �� i U �- C� -C U 4A b.0 •N 'N =3 =3 O O a-1 N N U N L (n 4J — Q O •U c: Ln - N W O +-+ O 'N U O L — -C fQ a--+ C) � ca � N N ca � O •> N .— (3) N O � O N f� L O L CL 10 vi f� N L bA `bn i r Q) tB N C6 �U .N CL C6 U E CL Q) N m a-1 N a� N v U E E U N m i U m U N N N M U N O a� N 76 i c O 1! y x+ T vn a pa", �1��v1''�- a v � w dA � `» C`Y°fir f ✓� s , tt�. � I +,, i � a f a�? ��t�•7i tfd��' T k! TV RrNl" 'ON � Kk- gpq s i t a . ��. }S`} lei .�`* ,�0. . `. �' � �t:�•' t �i�S I�'" � alto 7�3 � t • , i LOW u hr1 0 a i -�-� � aA 0 n� hr1 c V) � nL W E W E � U W 0 O L— Q 0 0 L Q 4-j E C— ca 4D w U tW-j 1 0 h �ntJ,N W L— O V) �(/) 76 Q 4, W co U m C7 W m 0 z Q c 0 U 4-+ c ro U ro L. 0 (10 U C6 N N a-+ N a n > 0 U 0 Ln s c� v 76 L O m L +-+ fD a, N L a) (A U U O a-+ i E 0 O 76 U \ v Q U N Y N O U �L LA a) L i O L 0 4- 0 a) O N 4- . v a� Q Ln O L U N -0 O E E 4--J U 0 QJ -0 E O +- E O a + an Co fD � C .0 U N 4r O Q O v X O L E a, ° J E U Q • hO W O •� 4� J U m a� m 0 z a 0 U c ro ro U C6 L 0 C6 U L N a' x (1) a N f0 U U f0 U f0 LL N �r-I -a rI bn E O N bm !E (n V } C) Y d d N C v 41 M Z c �_Q J � — U m O LL c� M Q U � L +_ N U c v O cn ], H U U Q 4 U (Ij c • M ate. U a N • • • a iz • • H m • • • • OL • N L O Q Q In U O � � O � 0- Ln 0- C: :3 O N CaA L o O L Z _ W L S Q� (n J • • P-. ko: ROO J, 0', 101 191 ON, January 27, 2020 VIA HAND -DELIVERY Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners Patti Adair, Chair Tony DeBone, Vice -Chair Phil Henderson, Commissioner David Doyle, County Counsel Adam Smith, Assistant County Counsel 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, OR 97703 i�' JAN 2l 2020 BOARDRAT� re: Legalization Procedure for a Portion of Sisemore Road, Submitted on Behalf of the Hudson Family Trust Dear Chair Adair, Vice -Chair DeBone, Commissioner Henderson, and Messrs. Doyle and Smith: The Hudson Family Trust (the "Trust")' submits this letter during the open record period following the Deschutes County Board of Commissioner's public hearing concerning Consideration of Board Signature of Order No. 2020-002, Completing Legalization Procedure for a Portion of Sisemore Road, on January 22, 2020. The information and analysis herein is a supplement to our letters dated January 13, 2020 and January 22, 2020; we request that all three letters be included in the record. The proposed legalization of a portion of Sisemore Road (the "Road") crosses the Trust's property, tax lot 1611330000600,18130 Tumalo Reservoir Road, Bend 97703 (the "Property"). Cody Smith, on behalf of the County Road Department, presented testimony at the January 22, 2020 hearing that the proposed road legalization is required in order for the County to receive state funding for the Bull Creek Bridge ("Bridge") repair project. Mr. Smith further testified that the Road must be legalized with a 60-foot wide right-of-way. The north supports of the Bridge are situated on the Trust Property. A review of the Local Agency Agreement State Funded Local Project Program (No. 31740) Sisemore Rd: Tumalo IRR Canal (Couch Lateral), Bridge No. BR17CO2 (the "Agreement") between the Oregon Department of Transportation ("ODOT") and the County shows that the County is not required to legalize the Road as 1 Dr. Leslie Hudson and Dr. Veronica Newton Hudson are the sole trustees of the Trust. reported at the Hearing. A copy of the Agreement is enclosed for reference. Paragraph 11 of the Agreement requires the County to "acquire all necessary right of way in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 19702, as amended, ORS Chapter 35 and the State Right of Way Manual." In other words, any right of way necessary for the Bridge Project must be acquired by eminent domain. Of note, ORS 35.605(1) provides: Every condemner having the right to purchase, acquire, enter upon and appropriate land and property for establishing, laying out, widening, enlarging or extending roads, streets or highways, may purchase, acquire, enter upon and appropriate, in or in connection with establishing, laying out, widening, enlarging or extending roads, streets or highways, land and property immediately adjoining the proposed boundaries of such roads, streets or highways. ORS 35.610 states: Before the right to purchase, acquire, enter upon and appropriate any adjoining land or property under ORS 35.605 (Authorization to acquire adjoining property for roadways) is exercised by any condemner, the governing body shall by appropriate ordinance or resolution describe the land to be purchased, acquired, entered upon or appropriated, and shall further determine that the appropriation of such land is reasonably necessary to protect the full use and enjoyment by the public of the road, street or highway. The Agreement is silent with respect to the status of the Road and does not include any direct or implied requirement to legalize the Road. Moreover, the Agreement directs the County to comply with federal and state eminent domain requirements in right-of-way acquisition. But the County insists it has the right to acquire a 60- foot ROW over Trust Property without payment of just compensation. Such condemnation would perforce inversely condemn an additional approximately 1.118 acres of contiguous property and maroon it in perpetuity from the main Trust property. The Agreement cannot be satisfied by the Road Legalization proposed by the County. If the Board approves the motion for Order No. 2020-002, such action will arguably violate the Agreement terms concerning payment of just compensation. As the Trust has repeatedly made clear, however, the County is not at risk of losing funds for the Bridge Project under the Agreement. The Agreement merely requires the County to ensure it acquires "necessary right-of-way" for the Project. It may do so via a grant of easement(s) from the Trust, as discussed below. In summary, the County's receipt of funds simply is not conditioned on any portion of Sisemore Road becoming legalized. As originally set forth in the County's RFP for Engineering Consultant Services for the Bridge Project, requesting proposals by July 13, 2018 (attached to our January 22, 2020 letter), the County recognized that Paragraph 11 would be satisfied by its acquisition of a temporary easement for the Bridge Project: 2 This Act was intended to ensure fair compensation and assistance for those whose property was compulsorily acquired for public use under "eminent domain" law. 2 Other Right of Way Comments, Concerns or Considerations: This project is anticipated to require two temporary easements ... one TE will be needed from the Hudson Family Trust. The acquisitions are not complex and should cost $10,000 each. Estimated RM for the project is $20,000. The County did not at that time, nor since then, set forth the basis for its valuation of an easement from the Trust, nor any legal description showing the extent of an easement the County estimates is required for staging equipment and accessing the Bridge for repairs. Those matters are open for discussion between the Trust and the Road Department. In sum, the statements in the RFP are consistent with paragraph 11 of the Agreement, provided the proffered payment for a temporary easement is determined to constitute "just compensation," and the area over which the easement is proposed includes all property "necessary" to complete the Bridge Project, Significantly, the County Road Department has erroneously maintained that the Road must be legalized for the Bridge Project with a 60-foot right-of-way, but Dr. Hudson testified that even the extent of such road legalization would not be sufficient for purposes of the Bridge Project. The County will need an easement from the Trust to access the east side of the Bridge for repairs. This is shown in photograph 5, attached to our January 22, 2020 letter and included here for the convenience of the County Commissioners. Heavy machinery and materials must move across either the Tumalo Irrigation District ("TID") property to the south or via the Trust Property to the north. Photograph 5 shows the dirt road that crosses from the Trust Property to TID property. This dirt road recently was installed (within the past 5-6 weeks) and is currently being used by the TID contractor to install piping along the in -filled irrigation canal. There had previously been no path down to the Bridge from the south property; access was only from the Trust Property. We understand that the temporary road will become a greenway after pipe installation is completed. In short, the County Road Department will have no access to the east side of the Bridge without an additional easement from the Trust. The Trust offers to formalize the easement(s) necessary for the Bridge Project in exchange for payment within the limits of the County's original estimate and agreement by the County to either abandon the proposed Road Legalization or to modify the proposed Road Legalization to include a right-of-way not to exceed the current road bed. If, however, the County has additional needs not communicated to the Trust or envisages activities (not undertaken by the local authority over the past 115 years) that compel a greater right of way then the Trust is open to considering arguments which demonstrate this compelling public interest. As set forth in our prior letters and in public testimony, there are numerous County collector roads comprised of less than a 60-foot right-of-way (as illustrated in Table 1). The Code, the TSP and state statute allow roads of "substandard" width, upon a showing of public interest. Even after a minimum right of way was recommended on July 5, 1947, 10% of newly legalized roads in Deschutes County were legalized below this minimum right of way. The Road Department carries the burden of proof to establish public interest. The Trust submits that this has not been established and so concludes that it is in the public interest to either abandon the road legalization proceedings, or to legalize the Road with less than a 60-foot right-of-way. As Dr. Hudson and Dr. Veronica Newton Hudson testified, the Trust, friends of the Tumalo Wildlife Corridor, local citizens and other private property owners actively maintain the area, including posting educational materials for the public, and work to minimize unsafe activities. Specifically, conversion of this land from private to public property would deprive the Trust of the ability to post notices and advise the public that such areas are private property to discourage illegal and other harmful activities. 3 There are concerns about the County's resources to maintain and monitor the area to the same extent as local volunteers and residents since 2013. There will be adverse impacts on wildlife, particularly the Tumalo Deer Winter Range, if the existing, narrow, dirt road is endowed with the legal characteristics of a major thoroughfare. Such action would irrevocably change the character of this natural area of critical concern (Tumalo Natural Area) to encourage more traffic and more off -road uses, with an attendant rise in wildfire risk and illegal activities. Widening the right-of-way would effectively move the "road" to a position immediately adjacent to the Trust Property; snow removal activities would then result in potential blocking of the driveway to the Hudsons' home and fence damage. The Trust requests a meeting with the County Road Department and County Counsel to discuss the proposal herein as soon as possible to allow the County to proceed with the Bridge Project in accordance with the terms of the Agreement in a timely manner. We believe that resolution of these issues can be reached by the parties and then presented by both parties to the Board at the February 5, 2020 Wednesday meeting. Thank you for your consideration of this letter. Sinc ely, t Stephanie Marshall encls. cc: Dr. Les Hudson Dr. Veronica Newton Hudson M Table 1. Right of way width of all roads in Deschutes County established up to 2010' Right of way (feet) Number of Roadsz 0 3 30 5 40 20 50 32 60 83 70 4 75 1 80 7 90 1 100 1 170 1 200 1 1 Latest year for which public data is available. 2 Dirt roads tend to dominate the lower right of way widths 5 (Ij (]J -00 4-- VID 0 C -0 - c c (IJ ON If in _.-Ma LEGAL COUNSEL Misc. Contracts and Agreements No. 31740 ProgramLOCAL AGENCY AGREEMENT State Funded Local Project Selsmore Rd: Tumalo IRR Canal (Couch Lateral), Bridge No. i Doschutes County THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between THE STATE OF OREGON, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as "State" or "ODOT;" and Deschutes County, acting by and through its elected officials, hereinafter referred to as "Agency," both herein referred to individually or collectively as "Party" or "Parties." 1. Agency wishes to exchange unspent federal funds previously allocated to the Project for state funds, in order to fund the Project using state funding. State has determined that Agency is eligible for state funds for the work to be performed under this Agreement through the State Funded Local Project Program, The Parties enter Into this Agreement to exchange these funds, identify the Project that will be funded with the state funds, and describe the method State will use to reimburse Agency for work performed on the Project using the state funds, including establishing invoicing requirements and the proportional. reimbursement rate. 2. By the authority granted in Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 190,110, 366,572 and 366,576, state agencies may enter into cooperative agreements with counties, cities, and units of local government for the performance of any or all. functions and activities that a party to the Agreement, its officers, or agents have the authority to perform. 3. Selsmore Road is a part of the county road system under the jurisdiction and control of Agency. 4. The Couch Lateral Bridge (No. 17CO2) has large spalls and rock pockets with exposed rebar throughout the arch, The reinforced concrete pier walls have large spalls with exposed rebar throughout the piers with leaks; the piers serve as a dam. The reinforced concrete abutments have numerous cracks and spalls with exposed rebar. This historic bridge provides access for the public and USFS lands located to the north and west of the structure. If this bridge continues to deteriorate, it may be closed to traffic, NOW THEREFORE, the premises being in general as stated in the foregoing Recitals, it is agreed by and between the Parties hereto as follows; i 1, State and Agency agree to Agency repairing and rehabilitating the Couch Lateral Bridge (8R17CO2) by removing and replacing the asphalt wearing surface, patching spalls, installing new guardrails, removing and replacing the existing non-functioning drainage pipes, and removing and replacing the existing fill against the abutments with 12-22.17 Key No. 20731 m W Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 material that allows drainage, hereinafter referred to as Project." The Project location and approximate limits are shown on the map Marked "Exhibit A," attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. 2. The total Project cost for the work to be performed under this Agreement is estimated at $1,435,279, which is subject to change. Prior to exchanging funds, the federal share of the total Project cost is $1,287,876. a. Per the 1:1 fund exchange ratio of state dollars to federal dollars, Agency will exchange $1,287,876 of federal dollars allocated for this Project for $1,287,876 of state dollars. b. State funds under this Agreement are limited to $1,287,876. .3. Upon receipt and approval of Agency's invoice(s), State shall proportionately reimburse Agency 89.73 percent of eligible, actual costs incurred in carrying out the Project, up to the maximum amount of state funds committed for the Project. 4. Agency is solely responsible for any and ail costs incurred in excess of the state funds identified in this Agreement. Any unspent state funds will be retained by State and will not be available for Agency use. State funds transferred to Agency must be used for the Project. 5. To be eligible fnr reimhi ircemvnt, vxpendltures must comply with the requirements Of Article IX, Section 3a of the Oregon Constitution. Eligible costs are defined as reasonable and necessary costs incurred by the Agency in performance of the Project. 6. The term of this Agreement will begin upon the date all required signatures are obtained and will terminate upon completion of the Project and final payment or ten (10) calendar years following the date of final execution, whichever is sooner. AGENCY OBLIGATIONS 1. Agency shall perform the work described in TERMS OF AGREEMENT, Parargraph 1 of this Agreement. 2. Americans with Disabilities Act Cmmnlianrea- a. When the Project scope includes work on sidewalks, curb ramps, or pedestrian - activated signals or triggers an obligation to address curb ramps or pedestrian signals, the Parties shall: i I Ifiifva nnnT c4. -A.,.A., 6- �- 1. -,-3—Fuaiuo tu ob-Subs a d ensure Project compilance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 (together, "ADA"), including ensuring that all sidewalks, curb ramps, and W Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 pedestrian -activated signals meet current ODOT Highway Design Manual standards; ii. Follow ODOT's processes for design, modification, upgrade, or construction of sidewalks, curb ramps, and pedestrian -activated signals, including using the ODOT Highway Design Manual, ODOT Design Exception process, ODOT Standard Drawings, ODOT Construction Specifications, providing a temporary pedestrian accessible route plan and current ODOT Curb Ramp Inspection form; iii, At Project completion, send a completed ODOT Curb Ramp Inspection Form 734-6020 to the address on the form as well as to State's Project Manager for each curb ramp constructed, modified, upgraded, or improved as part of the Project. The completed form is the documentation required to show that each curb ramp meets ODOT standards and is ADA compliant. ODOT's tillable Curb Ramp Inspection Form and instructions are available at the following address: httn.//www.oregon,gov/ODOT/HWY/CONSTRUCTION/Pages/Hw&onstForm s1. aspx; and b. Agency shall ensure that temporary pedestrian routes are provided through or around any Project work zone. Any such temporary pedestrian route shall include directional and informational signs, comply with ODOT standards, and include accessibility features equal to or better than the features present in the existing pedestrian facility. Deschutes County shall also ensure that advance notice of any temporary pedestrian route is provided in acessibie format to the public, people with disabilities, and disability organizations at least 10 days prior to the start of construction. c. Agency shall ensure that any portions of the Project under Agency's maintenance jurisdiction are maintained in compliance with the ADA throughout the useful life of the Project. This includes, but is not limited to, Agency ensuring that; I. Pedestrian access Is maintained as required by the ADA, ii. Any complaints received by Agency identifying sidewalk, curb ramp, or pedestrian -activated signal safety or access issues are promptly evaluated and addressed, iii. Any repairs or removal of obstructions needed to maintain Project features in compliance with the ADA requirements that were in effect at the time of Project construction are completed by Agency or abutting property owner pursuant to applicable local code provisions, 3 W, Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 iv. Any future alteration work on Project or Project features during the useful life of the Project complies with the ADA requirements in effect at the time the future alteration work is performed, and v. Applicable permitting and regulatory actions are consistent with ADA requirements: d. Maintenance obligations In this section shall survive termination of this Agreement, 3, Except as otherwise provided in Agency Obligations Paragraph 2 above, Agency agrees that the Project shall be developed in conformance with the applicable American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASH T O) standards, including the current edition of A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 4. Agency shall obtain a permit to occupy State right of way through the State District 10 Office prior to the commencement of construction. 5. if Project includes traffic signal or illumination improvements on or along a state highway, Agency shall: a. Pursuant to Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 734-020-0430, obtain the approval of the State Traffic Engineer prior to the design and construction of any traffic signal, or illumination to be Installed on a state highway, b. Enter into a separate traffic signal agreement with State to cover obligations for any traffic signal or illumination being installed on a state highway. c. Ensure Agency, or its contractor's, electrical inspectors possess a current State Certified Traffic Signal Inspector certificate, in order to inspect electrical installations on State highways. The State District Permitting Office shall verify compliance with this requirement prior to construction. The permit fee should also cover the State electrician's supplemental inspection. d. Upon completion of the Project and at Its own expense, maintain the pavement surrounding anv vehir_.iP dpfprrtnr Innp.Q in0nilayi in 46=� ®ganvy vtr9et in aI1-k a manner as to provide adequate protection for said detector loops. Failure to do so may result in State requiring Agency to repair or replace the damaged loops at Agency expense, Future Agency roadwork activities involving the detector loops may also result in the same State requirements. Agency shall also adequately maintain the pavement markings and signing installed in accordance with the approved signal plan sheets for the signal installation or current Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices standards. e. Ensure that all Project work and maintenance activities involving pedestrian - activated signals comply with the ADA and Agency Obligations Paragraph 2. 4 m Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No, 31740 6. Agency shall submit all of the following items to State's Project Manager, at Project completion and prior to final payment: a. Final Project completion Inspection form No, 734-5063 (completed with State's Project Manager); b, Final Cost; c. As -Constructed Drawings d. Structural Analysis Information (if applicable); e. Foundation Report; f. Hydraulic Report including Scour Analysis, g. Pile Records and drill logs (if applicable); h. Final load Rating calculation with a stamped report with a CD containing all electronic files to the State's Senior Local Bridge Standards Engineer; I. Notify State's Local Agency Bridge Inspection Coordinator at Richard, J.KingaOodot,state. or. us, and brid e a odot.state.or.us to ensure the initial inspection will be scheduled; and j. Inspection with State's Project Manager under this Agreement, State's Region Senior Structural Designer, or State's Senior Local Bridge Standards Engineer, 7. Agency shall submit, prior to final payment, required bridge plans, reports, and documentation to State's Project Manager and Senior Local Bridge Standards Engineer, using an electronic tiles package: MicroStation file and PDF file output that shows all red -line as -constructed markups of plan sheets (and additional files listed below, If applicable to the project). Agency shall follow the file naming convention required in the Bridge Design and Drafting Manual located at: hfto://www.orecion.gov/ODOT/HWY/BRIDGE/Pactes/standards manuals.as x#Brld e Design & Drafting Manual. a, In the "As Constructed Plans" folder on State's FTP directory (available at the following link): ftv://ft2.odot.state.or.us/AsCogstructedPilans/, Agency shall create a subfolder under the "Bridge" folder using the bridge numbers shown in this Agreement for each bridge for the subfolder name. Agency shall place the PDF files in these folders, including: b. 11 inch x 17 inch PDF plan sheets stamped and signed -as-constructed markups, containing final construction notes. c. Agency shall also place copies in same FTP folder of the following reports/records identified in Agency Obligations, paragraph 7 of this Agreement. d, Agency shall send email notification to State's Project Manager and Senior Local Bridge Standards Engineer HoIIv.M.WINSTON@odot.state.or.us and to the bridoeft—odot.state.orms, mailbox after placing files on FTP site (include link to applicable FTP subfolder in email). 6. Project Change Re uc est (PCR) Process Agency must obtain approval from State's Bridge STIP Coordinator and State's Bridge Engineer for changes to the 5 W Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No, 31740 Project's scope, schedule, or budget by submitting a PCR, as specified in Paragraphs 10 a-f, below. Agency shall be fully responsible for all costs attributable to changes to the established Project scope, schedule or budget made prior to an approved PCR. Amendments to this Agreement are required for all approved PCRs. a. Scope - A PCR is required for any significant change or reduction in the scope of work described in the Project Description in Terms of Agreement, paragraph 1. b. Schedule— A PCR is required if Agency or State's Contact anticipates that any Project Milestone will be delayed by more than ninety (90) days, and also for any change in schedule that will require amendment of the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), C. Budget — The Project's estimated budget is used for determining the level of compensation for completed work. Increases or decreases in the budget which require a STIP amendment also require the submission of a PCR to the State's Regional Local Agency Liaison. d. PCR requests that result in Project cost increases that are equal to or less than twenty (20) percent of the total estimated Project cost or $200,000, whichever amount is less, can be approved by the State Bridge Engineer. Such amendments can be approved and entered into bill the Mate Bridge Engi„e&Irt subject to any applicable State approvals: e. PCR requests that result in a Project cost increase in excess of twenty (20) percent of the total estimated Project cost or $200,000, whichever amount is greater, must be approved by the State Bridge Engineer and the Local Agency Bridge Selection Committee with a majority vote. Such amendments must be executed by the same officials who executed the original Agreement, and are subject to any applicable State approvals. PCR Form - Agency must submit all change requests using PCR Form 734-2851 attached by reference and made a part of this Agreement, The PCR Fart-ri is due no later than thirty (30) days after the need for change becomes known to Agency. The PCR shall explain what change is being requested, the reasons for the change, and any efforts to mitigate the change. A PCR may be rejected at the d4sVt 4,{Vn of State's Bridge 'Engineer. . The fillable PCR form and its instructions are available at the following web site, http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/Forms/20DOT/2851.doo Q �('iG11nl/ o "1d11 wrnatient Eo the eligible, _a. _1 o .,. .,y.,{{vy N1lcnii }.+tC.OGlil IilYt/il..e7 IUI d{IC Cil�{(JIB, �(.iud� (i{7SI5 incurred by !-agency on behalf of the Project directly to State's Project Manager listed in this Agreement for review and approval. Such invoices shall be in a form identifying the Project, Key Number, the Agreement number, the Project phase and amount charged to each (such as preliminary engineering, right of way, and construction), the invoice 6 m Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 number, and will itemize all expenses for which reimbursement Is claimed, Invoices shall be presented for perlods greater than one month, based on actual expenses incurred, and must clearly specify the percentage of completion of the Project. Agency shall also include with the invoice a Project progress report or summary that describes work accomplished for the period being invoiced and work expected for the next invoicing period. Travel expenses will not be reimbursed, 10.Agency, or its consultant, shall conduct the necessary preliminary engineering and design work required to produce final plans, specifications and cost estimates in accordance with current state and federal laws and regulations; obtain all required permits; be responsible for all utility relocations; advertise for bid proposals; award all contracts; perform all construction engineering; and make all contractor payments required to complete the Project. 11.Agency or its consultant shall acquire all necessary right of way In accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, ORS Chapter 35 and the State Right of Way Manual. 12, Agency shall comply with all federal, state, and local laws, regulations, executive orders and ordinances applicable to the work under this Agreement, including, without limitation, the provisions of ORS 279C.505, 279C.515, 279C.520, 279C,530 and 279B.270 incorporated herein by reference and made a part hereof. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Agency expressly agrees to comply with (i) Title VI of Civil Rights Act of 1964; (ii) Title V and Section 604 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; (ill) the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and ORS 659A.142; (iv) alI regulations an -a' administrative rules established pursuant to the foregoing laws; and (v) all other applicable requirements of federal and state civil rights and rehabilitation statutes, rules and regulations. 13.Agency shall perform the services under this Agreement as an independent contractor and shall be exclusively responsible for all costs and expenses related'to its employment of individuals to perform the work under this Agreement including, but not limited to, retirement contributions, workers compensation, unemployment taxes, and state and federal income tax withholdings. 14.AI1 employers, including Agency, that employ subject workers who work under this Agreement in the State of Oregon shall comply with ORS 656,017 and provide the required Workers' Compensation coverage unless such employers are exempt under ORS 656.126, Employers Liability Insurance with coverage limits of not less than $600,000 must be included. Agency shall ensure that each of its subcontractors complies with these requirements, 15.Agency shall, at its own expense, maintain, operate, and provide power as needed upon Project completion at a minimum level that Is consistent with normal depreciation and/or service demand and throughout the useful life of the Project. State and Agency agree that the useful life of this Project is defined as 10 years. K91 Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 Maintenance and power responsibilities shall survive any termination of the Project Agreement, 16, Utility relocation or reconstruction may or may not be an eligible Project expense according to the following standard: a. The expense is an eligible expense if the owner of the utility facility possesses a property right for its location on the public right of way, b. The expense is not an eligible expense if the owner of the utility facility does not possess a property right for its location, but the facility exists on the public right of way solely under the permission of the Agency or other road authority, whether that permission is expressed or implied, and whether written or oral, 17. Agency certifies, at the time this Agreement is executed, that sufficient funds are available and authorized for expenditure to finance costs of this Agreement within Agency's current appropriation or limitation of the current budget. Agency further agrees that they will only submit invoices to State for reimbursement on work that has been performed and paid for by Agency as described in this Agreement. 13, Agency shall require its contractor(s) and subcontractor(s) that are not units of local government as defined in ORS 190,003, If any, to indemnify, defend, save and hold harmless the State of Oregon, Oregon Transportation Commission and its members, Oregon Department of Transportation and Its officers, employees and agents from and against any and all claims, actions, liabilities, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorneys' fees, arising from a tort, as now or hereafter defined in ORS 30,260 (Claims), to the extent such Claims are caused, or alleged to be caused by the negligent or willful acts or omissions of Agency's contractor or any of the officers, agents, employees or subcontractors of the contractor. It is the specific intention of the Parties that State shall, In all instances, except to the extent Claims arise from the negligent or willful acts or omissions of the State, be indemnified from and against all Claims caused or alleged to be caused by the contractor or subcontractor, 19.Any such indemnification shall also provide that neither Agency's contractor and subcontractor nor any attorney engaged by Agency's contractor and subcontractor shall defend any Balm in the name of the State of Orego; � or any agency of the State of Oregon, nor purport to act as legal representative of the State of Oregon or any of its agencies, without the prior written consent of the Oregon Attorney General, The State of Oregon may, at anytime at its election assume its own defense and settlement in the event that it determines that Agency's contractor is prohibited from defending the State of Oregon, or that Agency's contractor is not adequately defending the State of Oregon's interests, or that an important governmental principle is at issue or that it is in the best interests of the State of Oregon to do so, The State of Oregon reserves all rights to pursue claims it may have against Agency's contractor if the State of Oregon elects to assume its own defense. C4*7 Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No, 31740 20. If Agency enters into a construction contract for performance of work for the Project, then Agency will include provisions in that contract requiring its contractor to comply with the following: a. Contractor and Agency shall name State as a third party beneficiary of the resulting contract. b. Contractor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless State from and against all claims, suits, actions, losses, damages, liabilities, costs and expenses of any nature whatsoever resulting from, arising out of, or relating to the activities of Contractor or its officers, employees, sub -contractors, or agents under the resulting contract. c, Commercial General Liability. Contractor shall obtain, at Contractor's expense, and keep in effect.during the term of the resulting contract, Commercial General Liability Insurance covering bodily injury and property damage in a form and with coverages that are satisfactory to State, This Insurance shall include personal and advertising injury liability, products and completed operations, Coverage may be written in combination with Automobile Liability Insurance (with separate limits). Coverage shall be written on an occurrence basis. If written in conjunction with Automobile Inability the combined single limit per occurrence shall not be less than $1,000,000 for each job site or location. Each annual aggregate limit shall not be less than $2,000,000. d, Automobile Liability. Contractor shall obtain, at Contractor's expense, and keep in effect during the term of the resulting contract, Commercial Business n.,a c :r i ra . ,�_..�____ �� . e%uwmobile Liability Insurance covering all owned, non -owned, or hired vehicles. This coverage may be written in combination with the Commercial General Liability Insurance (with separate limits), Combined single limit per occurrence shall not be less than $1,000,000. e. Additional Insured Endorsement. The liability insurance coverage, except Professional Liability, Errors and Omissions, or Workers' Compensation, if included, required for performance of the resulting contract will include State and its divisions, officers and employees as Additional Insured but only with respect to the Contractor's activities to be performed under the resulting contract. Coverage shall be primary and non-contributory with any other insurance and self-insurance. Notice of Cancellation or Change. There shall be no cancellation, material change, potential exhaustion of aggregate limits or non -renewal of insurance coverage(s) without thirty (30) days written notice from the Contractor or its insurer(s) to State. Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of this clause shall constitute a material breach of the resulting contract and shall be grounds for immediate termination of the resulting contract and this Agreement. 21.Agency acknowledges and agrees that State, the Oregon Secretary of State's Office, and their duly authorized representatives shall have access to the books, 9 Deschutes County/®DCT Agreement No. 31740 documents, papers, and records of Agency which are directly pertinent to the specific Agreement for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcripts during the course of the Project and for a period of six (6) years after final payment. Copies of applicable records shall be made available upon request. Payment for costs of copies is reimbursable by State. 22.Agency certifies and represents that the individual(s) signing this Agreement has been authorized to enter into and execute this Agreement on behalf of Agency, under the direction or approval of its governing body, commission, board, officers, members or representatives, and to legally bind Agency, 23.Agency's Project Manager for this Agreement is Cody Smith — County Engineer, 61150 SE 271h Street, Send. nR ')77n2_ (5411 :�99 7111 Cody, smith -deschutes org, or assigned designee upon individual's absence. Agency shall notify the other Party in writing of any contact information changes during the term of this Agreement. 1. In consideration for the services performed under this Agreement, State shall reimburse Agency 69,73 percent of eligible costs incurred in carrying out the Project up to the maximum amount of state funds committed for the Project in Terms of Agreement, Paragraph 2 of this Agreement. Reimbursements shall be made by State within forty-five (43) days of State's approval of a request for reimbursement from Agency, except that final payment will be withheld until the State's Project Manager has completed final project inspection and project acceptance. 2. State shall provide the following items to Agency's Project Manager no later than 30 days after execution of this Agreement: a. Scoping Notes; and b. Any other project specific information gathered during the scoping and selection process 3. State's Project Manager will arrange for a final project inspection upon notification from Agency of Project completion, to confirm project completeness and fulfillment of Agreement obligations, prior to final payment. 4. If Project includes traffic signal improvements on or along a State Highway, traffic signal timing shall be the responsibility of State, unless there is an agreement that specifically allows Agency to perform that function. Consistent with Agency Obligations Paragraph 2 State shall: a. Ensure its Region Electrical Crew, at Project expense, perform the signal equipment environmental testing and perform the signal field testing and turn on, Pal Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 b. Retain the right of review of the traffic signal timing for signals on state highways, or those which State maintains, and shall reserve the right to request adjustments when needed, c, Notify the local jurisdiction whenever timing changes that affect the operation of local street connections to the state highway are scheduled. All modifications shall follow guidelines set forth in the current Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices, and the current ODOT State Traffic Signal Policy and Guidelines, d. Upon completion of the Project, maintain the pavement surrounding the vehicle detector loops Installed in the State highway in such a manner as to provide adequate protection for said detector loops and at State's expense, e. Maintain the pavement markings and signing installed on the State highway in accordance with current ODOT standards, and f. Where Agency has an agreement with State to modify signal timing and the Agency modifies timing to add railroad or emergency vehicle preemption, bus priority, or other changes that affect vehicle or pedestrian clearances, or operation of the state highway, Agency shall promptly report such modifications to State's Region Traffic Engineer. Any such timing modification shall comply with the ADA and Agency Obligations Paragraph 2, 5. State's Project Manager for this Agreement is Darrell Newton - Local Agency Programs Coordinator, 63055 N. Highway 97, Bldg M, Bend, OR 97703, (541) 388- $2.79. flarrell.metLnOodot,stateor Ups or assignedrl ratrsvigneeupon l linnsa® I mnrs inrliuirll'B absence. State shall notify the other Party in writing of any contact information changes during the term of this Agreement. 1, This Agreement may be terminated by mutual consent of both Parties, 2. State may terminate this Agreement effective upon delivery of written notice to Agency, or at such later date as may be established by State, under any of the following conditions; If Agency falls to provide services called for by this Agreement within the time specified herein or any extension thereof. b. If Agency fails to perform any of the other provisions of this Agreement or so fails to pursue the work as to endanger performance of this Agreement in accordance with its terms, and after receipt of written notice from State fails to correct such failures within ten (10) days or such longer period as State may authorize. c, If Agency fails to provide payment of its share of the cost of the Project. d. If State fails to receive funding, appropriations, limitations or other expenditure 11 M Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 authority sufficient to allow State, in the exercise of Its reasonable administrative discretion, to continue to make payments for performance of this Agreement. e. If federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a way that either the work under this Agreement is prohibited or if State is prohibited from paying for such work from the planned funding source. 3. If State terminates this Agreement for the reasons described in General Provisions 2(a) or (b) above, Agency must reimburse State for all state funds expended. If Agency falls to reimburse State, State may withhold Agency's proportional share of State Highway fund distribution necessary to reimburse State for costs incurred by such Agency breach. y. Any termination or" this Agreement shall not prejudice any rights or obligations accrued to the Parties prior to termination. 6. If any third party makes any claim or brings any action, suit or proceeding alleging a tort as now or hereafter defined in ORS 30.260 ("Third Party Claim") against State or Agency with respect to which the other Party may have liability, the notified Party must promptly notify the other Party in writing of the Third Party Claim and deliver to the other Party a copy of the claim, process, and all legal pleadings with respect to the Third Party Claim, Each Party is entitled to participate in the defense of a Third Pay Claim, and to defend a Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing. Receipt by a Pa y of ti►e notice and copies required in this paragraph and meaningful opportunity for the Party to participate in the investigation, defense and settlement of the Third Party Claim with counsel of its own choosing are conditions precedent to that Party's liability with respect to the Third Party Claim. 6. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which State is jointly liable with Agency (or would be if joined in the Third Party Claim), State shall contribute to the amount of expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by Agency in such proportion as is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of State on the one hand and of Agency on the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations. The relative fault of State on the one hand and of Agency on the other hand shall be determined by reference to, among other things, the Parties' relative intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the circumstances resulting In such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts. State's contribution amount: in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have been capped under Oregon law, including the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30,300, if State had sole liability in the proceeding. 7. With respect to a Third Party Claim for which Agency is jointly liable with State (or would be if joined in the Third Party Claim), Agency shall contribute to the amount of expenses (including attorneys' fees), judgments, fines and amounts 'aid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred and paid or payable by State in such proportion as is appropriate to reflect the relative fault of Agency on the one hand 12 M Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 and of State on the other hand in connection with the events which resulted in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts, as well as any other relevant equitable considerations. The relative fault of Agency on the one hand and of State on the other hand shall be determined by reference to, among other things, the Parties` relative intent, knowledge, access to information and opportunity to correct or prevent the circumstances resulting in such expenses, judgments, fines or settlement amounts. Agency's contribution amount in any instance is capped to the same extent it would have been capped under Oregon law, including the Oregon Tort Claims Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, if it had sole liability in the proceeding. 8. The Parties shall attempt In good faith to resolve any dispute arising out of this Agreement. In addition, the Parties may agree to utilize a Jointly selected mediator or arbitrator (for non -binding arbitration) to resolve the dispute short of litigation. 9. State and Agency are the only Parties to this Agreement and, as such, are the only Parties entitled to enforce its terms. Nothing in this Agreement gives or shall be construed to give or provide any benefit, direct, indirect or otherwise to third persons unless such third persons are expressly identified by name and specifically described as intended to be beneficiaries of Its terms. 10.This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts (facsimile or otherwise) all of which when taken together shall constitute one agreement binding on all Parties, notwithstanding that all Parties are not signatories to the same counterpart, Each copy of this Agreement so executed shall constitute an original. 11.This Agreement and attached exhibits constitute the entire agreement between the Parties on the subject matter hereof. There are no understandings, agreements, or representations, oral or written, not specified herein regarding this Agreement. No waiver, consent, modification or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind either party unless in writing and signed by both Parties and all necessary approvals have been obtained. Such waiver, consent, modification, or change, if made, shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. The failure of either Party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver by that Party of that or any other provision. THE PARTIES, by execution of this Agreement, hereby acknowledge that their signing representatives have read this Agreement, understand it, and agree to be bound by its terms and conditions, This Project is in the 2018-2021 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), (Key #20371) that was adopted by the Oregon 'transportation Commission on July 11, 2017 (or subsequently by amendment to the STIP). 13 Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No, 31740 DESCHUTES COUNTY, by and through its elected officials By Chair Date d,agfiN > LEGAL RE&IEIWI APPROVAL By Agency Counsel Date hmgeMY �� Cody Smith µ County Engineer 61160 SE 271h Street Bend, OR 27702 (541) 322-7113 Cod_y.smith@deschutes org 5ta4e CAnta(:t: Darrell Newton - Local Agency Programs Coordinator 63055 N. Highway 97, Bldc,1. M Bend OR, 97703 (541) 388-6272 darrell.r.newton@odot.stqte,or.us 14 STATE Or OREGON, by and through its Dep-�4m n ofi ransporlation By Highwa -Divi ron Administrator Date— APFIROVAL RECOMMENDED RegioA 4 Manager Date 0Z-'0 l By State Brig e Engineer Date /-, 7- APPROVED AS To i PGAI SUFFICIENCY By: Rachel Bertoni Assistant Attorney General by email Date: January 9, 2018 Deschutes County/ODOT Agreement No. 31740 0 0.26 0.6 0.76 1 Mies �' kihrrAndCKswb G15 tuuiyst rnx+e fi xr-nw Legend W i«mt p{�1 daupQ�lrolwdcn9 Slaernwe9ridgrr Waterway Ft0ad 8r¢e9iene P Lake County Routes Flood lain P rrwrh rwengsw„n�aaw.erana�tasieiw,eo t 7axiols WC Handa cwlururxuoy.alz. Csro.nirerw,taao.,..ar,oraa iwn. PwJus,fcaiyew,+aaa+Ft►+iraku,arhYy:kvarar. dr,r8nr, a r sewer/ end 11+wtea vwr as m Printed; „ ,Pt<plpWrl rtoagiyyrartypnal May Publk: Land 4, 2015 rrnenQ:Wams� P.Nrt4+5„i4gactr'Rrtp,�rfWumore RrnrD�S�lsrrore„LoCaOm„Ilpy.2pfSrneq 15 W 0 o 0 0 0 z IZI- m oo m Q 4 oo uri o0 _ + + + + U cn 00 �O NO 0 Ln � N Z N al14 N qj)- 00 -t/)- Ol Or-i O 75 Z O N '^ ON �u i� N z 0 � qj)- � N . c: CAA U E C O _O E Q w cn U Q O cn X E ._ 0 W .- > E— CC =;Z a o L M`o 4V' •' N M Z Z Z Z Z� Za M 'Zo O 0)1• Cl• O w ri I`• 1�•` N 0�0 00 v-4 h N d Ln V-4 01 00 Ln M d' r- 0) 0) � d Ln r- M Nta. i r-i r-1 tlk V k t/k t/k i/k 4A VS & o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -0 C O d' 01 d' O 0�0'0 w N t9 r1 r... d� N O Lf� 0000 eV-1 r, V d M Ln : ri N e-i 't0 Ln 00 Ol r-.:v4 e-1 I r-1 ! vi M N � d' N N r4 lD N 00 W r- f` Ln N 0) M M LD q* qt 01 Ol N lD e-4 ct O lD M 00 00 00 00 0) Ol Ol Ln Ol Ln A Ln lD C% N M 00 r-1 'Ct ci M I- m O d w N' cf' e-1 M W d� M 0) Ol 00 W r-I r-I to 00 P- i-i Ln cT' O N Il_ N N �'•1 o lD d lD M N d d M M d L1'1 O1 00 00 W ilk i/k i!k i/k Vk i/k i/k Vk ih th (/� ih i/k i!k �i +•' > u C m 'si t0 C <(A0Z°o" �4 - A 4 h c 5; �O N � o w � � ��e M Ln w S M M XS P:ti mq . O J � , Q) S O nµ e' § 4- J irk O O r O U O a) > (1) bn 4-j ^ ' 4-, U- s i a 2 2 w --a O ��q��\ At-n IN V) CL to m M -C u 0 m (D W 0 < (D C.L 0 4� u O :� bio Z.1=3 bp LLJ 4- CL (3) x > 0 CL Lu LLj (A E 5 c 0 ctM 0 0 a) < C4� -.2 + bo C " 5 06 M s-(a bjo uj CL W OCL > D-Lr) LU a4 0 t t o u 0 oZ =o,,- U L_ CL C) C (D fu MM U UJ -C a) = Ln 0)tm um 0) --50-= M a z _ja) z z ui vi < (A* 0 cN L � N Uo a +-+ co N CL i W 0 c� 1 O a Q Uo C = W N 'S Eb 0 O O Z t1A 0� O Y O� Q W iJ c/) S— � � 0 J p-0X-0 u W -0 O CCU) � +J4-JaLJ E 4-J f0 Z D Ln W U U CL t U w CG P4 O 0 N - W Q C: I— u V) u aA ro +_ a Lija�� V) Qo 4-1 w V) W~ Z Q Q Z m u Q cc O CL O O�U- u > _O t2+ cc p v w Z no LU H z � 2 � Z N O $= U 0 W ( OO LLu u .N Q) co i cz Z O N O W> co LLI O J W QZ a W a FZ4 Q z� W N N CL T� N C o L- ,^ V / cr- W F.. (A> p W � O Q WEv �vto CO N d > � W cm G 7>� Lo O O N W N Z 0 L W '� L.L > f- G W W Z V ' r-4 r-i 0 4-J Ln 10 LL- (3) _Ile > LL C- u U LLI LL 1-0 ol CL T 4-J u u V) 0 4-J 0-0 tA Q) C: -0 uj u -0 uj 0 ui .7 LAJ U + LLJ (1) wc > w _0 4- U L- OC =3 0 0 z V) 0 vM CO m ca LU UJ Zn E 5; ui 3: 0 to D m N L N 0, O O N 5- -0 L t, 00 O kD (Yi V)- t El 4^I u La GJ NLn UD d' q* O N Cif e-1 c!' Ln 4A 4A K I E S C0G o� Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - https://www.deschutes.org/ AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT For Board of Commissioners BOCC Monday Meeting of January 27, 2020 DATE: January 22, 2020 FROM: Greg Munn, Finance, 541-388-6559 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Monthly Treasurer and Finance Report MEMORANDUM DATE: January 27, 2020 TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Greg Munn, Acting County Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Treasury and Finance Report Following is the monthly finance report as of fiscal year to date December 31, 2019 (unaudited). Treasury and Investments • The portfolio balance at the end of December was $241M, unchanged from last month but an increase of $18M (8%) from a year ago. • Net investment income for the month is $411,241 which is $20,065 less than last month and $23,358 less than December 2018. While the year to date net interest income is 16% more than the prior year, the percent difference is narrowing due to a decline in interest rates over the last six months. • All portfolio category balances are within maximums. • Average portfolio yield for the month is 2.30% - down from last month's 2.48% and reflecting lower return opportunities in the securities market and reduction in the LGIP rate. • The Local Government Investment Pool rate remains unchanged at 2.25%. • The weighted warnao times to maturity is fl U,) years which is an inrrpasp from IaSt month (0:62) dlUe to the purchase of several new investments. Portfolio Breakdown: Par Value by Investment Type Municipal Debt $ 15,510,000 6.4% Corporate Notes 59,090,000 24.5% Time Certificates - 0.0% U. S. Treasuries 16,000,000 6.6% Federal Agencies 90,000,000 37.3% LGIP 50,158, 694 20.8% First Interstate Bank 10,367,872 4.3% Total Investments $ 241,126,566 100.0% Investment Income Dec-19 Y-T-D Total Investment Income 432,886 2,375,090 Less Fee: 5% of Invest. Income (21,644) 118,754 Investment Income - Net 411,241 2,256,335 Prior Year Comparison Dec-18 434,599 1,840,010 Category Maximums: Yield Percentages Total Portfolio: By Investment Types U.S. Treasuries 100 % _ Current Month Prior Month First Interstate LGIP ($50,400,000) 100% FIB/ LGIP 2.25% 2.25% Bank Federal Agencies 75% Investments 2.25% 2.32% NLnicipal Debt 4.3% 6.4% Banker's Acceptance 25% Average 2.30% 2.48% Time Certificates 50% Corporate Municipal Debt 25% .Benchmarks Notes Corporate Debt 25% 24 Month Treas. 1.58% 24.5 LGIP Rate 2.25% Weighted Ave Maturit 36 Month Treasury 1.59% i Max 3.54 Years 0.92 Term MinimumP Actual Time 0 to 30 Days 10% 28.3 % Certificates Under 1 Year 25% 58.2% o.o % Under 5 Years 100% 100.0% U. S. Other Policy Actual Treasuries Corp Issuer 5% 3.4% EFede,ia 6.6% Callable 25% 18.5% Credit W/A AA2 AA1 4.50% 4.00% 3.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 300,000,000 250,000,000 200,000,000 150,000,000 100,000,000 50,000,000 24 Month Historic Investment Returns Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec County Rate 2 Year Treasury Rate I ICorporate Bond Rate h h f� h r n n h i`I� r n W CO W 00 W CO W CO W W OJ CO Ol 01 (11 Ol Ol Ch Ol 6l dl Ol Ol 01 ci 1i c-I @ v @ Q 75 pA L1 > u = 9 '_ ? G qP Q J u @ v u o a@ v@ o@ v o v o u ro a@ o 0 a o z - 2 a a V) o o¢ Q o z o Deschutes County Investments '>; ,_'.` Purchases made in December2018 Portfolio Management +: Purchases made in December 2019 Portfolio Details - Investments December 31, 2019 Purchase Maturity Days To Ratings Coupon Par Market Book Call Inv it "' Inv Tyr`"' CUSIP "j Security W'. Broke'" Date ,'_� Date -i Matur." Moog'"', S&PIRI 7,; Rat - YTM3 ""! Value Value Value CaIIDati " 10625 MCI 94988J51-7 Wells Fargo Corporate Note CASTLE 1/23/2018 1/15/2020 14 Aa2 A+ 2.400 2.444 3,000,000 3,000,450 2,999,950 - - 10704 AFD 76116EFV7 RFSCP STRIP PRIN CASTLE 6/27/2019 1/15/2020 14 2,222 2.311 1,225,000 1,224,179 1,223,941 - - 10677 FAG 3137EAEE5 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp CASTLE 12/19/2018 1/17/2020 16 Aaa AA+ 1.500 2.770 1,500,000 1,499,850 1,499,171 - - 10682 FAC 3135GOA78 Federal National Mtg Assn PJ 12/21/2018 1/21/2020 20 Aaa AA- 1.625 2.665 2,000,000 2,000,060 1,998,868 - - 10707 FAC 3136G1C98 Federal National Mtg Assn DA DAV 7/19/2019 2/5/2020 35 Aaa AA+ 1,420 2.080 2,000,000 1,999,640 1,998,765 - - 10679 FAC 3130ACRPI Federal Home Loan Bank R W B 12/21/2018 2/7/2020 37 Aaa AA+ 1.680 2.682 2,000,000 2,000,060 1,998,037 - - 10528 MCI 594918AYO Microsoft Corp CASTLE 8/8/2016 2/12/2020 42 Aaa AAA 1.850 1.298 1,000,000 1,000,010 1,000,613 1/12/2020 10673 MCI 89236TCFO Toyota Mir Cred -CorpN CASTLE 12/12/2018 3/12/2020 71 Aa3 AA- 2.150 3.301 2,000,000 2,000,520 1,995,582 - - 10698 FAC 880591 EVO Tennessee Valley Authority CASTLE 4/25/2019 3/15/2020 74 Aaa 2.250 2.474 3,000,000 3,003,900 2,998,634 - - 10729 FAC 880591 EVO Tennessee Valley Authority CASTLE 11/29/2019 3/15/2020 74 Aaa 2,250 1,660 5,000,000 5,006,500 5,006,388 - - 10655 TRC 912828,184 U.S. Treasury DA DAV 9/28/2018 3/31/2020 90 Aaa AA+ 1.375 2,760 2,000,000 1,998,680 1,993,360 - - 10606 MUN 13063CSQ4 California St VINISP 9/21/2017 4/1/2020 91 Aa3 AA- 1.800 1.800 780,000 780,211 780,000 - - 10695 MCI 06051GFN4 Bank of America Corp CASTLE 4/10/2019 4/21/2020 111 A2 A- 2.250 2.674 1,500,000 1,501,410 1,498,095 - - 10639 FAC 3137EAEM7 Federal Home Loan Mig Corp CASTLE 4/19/2018 4/23/2020 ll3 Aaa AA+ 2.500 2.511 2,000,000 2,005,340 1,999,932 - - 10688 MCI 037833BE9 Apple Inc CASTLE 1/15/2019 516/2020 126 Aal AA+ 2.205 2.408 2,000,000 2,001,840 2,001,215 - - 10597 FAC 3134GBNK4 Federal Home Loan Mig Corp CASTLE 7/13/2017 5/29/2020 149 Aaa AA+ 1.625 1.671 3,000,000 2,999,880 3,000,000 - - 10664 MUN 7366881-02 Portland Community College PJ 11/27/2018 6/1/2020 152 Aal AA+ 3A26 3.126 615,000 518,059 515,000 - - 10690 MCI 740189AL9 Precision Castparts Corp CASTLE 2/19/2019 43997 166 A2 AA- 2.250 2.800 1,000,000 1,000,440 997,550 5/15/2020 10479 MUN 686053DH9 Oregon School Boards Assoc DA DAV 11/2/2015 6/30/2020 181 Aa2 AA 5.373 2.050 875,000 890,680 888,718 - - 10523 MUN 686053DH9 Oregon School Boards Assoc CASTLE 6/24/2016 6/30/2020 181 Aa2 AA 5.373 1.570 500,000 608,960 509,128 - - 10580 ACB 686053CK3 Oregon School Boards Assoc CASTLE 3/15/2017 6/30/2020 181 Aa2 A+ 2.063 2,149 1,000,000 990,620 989,772 - - 10599 MUN 569203MA7 Salem-Keizer School District CASTLE 7/26/2017 6/30/2020 181 Aa2 2.107 1.778 2,310,000 2,314,620 2,313,641 - - 10715 AFD 76116FAD9 RFSCP STRIP PRIN MORETN 10/3/2019 7/15/2020 196 1,801 1.853 3,000,000 2,972,370 2,957,075 - - 10572 MCI 94974BGM6 Wells Fargo Corporate Note PJ 1/19/2017 7/22/2020 203 A2 A- 2.600 2.350 1,000,000 1,003,820 1,001,332 - - 10691 MCI 94974BGM6 Wells Fargo Corporate Note CASTLE 2/22/2019 7/22/2020 203 A2 A- 2.600 2.940 1,000,000 1,003,820 998,148 - - 10674 FAC 3136G4PC1 Federal National Mtg Assn MORETN 12/13/2018 7/24/2020 205 Aaa AA- 1.750 2,820 1,275,000 1,275,140 1,267,525 1/24/2020 10675 FAC 3136G4NP4 Federal National Mtg Assn MORETN 12/13/2018 7/24/2020 205 Aaa AA+ 1.800 2.820 1,000,000 1,000,090 994,410 1/24/2020 10676 MCI 90331 HNW9 U S Bank - Corp Note CASTLE 12/18/2018 7/24/2020 205 Al AA- 2.186 2.694 1,500,000 1,501,440 1,498,748 6/24/2020 10680 FAC 313OA5Z77 - Federal Home Loan Bank MORETN 12/21/2018 7/29/2020 210 Aaa AA+ 1.830 2,691 2,000,000 2,002,100 1,990,320 - - 10717 AFD 912803AU7 U.S. Treasury CASTLE 10/18/2019 8/15/2020 227 1.638 1.684 4,000,000 3,959,880 3,945,040 - - 10742 ` MCI '.89236TFK6 :Toyota Mir Cred - Corp N : CASTLE 12/.1712019 8/21/2020 233 Aa3 AA 2.045 1.922 ` 3,000,000 3,002,100 3,002,319 - - 10656 TRC 9128284Y3 U.S. Treasury MORETN 9/28/2018 8/31/2020 243 Aaa AA+ 2,625 2.818 2,000,000 2,012,820 1,997,516 - - 10633 MCI 053015AD5 AUTOMATIC DATA CASTLE 2/26/2018 9/15/2020 258 Aa3 AA 2.250 2.570 2,710,000 2,717.154 2,704,105 8/15/2020 10653 TRC 9128281-65 U.S. Treasury CASTLE 9/17/2018 9/30/2020 273 Aaa AA+ 1.375 2,751 2,000,000 1,995,940 1,980,149 - - 10573 MUN 940093R25 Washington Univ Higher Ed PJ 1/19/2017 10/1/2020 274 Aa3 A+ 5.930 1.970 400,000 411,608 411,400 - - 10629 MCI 45905U7J7 International Bonds for Recons CASTLE 2/9/2018 10/5/2020 278 Aaa AAA 2.000 2.471 2,000,000 2,003,680 1,990,599 - - 10659 MCI 45905U7J7 International Bonds for Recons CASTLE 10/26/2018 10/5/2020 278 Aaa AAA 2,000 3.072 820,000 821,509 813,041 - - 10703 MCI 459051-17J7 International Bonds for Recons CASTLE 6/26/2019 10/5/2020 278 Aaa AAA 2.000 2.000 750,000 751,380 750,000 - - 10657 AFD 76116FAE7 RFSCP STRIP PRIN CASTLE 10/4/2018 10/15/2020 288 2.764 2.951 2,445,000 2,411,577 2,390,935 - - 10714 MCI 46625HHU7 JPMorgan Chase -Corporate N CASTLE 9/20/2019 10/15/2020 288 A2 A- 4.250 2,059 3,000,000 3,053,310 3,050,987 - - 10548 MUN 492244DV7 Kern Community College CASTLE 11/15/2016 11/1/2020 305 AA- 2.893 1.800 500,000 504,035 504,376 - - 10689 MUN 544587C30 LOS ANGELES MUNI IMP CASTLE 2/11/2019 11/1/2020 305 AA- 3.146 2,872 2,310,000 2,334,555 2,315,075 - - 10617 FAC 3134GBX56 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp CASTLE 12/13/2017 11/24/2020 328 Aaa AA+ 2.250 2.172 3,000,000 3,015,750 3,000,000 - - 10719 MCI 06051GEE5 Bank of America Corp CASTLE 10/22/2019 1/5/2021 370 5.875 1.883 2,000,000 2,077,980 2,079,391 - - 10725 MUN 73209MAC1 POMONA CALIF REDEV AGY PJ 11/22/2019 2/1/2021 397 A+ 3,406 1,800 1,300,000 1,320,241 1,322,254 - 10735 MCI '. 90331 HPA5-US Bancorp ' PJ ':12/6/2019 214/2021 400 Al '; AA- ,3.000 1,850 t2,000,000 2,024,020 2,024,689 - - 10722 FAC 880591EL2 Tennessee Valley Authority CASTLE 11/5/2019 2/15/2021 411 3.875 1.650 2,000,000 2,044,460 2,049,183 - - 10739 ` AFD 912833LC2 :U.S Treasury... : CASTLE 12/11/2019 :44242 411 1.6475 1.69748 ` 3,000,000 2,946,240 2,940,690 - - 10740 AFD '912833LC2 U.S. Treasury - CASTLE 12/13/2019 2M612021 <411 1.648 1.698 -2,000,000 1,964,160 1,960,640 - - 10621 FAC 3134G8JH3 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp CASTLE 12/27/2017 2/17/2021 413 Aaa AA+ 2.500 1.915 2,000,000 2.001,220 1.999,490 2/17/2020 10687 VR2 89236TEV3 Toyota Mtr Cred -CorpN CASTLE 1/9/2019 4/13/2021 468 Aa3 AA- 2.281 2.784 2,000,000 2,003,260 1,993,008 - - 10702 VR2 06051GFV6 Bank of America Corp CASTLE 5/31/2019 4/19/2021 474 Aaa A- 3.386 3.372 1,050,000 1,066,517 1,065,119 - - 10706 MUN 801577NR4 SANTA CLARA CNTY CALIF FIND CASTLE 7/2/2019 5/1/2021 486 AA+ 2,050 2.263 1,095,000 1,097,146 1,094,761 - - 10700 MCI 06051GEH8 Bank of America Corp CASTLE 5/9/2019 5/13/2021 498 A2 A- 5.000 2.700 1,560,000 1,626,472 1,607,408 - - 10741 TRC 9128286V7 U.S. Treasury CASTLE : 12113/2019 ':: 5/31/2021 516 2.125 1.70172 -"5,000,000 5,036,150 5,029,387 - - 10728 MCI 46625HRT9 JPMorgan Chase - Corporate N CASTLE 11/29/2019 6/7/2021 523 A2 A- 2.400 1.920 3,000,000 3,019,800 3,019.152 5/7/2021 10738 MCI 46625HRT9 JPMorgan Chase - Corporate N DA DAV 12/10/2019 6/7/2021 523 A2 A- 2.400 1.956 ` 2,000,000 2,013,200 - 2,012,492-07/2021 10667 MCI 695114CM8 Pacific Corp CASTLE 11/29/2018 6/15/2021 531 Al A+ 3,850 3.350 1,170,000 1,198,817 1,178,085 3/15/2021 10672 MCI 695114CM8 Pacific Corp CASTLE 12/6/2018 6/15/2021 531 Al A+ 3.850 3.351 830,000 850,443 835,732 3/15/2021 10692 MCI 695114CM8 Pacific Corp CASTLE 2/22/2019 6/15/2021 531 Al A+ 3.850 2.850 2,000,000 2,049,260 2,025,036 3/15/2021 10708 FAC 3133EKVC7 Federal Farm Credit Bank CASTLE 7/29/2019 7/19/2021 565 Aaa AA+ 1.875 1.875 3,000,000 3,014,610 3,000,000 - - 10721 TRC 91282871`1 U.S. Treasury CASTLE 10/31/2019 7/31/2021 577 1.75 1,63127 5,000,000 5012100 5009170.82 - - 10705 MUN 797398DK7 SAN DIEGO GNTY CALIF PENSIC CASTLE 7/1/2019 8/15/2021 592 AA2 AAA 5.835 2.000 2,000,000 2,128.760 2,121,172 - - 10711 FAC 3134GT2Q5 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp CASTLE 8/16/2019 8/19/2021 596 Aaa 2.000 2,000 3,000,000 3,001,170 3,000,000 2/19/2020 10743 FAC ' 3134GT2Q5 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp CASTLE 12/19/2019 8/19/2021 596 Aaa " 2.000 1.976 2,535,000 2,535,989 2,535,954 2/19/2020 10737 FAC 313OA94N8 Federal Home Loan Bank CASTLE -1219/2019 '8/2512021 602 Aaa AA+ '1,700 1.714 -5,000,000 5,000,350 4,998,795 2/25/2020 10696 AFD 88059E4M3 Tennessee Valley Authority CASTLE 4/18/2019 9/15/2021 623 2.373 2,536 1,020.000 987,809 978,107 - - 10648 MCI 45905UC36 International Bonds for Recons CASTLE 7/16/2018 9/28/2021 636 Aaa AAA 2.000 2.967 2,000,000 1,941,400 1,968,106 - - 10716 FAC 3134GUGV6 Federal Home Loan Mig Corp CASTLE 10/15/2019 10/15/2021 653 2.000 2.000 3,000,000 2,998,710 3,000,000 1/15/2020 "10731 MCI : 94988J5T0 "Wells Fargo Corporate Note CASTLE '. 12/5/2019 10/22/2021 660 Aa2 A+ :. 3.625 :1.950 2,000,000 2,058,420 2,059,177 9/21/2021 10724 FAC 3130AHJYO Federal Home Loan Bank CASTLE 11/8/2019 11/19/2021 688 1.625 1.711 3,000,000 3,003,630 2,995,242 - 10744 FAC 313OAHSR5. Federal Home Loan Bank CASTLE 12/20/2019 12/20/2021 ! 719 :14625 1.680 ' 3, 000, 000 3,001,230 2,996,810 - - 10732 MCI 46625HJD3 JPMorgan Chase - CorporateN PJ 12/6/2019 '112412022 754 A2 A- 4.500 2,010 2,000,000 2,100,040 2,100,073 - - 10654 MCI 695114CP1 Pacific Corp CASTLE 9/25/2018 2/1/2022 762 Al A+ 2.950 3.320 700,000 713,720 694,920 11/1/2021 10726 FAC 3133EKCYO Federal Farm Credit Bank CASTLE 11/21/2019 3/14/2022 803 Aaa AA+ 1,950 1,949 5, 000, 000 5,009,850 5,009,621 - - 10730 FAC 3133EKCYO Federal Farm Credit Bank CASTLE 11/29/2019 3/14/2022 803 Aaa AA+ 1.950 1.838 5,000,000 5,009,850 5,010,652 - - 10720 MCI 90520EAH4 MUFG Union Bank CASTLE 10/25/2019 4/1/2022 821 Aaa A 3.150 2.038 2,000,000 2,U46,940 2,048,582 - r10733 MCI 084664BT7 : Berkshire Hathaway Inc MORETN '12/6/2019 5/15/2022 865 Aa2 AA - 3.000 1.740 :2,000,000. .2,054,800 2,058,267 - - 10736 FAC 3133ELCH5 Federal Farm Credit Bank PJ 12/5/2019 6/2/2022 883 '1.700 1.716 '2,000,000 1,998,780 1,999,223 6/212020 10652 MUN 686053BQ1 Oregon School Boards Assoc MORETN 9/14/2018 6/30/2022 911 Aa2 AA 5.480 3.120 925,000 1,004,865 976,002 - - 10710 FAC 3130AGUGS Federal Home Loan Bank CASTLE 8/9/2019 8/5/2022 947 Aaa AA+ 2.250 2.084 3,000,000 3,001,260 3,002,083 2/5/2020 10718 FAC 3134GUJN1 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp CASTLE 10/21/2019 10/17/2022 1020 Aaa 2.100 2.096 4,000,000 4,000,680 4,000.374 1/17/2020 10734 MCI 89114QCD8 Toronto Dominion Bank PJ 12/6/2019 12/1/2022 1065 Aa3 A 1.900 1.871 2,000,000 2,001,920 2,001,621 - - 10727 MCI 06051GEU9 Bank of America Corp CASTLE 11/25/2019 1/11/2023 1106 3,300 2.120 2,000,000 2,067,760 2,068,749 - - 10709 MUN 2927OCNU5 Bonneulle Power Administratio CASTLE 7/30/2019 7/1/2023 1277 Aal AA- 5.803 2.12492 1,000,000 1,127,700 1,122,875 - - 10713 MCI 361582ADI Berkshire Hathaway Inc CASTLE 9/9/2019 7/15/2023 1291 Aa3 AA 7.350 2,031 500,000 586,005 590,081 - - 10078 RRP SYS10078 Local GoN Investment Pool 7/1/2006 - - 1 2.750 2.750 50,158,694 50,158,694 50,158,694 - - 10084 RR2 SYS10084 First Interstate 7/1/2006 - - 1 2.750 2.750 10,367,872 10,367,872 10,367,872 - - 241,126,566 242,274,286 241,878,194 Room Tax Room tax collections for FY 2020 as of December 31, 2019 are up 12.1% compared to the same period in FY 2019. Budget to Actuals Report On the attached pages you will find the Budget to Actuals Report for the County's major funds with actual revenue and expense data compared to budget through December 31, 2019. Below is a copy of the budget to actuals dashboard for the General Fund. As part of the presentation of the Treasurer's report we will be sharing a live overview of the dashboard and how it can be used for County departments. County Wide Financial [dashboard 001 - General Fund �50% ... Year �omp'uit Fund Select Al, {Blank` o,e Ozb-Cods A6mtr.. 0 S C £c—,ric J.. L - General cw,,_. o_o eeec Cie,_ ''co - l?lv i�bla r✓ .3.: - Garb: l,:tclo... Monthly GL Nmd $9.bM (Blank) Budget to Actuals Requirements Resources Beginning Working Capital Budget to Actuals by Category SSA .�- actin L=J Position Control Summary July -June Percent Org Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Unfilled Assessor Filled 34.26 34.26 34.26 34.26 34.26 34.26 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.84% Clerk Filled 8.48 8.48 8.48 8.48 8.48 8.48 Unfilled - - - - - - 0.00% BOPTA Filled 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 0.52 Unfilled - - - - 0.00% DA Filled 49.95 49.95 49.95 51.95 50.95 51.75� Unfilled 2.00 2.00 2.00 - 1.00 1.00 2.56% Tax Filled 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 4.50 Unfilled - 0.00% Veterans' Filled 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 Unfilled - - - - - 0.00% Property Mngt Filled 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 Unfilled - - - - 0.00% Total General Fund Filled 103.51 103.51 103.51 105.51 104.51 105.31 Unfilled 3.00 3.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.19% Justice Court Filled 4.60 4.60 4.60 4.60 3.60 3.60 Unfilled - - - 1.00 1.00 7.25% Community Justice Filled 46.90 47.20 47.20 47.90 47.90 47.90 Unfilled 1.00 0.70 0.70 - - 0.84% Sheriff Filled 221.75 221.75 224.75 220.75 223.75 224.75 Unfilled 18.75 18.75 15.75 19.75 16.75 15.75 7.31% Health Srvcs Filled 284.55 286.65 291.20 293.95 291.95 293.30 Unfilled 20.35 18.25 18.70 16.95 18.75 17.40 5.96% CDD Filled 53.00 54.00 54.00 56.00 55.00 55.00 Unfilled 3.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.39% Road Filled 55.00 55.00 56.00 SS.00 54.00 55.00 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.79% Adult P&P Filled 37.85 38.55 39.55 38.85 38.85 39.85 Unfilled 2.00 1.30 0.30 1.00 1.00 - 2.34% Solid Waste Filled 24.00 24.00 24.00 23.00 23.00 23.00 Unfilled 0.50 0.50 0.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 4.08% 9-1-1 Filled 55.52 53.53 56.53 56.53 56.53 55.53 Unfilled 4.48 6.48 3.48 3.48 3.48 4.48 7.19% Victims Assistance Filled 7.00 7.00 7.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - - 6.25% GIS Dedicated Filled 1.30 1.30 1.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 1.00 - - 21.74% Fair & Expo Filled 12.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 11.00 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 6.94% Natural Resource Filled 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Unfilled - - - 1.00 1.00 1.00 33.33% ISF - Facilities Filled 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 19.00 20.00 Unfilled 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 5.00 23.33% ISF -Admin Filled 5.75 5.75 5.75 6.75 6.75 6.75 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 15.73% ISF - SOCC Filled 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 Unfilled - - - - - 0.00% ISF- Finance Filled 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 Unfilled - - - - - - 0.00% ISF - Legal Filled 6.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 - - - 4.76% ISF - HR Filled 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 Unfilled - - - - - - 0.00% ISF - IT Filled 14.70 14.70 14.70 14.70 15.70 15.70 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 - 4.25% ISF - Risk Filled 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 Unfilled 1.00 1.00 - 12.90% July -June Percent Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Unfilled Total.• Filled 976.68 977.79 991.34 995.09 993.09 998.24 Unfilled 66.08 64.98 56.43 56.68 58.48 54.13 %Unfilled 6.34% 6.23% 5.39% 5.39% 5.56% 5.14% 5.67% Q� �'�ES`�� Budget to Actuals - Countywide Summary All Departments 50.0% FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % 001 - General Fund 33,938,668 34,900,450 103% ; 35,707,331 31,712,345 89% 36,573,033 102% ; 030 - Juvenile 786,286 842,485 107% ; 856,930 317,186 37% ; 888,819 104% ; 160/170 - TRT 7,282,600 7,682,623 105% ; 7,732,000 5,770,394 75% 8,320,000 108% ; 220 - Justice Court 552,000 608,275 110% ; 578,000 293,973 51% ; 603,000 104% ; 255 - Sheriffs Office 39,225,869 40,517,859 103% ; 41,390,080 37,556,812 91% 41,978,615 101% ; 274 - Health Services 35,444,454 37,595,739 106% ; 35,498,170 16,049,344 45% ; 34,310,744 97% ; 295 - CDD 8,153,746 7,755,886 95% ; 8,468,820 3,929,761 46% 8,283,990 98% ; 325 - Road 22,876,423 23,035,209 101% ; 22,785,827 11,826,246 52% ; 23,504,549 103% ; 355 - Adult P&P 6,360,818 6,463,769 102% ; 5,775,278 2,983,539 52% 6,300,300 109% ; 465 - Road CIP 959,104 261,131 27% 2,142,893 1,354,003 63% ; 2,827,922 132% ; 610 - Solid Waste 11,868,613 11,504,244 97% ; 11,724,869 6,260,718 53% ; 11,823,961 101% ; 615 - Fair & Expo 1,499,100 1,589,820 106% ; 1,561,500 491,575 31% 1,420,050 91% ; 618 - RV Park 358,600 488,620 136% ; 437,700 300,379 69% 498,682 114% ; 670 - Risk Management 3,569,944 3,477,056 97% 3,495,039 2,238,082 64% ; 3,817,039 109% ; 675 - Health Benefits 21,411,563 22,699,675 106% ; 22,318,433 10,841,588 49% 21,910,231 98% ; 705 - 911 10,260,013 10,514,313 102% ; 10,563,350 8,910,421 84% ; ; 10,711,703 101% ; 999 - Other 36,330,641 38,687,048 106% ; 28,159,423 18,122,964 64% ; 28,300,598 101% ; TOTAL RESOURCES ; 240,878,442 248,624,202 103% ; 239,195,643 158,959,331 66% 242,073,235 101% ; Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuats % Projection % 001 - General Fund 17,486,029 16,406,076 94% 18,210,485 8,426,445 46% ; 18,000,079 99% ; 030 - Juvenile 7,040,903 6,638,892 94% ; 7,127,337 3,435,176 48% 6,978,189 98% ; 160/170 - TRT 2,335,678 2,233,953 96% 2,212,140 1,556,508 70% ; 2,350,919 106% ; 220 - Justice Court 658,081 652,039 99% 678,141 352,762 52% ; 683,621 101% ; 255 - Sheriff's Office ; 42,853,022 41,553,897 97% ; 44,494,082 22,131,549 50% ; 45,098,310 101% ; 274 - Health Services 44,974,364 42,441,390 94% 47,434,471 19,823,888 42% ; 43,103,243 91% ; 295 - CDD 7,726,157 7,331,793 95% 7,905,639 3,734,935 47% ; 7,646,095 97% ; 325 - Road 14,689,753 12,158,904 83% 14,573,336 6,184,534 42% 13,870,067 95% ; 355 - Adult P&P 6,505,128 6,208,673 95% 6,589,491 3,126,863 47% 6,501,624 99% ; 465 - Road CIP 8,309,501 5,484,366 66% 13,835,913 2,218,768 16% 13,447,343 97% ; ��E��{ Budget to Actuals `0 - Countywide Summary o�iaQw.,leAll Departments 50.0% FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) Year Complete 610 - Solid Waste 8,310,720 7,643,635 92% ; 8,384,039 3,222,963 38% 8,232,880 98% ; 615 - Fair & Expo 2,688,885 2,789,095 104% ; 2,464,787 1,263,815 51% ; 2,645,387 107% ; 618 - RV Park 521,971 499,108 96% 540,373 320,006 59% 501,391 93% ; 670 - Risk Management 3,858,097 2,862,764 74% ; 4,132,295 1,612,189 39% 3,874,059 94% ; 675 - Health Benefits ; 23,144,255 21,211,086 92% 22,115,011 9,691,600 44% ; 23,272,932 105% ; 705 - 911 13,379,064 10,570,113 79% ; 12,250,336 5,335,399 44% ; 11,755,714 96% ; 999 - Other 46,792,062 35,262,851 75% 57,745,015 17,322,146 30% 57,689,015 100%: TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 251,273,671 221,948,635 88% 270,692,891 109,759,547 41% ; 265,650,869 98% ; Fiscal Year 2019 HSGal Year 2020 TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget AGtuals % Projection % 001 - General Fund ; (18,077,559) (18,091,539) 100% ; (19,023,310) (9,648,219) 51% ; (19,023,310) 100% ; 030 - Juvenile 5,744,015 5,744,015 100% ; 5,874,465 2,937,228 50% 5,874,465 100% ; 160/170 - TRT (4,649,866) (4,449,866) 96% ; (4,133,128) (2,066,554) 50% (4,133,128) 100% ; 220 - Justice Court 30,000 30,000 100% ; - - 255 - Sheriffs Office 2,981,253 2,981,254 100% ; 3,119,936 1,621,775 52% 3,119,936 100% ; 274 - Health Services 6,177,535 6,179,204 100% ; 6,102,365 2,776,874 46% 6,102,365 100% ; 295 - GDD (9,1192,624) (1,170,172) IUL% , (1,448,081) (724,032) 50% (1,448,08i) IVV /o , 325 - Road (14,464,308) (14,464,308) 100% ; (11,910,575) (1,313,601) 11% ; ; (11,910,575) 100% ; 355 - Adult P&P 165,189 165,189 100% ; 223,189 111,590 50% ; 223,189 100%: 465 - Road CIP 13,811,725 13,393,963 97% 12,014,914 - 0% ; 11,805,052 98% ; 610 - Solid Waste (4,688,023) (5,000,029) 107% ; (3,296,192) (1,616,182) 49% ; ; (3,296,192) 100% ; 615 - Fair & Expo 1,220,994 1,164,996 95% ; 1,022,863 563,926 55% ; 877,863 86% ; 618 - RV Park 160,000 160,000 100% ; (307,000) (73,500) 24% ; ; (307,000) 100% ; 670 - Risk Management (3,168) (3,168) 100% ; (6,918) (3,458) 50% ; (6,918) 100%: 705-911 - - _ _ _ 999 - Other 12,744,837 13,360,461 105% ; 11,767,472 7,434,153 63% ; 12,122,334 103% ; TOTAL TRANSFERS - - - - 01Es` Budget to Actuals - Countywide Summary All Departments 50.0% FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 ENDING FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals Projection % 001 - General Fund 9,265,080 12,349,379 133% ; 9,563,536 25,987,061 11,899,023 124% ; 030 - Juvenile 689,399 1,296,490 188% ; 694,058 1,115,728 1,081,585 156% ; 160/170 - TRT 2,261,401 2,565,255 113% ; 3,686,732 4,712,587 4,401,208 119% ; 220 - Justice Court 67,919 144,227 212% ; 64,859 85,438 63,606 98% ; 255 - Sheriffs Office 13,191,907 16,818,660 127% ; 14,732,933 33,865,698 16,818,901 114% ; 274 - Health Services 3,850,339 10,638,105 276% ; 4,286,867 9,640,436 7,947,971 185% ; 295 - CDD 1,478,676 1,783,536 121% ; 1,097,104 1,254,330 973,350 89% ; 325 - Road 2,416,014 6,726,840 278% ; 2,303,905 11,054,951 ; 4,450,747 193% ; 355 - Adult P&P 2,220,879 2,754,005 124% ; 1,998,976 2,722,271 2,775,870 139% ; 465 - Road CIP 14,148,365 17,759,555 126% ; 15,938,430 16,894,789 18,945,186 119% ; 610 - Solid Waste 600,000 799,570 133% ; 644,638 2,221,143 1,094,459 170% ; 615 - Fair & Expo 31,209 (94,564) -303%; 199,576 (302,878) (442,038) -221%; 618 - RV Park 315,629 592,992 188% ; 150,327 499,865 283,283 188% ; 670 - Risk Management 5,308,679 7,193,407 136% ; 5,455,826 7,815,843 7,129,469 131% ; 675 - Health Benefits 14,318,894 16,563,905 116% ; 16,309,716 17,713,893 ; 15,201,204 93% ; one 9A A 5,505,949 8,604,816 156% 6.066.720 12.179.838 7,560,805 125% 999 - Other 58,869,933 75,223,189 128% ; 55,033,130 83,458,160 57,957,105 105% ; TOTAL FUND BALANCE 134,540,271 181,719,367 135% ; 138,227,333 230,919,152 ; 158,141,733 114% ; �Tes` 2< Budget to Actuals Report General Fund - Fund 001 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) RESOURCES Property Taxes - Current Property Taxes - Prior Other General Revenues Assessor Clerk BOPTA District Attorney Tax Office Veterans Property Management TOTALRESOURCES REQUIREMENTS Assessor Clerk BOPTA District Attorney Medical Examiner Tax Office Veterans Property Management Non -Departmental TOTAL REQUIREMENTS TRANSFERS Transfers In Transfers Out TOTAL TRANSFERS 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 27,318,385 27,774,133 102% 29,046,840 27,160,256 94% 29,012,542 100% ; (34,298); A 389,000 433,798 112% 391,000 828,090 212% ! 900,000 230% 509,000� B 2,685,500 3,272,354 122% 3,020,400 1,890,497 63% 3,161,400 105% 141,000! C 870,658 823,127 95% 837,283 467,519 56% 837,283 100%! -! D 1,787,270 1,702,762 95% 1,597,369 1,051,571 66% 1,847,369 116% ! 250,000! E 12,700 12,119 95% 12,220 7,129 58% 12,220 100%! D 389,782 386,919 99% 311,215 134,534 43% 311,215 100% 198,950 206,292 104% 195,390 115,291 59% 195,390 100%! D 166,423 168,945 102% < 175,614 46,154 26% 175,614 100%! F 120,000 120,000 100%! 120,000 11,305 9% 120,000 100%! G 33,938,668 34,900,450 103% ; 35,707,331 31,712,345 89% 36,573,033 102% ; 865,702; Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % 41802,452 4,530,558 94% 4,993,290 2,346,359 47% 1,854,397 1,598,764 86% 2,031,590 709,989 35% 73,125 69,565 95% 77,950 37,474 48% 7,372,932 6,993,244 95% 7,800,568 3,780,563 48% 173,129 160,296 93% 235,542 80,679 34% 872,020 779,330 89% 846,307 439,487 52% 572,287 539,026 94% 5893551 260,679 44% 287,858 278,966 97% 281,985 146,405 52% 1,477,829 1,456,326 99% € 1,353,702 624,811 46% 17,486,029 16,406,076 94% 18,210,485 8,426,445 46% ; Projection % $ Variance 4,879,165 98% 114,12& H 1,982,135 98% 49,45& H 77,497 99% 451 7,745,507 99% 55,061 ! H 235,542 100% 851,408 101% (5,101); 591,354 100% (1,803) 283,769 101% (1,784); 1,353,702 100%, 18,000,079 99% ; 210,406; Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 326,122 289,065 89% 260,000 130,000 50% 260,000 100% I (18,403,681) (18,380,604) 100% t (19,283,310) (9,778,219) 51% t (19,283,310) 100% (18,077,559) (18,091,539) 100% ; (19,023,310) (9,648,219) 51% (19,023,310) 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 10,890,000 11,946,544 110% 11,090,000 12,349,379 111% 12,349,379 111% 1,259,379; Resources over Requirements 16,452,639 18,494,374 17,496,846 23,285,900 18,572,954 1,076,108 Net Transfers - In (Out) i (18,077,559) (18,091,539) f (19,023,310) (9,648,219) E (19,023,310) 0; TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 9,265,080 $ 12,349,379 133% $ 9,563,536 $ 25,987,061 272% $ 11,899,023 124% $2,335,487, A Current year taxes received primarily in November, February and May; actual 19-20 TAV is a 5.36% increase compared to FY 18-19 vs. 5.5% budgeted. B TDS Baja deferred billing credits per ORS 305.286 in addition to settlement payment C PILT payment of $500,000 received in July. Includes $112,566 of Marijuana tax YTD; interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances D A & T Grant received quarterly. Q1 - July; Q2 - October; Q3 - January; Q4 - April. E Recording fees are up 39% YTD compared to the prior year. F Oregon Dept. of Veteran's Affairs grant reimbursed quarterly. G Interfund land -sale management revenue recorded at year-end. H Savings related to FTE vacancies YTD and forecasted vacancy rates consistent with YTD experience. I Repayment to General Fund from Finance Reserves for ERP Implementation c .� Budget to Actuals Report C� Juvenile - Fund 030 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance OYA Basic & Diversion 407,113 413,320 102% 442,601 87,359 20% 442,601 100% - A ODE Juvenile Crime Prev ! 91,379 92,492 101% 91,379 21,545 24% 91,379 100% A Leases ! 85,000 87,311 103% 86,400 52,049 60% 95,000 110% 8,600, B Inmate/Prisoner Housing ! 70,000 97,200 139% 80,000 59,100 74% 100,000 125% 20,000� C DOC Unif Crime Fee/HB2712 35,000 43,681 125% 35,000 49,339 141% 49,339 141% 14,339! D Interest on Investments ! 25,000 31,318 125% 31,000 15,400 50% 30,000 97% (1,000) OJD Court Fac/Sec SB 1065 17,000 27,158 160% 26,000 11,341 44% 26,000 100% Gen Fund -Crime Prevention ! 20,000 20,000 100% 20,000 5,000 25% 20,000 100% A Food Subsidy 18,744 12,052 64% 16,000 6,967 44% 11,000 69% (5,000); E Miscellaneous ! 2,050 4,603 225% 14,050 3,106 22% 10,000 71% (4,050); F Contract Payments 8,000 7,269 91% 8,000 3,315 41% 8,000 100% G Case Supervision Fee ! 7,000 6,081 87% 6,500 2,666 41% 5,500 85% (1,000), H TOTAL RESOURCES 786,286 842,485 107% ; 856,930 317,186 37% ; ; 888,819 104% ; 31,889: REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Personnel Services 5,705,245 5,412,349 95% 5,797,927 2,809,638 48% 5,650,427 97% 147,50& 1 Materials and Services ! 1,327,658 1,218,976 92% 1,329,410 625,537 47% 1,327,762 100% 1,648! J Capital Outlay 8,000 7,566 95% - - -, TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 7,040,903 6,638,892 94% 7,127,337 3,435,176 48% 6,978,189 98% 149,148; TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfers In- General Funds 5,831,015 5,831,015 100% 5,961,465 2,980,728 50% 5,961,465 1009% Transfers Out-Veh Reserve (87,000) (87,000) 100% (87,000) (43,500) 50% (87,000) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS 5,744,015 5,744,015 100% ; 5,874,465 2,937,228 50% 5,874,465 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 1,200,000 1,348,881 112% 1,090,000 1,296,490 119% 1,296,490 119% 206,490; Resources over Requirements (6,254,617) (5,796,407) (6,270,407) (3,117,990) (6,089,370) 181,037, Net Transfers - In (Out) 5,744,015 5,744,015 5,874,465 2,937,228 5,874,465 0! TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 689,399 $ 1,296,490 188% $ 694,058 $ 1,115,728 161% $ 1,081,585 156% $387,527; A Quarterly Reimbursement. Q1 for OYA Basic and ODE Juvenile Crime Prev received. B Projection based on YTD actuals. Leased a second office to J Bar J Youth Service. C Out of county juvenile detention housing. Fluctuates in accordance with other county policy/usage. Current YTD trend higher than budgeted D Annual payment received from State Dept. of Corrections based on new state formula higher than budgeted E Projection based on YTD actuals. Less than anticipated qualifying juvenile detention meals. F Anticipated grant revenue from youth substance abuse research study lower than budgeted due to project start-up delays. G Payments for community service crew projects. Fluctuates depending on community need/request. Current YTD trend lower than budgeted; however, it is anticipated this revenue will be close to budget. H Projection based on YTD actuals I Projected Personnel savings based on FY19 and YTD average vacancy rate of 1.7% j Projected based on YTD actuals. Higher electricity costs are being offset by lower youth intensive residential services costs �I ES` �{ Budget to Actuals Report o� TRT - Fund 160/170 50.0% FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Room Taxes 7,260,000 7,618,179 105% 7,670,000 5,721,997 75% 8,245,000 107% 575,000; A Interest 22,600 64,444 285% 62,000 48,396 78% 75,000 121% 13,000, B TOTAL RESOURCES 7,282,600 7,682,623 105% ; 7,732,000 5,770,394 75% 8,320,000 108% ; 588,000: REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance COVA 1,946,668 2,067,761 106% 2,064,221 1,487,226 72% 2,203,000 107% , (138,779)� C Interfund Contract 59,121 59,121 100% 79,160 39,580 50% 79,160 100% D Interfund Charges 39,087 39,087 100% 37,309 18,655 50% 37,309 100% t Auditing Services 12,501 10,800 86% 14,500 4,200 29% 14,500 100% Software 60,000 51,533 86% 10,350 5,600 54% 10,350 100% Office Supplies 4,000 1,589 40% 3,000 324 11% 3,000 100% Printing 2,200 209 9% 2,000 - 0% € 2,000 100% Public Notices 3,101 1,834 59% 1,600 924 58% 1,600 100% Temporary Help 9,000 2,020 22% Sunriver Service Dist 200,000 0% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 2,335,678 2,233,953 96% 2,212,140 1,556,508 70% 2,350,919 106% ; (138,779); TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfer Out - RV Park (35,000) (17,500) 50% (35,000) 100% Transfer Out - Annual Fair (150,000) (150,000) 100% (250,000) (125,000) 50% (250,000) 100% Transfer Out - F&E Reserve (830,083) (630,083) 76% (286,687) (143,342) 50% (286,687) 100% Transfer Out - F&E (517,996) (517,996) 100% (409,654) (204,814) 5U% (4U9,bb4) 1UU% Transfer Out - Sheriff (3,151,787) (3,151,787) 100% (3,151,787) (1,575,888) 50% (3,151,787) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS (4,649,866) (4,449,866) 96% (4,133,128) (2,066,554) 50% ; (4,133,128) 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget, Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 1,964,345 1,566,452 80% 2,300,000 2,565,255 112% 2,565,255 112% 265,25S Resources over Requirements 4,946,922 5,448,669 5,519,860 4,213,886 5,969,081 449,221, Net Transfers - In (Out) E (4,649,866) (4,449,866) d (4,133,128) (2,066,554) ! f (4,133,128) E 0! TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 2,261,401 $ 2,565,255 113% $ 3,686,732 $ 4,712,587 128% 7 $ 4,401,208 119% $714,476 A Prior year collections YTD was 70% of budget, compared to current year collections YTD of 75% B Includes interest payments from delinquent tax collections. C COVA is estimated to receive --27.5% of TRT revenue collected above budgeted amounts D Contracted services with the Finance Department for operating TRT program. �1�S `� Budget to Actuals Report o Justice Court - Fund 220 50.0% FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Court Fines & Fees 550,000 605,344 110% 575,000 292,789 51% 600,000 104% 25,000; Interest on Investments 2,000 2,931 147% 3,000 1,185 39% 3,000 100% TOTAL RESOURCES 552,000 608,275 110% ; 578,000 293,973 51% ; 603,000 104% ; 25,000: REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Personnel Services 508,650 508,098 100% 516,868 276,944 54% 522,348 101% (5,480); A Materials and Services 149,431 143,941 96% 161,273 75,818 47% 161,273 100% B TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 658,081 652,039 99% 678,141 352,762 52% 683,621 101% ; (5,480); TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfers In- General Fund 30,000 30,000 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS 30,000 30,000 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 144,000 157,990 110% 165,000 144,227 87% 144,227 87% (20,774)' Resources over Requirements (106,081) (43,764) (100,141) (58,788) (80,621) 19,520! Net Transfers - In (Out) 30,000 30,000 - - 0� TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 67,919 $ 144,227 212% $ 64,859 $ 85,438 132% $ 63,606 98% ($1,254): .,.a Personnel ..,,...........41.iL.� - Pr G'ecteu Personnel overage a.,.r {., payout for 4orminofor� PMnInJ Pne...- - errantly varant to B Annual software maintenance costs paid upfront in fiscal year. �IES Budget to Actuals Report Sheriffs Office - Fund 255 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) RESOURCES LED #1 Property Tax Current LED #2 Property Tax Current Sheriff's Office Revenues LED #1 Property Tax Prior LED #2 Property Tax Prior LED #1 Interest LED #2 Interest LED #1 Foreclosed Properties LED #2 Foreclosed Properties TOTALRESOURCES REQUIREMENTS Sheriff's Services Civil/Special Units Automotive/Communications Detective Patrol Records Adult Jail Court Security Emergency Services Special Services Training Crisis Stabilization Center Other Law Enforcement Non - Departmental TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 1 Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 24,780,245 25,153,487 102% 26,293,470 24,579,404 93% 26,211,939 100% (81,531): A i 10,027,098 10,171,051 101% 10,632,014 9,922,650 93% 10,581,701 100% (50,313)( B ! 3,675,026 4,153,450 113% 3,730,596 1,930,507 52% 3,803,185 102% 72,589! C k 312,000 326,275 105% 312,000 640,226 205% 683,701 219% 371,701 D k 166,500 157,143 94% 148,000 279,321 189% 306,089 207% 158,089, D k 145,000 288,269 199% 138,000 125,416 91% 250,000 181% 112,000� E k 120,000 193,301 161% 136,000 79,289 58% 142,000 104% 6,000! E 53,322 - - - 21,561 39,225,869 40,517,859 103% ; 41,390,080 37,556,812 91% 41,978,615 101% ; 588,535: Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals 2,997,984 3,068,683 102%, 3,105,057 1,462,739 47% i 1,181,695 1,149,677 97% 1,232,158 654,644 53% ! 2,644,785 2,532,545 96% 2,858,337 1,336,793 47% 2,033,077 2,044,686 101% 2,132,319 1,148,592 54% k 10,003,952 10,040,921 100% 10,592,002 5,871,360 55% k 881,182 892,837 101% 1,004,600 389,071 39% 18,357,098 17,364,464 95% 18,359,024 8,841,044 48% 551,494 531,409 96% 556,740 229,060 41% 328,581 341,586 104% 402,734 223,158 55% 1,520,623 1,451,124 95% 1,601,871 810,691 51% 667,647 8744,923 131% 743,3:54 437,458 59�70 k 559,308 82,308 15% 571,267 42,134 7% 1,017,266 1,070,404 105% 1,330,214 582,593 44% ! 108,329 108,329 100% 4,425 102,213 999% 42,853,022 41,553,897 97% ; 44,494,082 22,131,549 50% ; Projection % $ Variance 3,066,110 99% i 38,947� F k 1,231,269 100% 889!i 2,916,488 102% (58,151)! 2,273,446 107% (141,127)! 11,264,020 106% (672,018); G 893,055 89% 111,545; 18,293,042 100% 65,982; 468,211 84% 88,529 440,627 109% (37,893)l, 0 1,690,039 106% (88,168)! "a44,795 i i4o (i0i,46i) 388,642 68% 182,625! 1,224,141 92% 106,073� 104,425 999% (100,000) 45,098,310 101% ; (604,228); TRANSFERS Budget Actuais % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfer In - TRT 3,151,787 3,151,787 100% 3,151,787 1,575,888 50% 3,151,787 100% Transfer In - General Fund 103,132 103,132 100% 240,249 120,120 50% 240,249 100% Transfers Out - Debt Service k (273,666) (273,666) 100% (272,100) (74,233) 27% (272,100) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS 2,981,253 2,981,254 100% ; 3,119,936 1,621,775 52% ; 3,119,936 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 13,837,807 14,873,445 107% 14,716,999 16,818,660 114% 16,818,660 114% 2,101,661; Resources over Requirements (3,627,153) (1,036,039) (3,104,002) 15,425,263 (3,119,695) (15,693) Net Transfers - In (Out) 2,981,253 2,981,254 3,119,936 1,621,775 3,119,936 ! 0� TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 13,191,907 $ 16,818,660 127% : $ 14,732,933 $ 33,865,698 230% $ 16,818,901 114% $2,085,968; A Actual 19-20 TAV is a 5.36% increase compared to FY 18-19 vs. 5.5% budgeted B Actual 19-20 TAV is a 5.16% increase compared to FY 18-19 vs. 5.5% budgeted C Projected to exceed budget due to additional SB 395 Prisoner Housing funds in Adult Jail D TDS Baja deferred billing credits per ORS 305.286 in addition to settlement payment E Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances F Variances in most Divisions are from projections based on YTD personnel and positions that are unfilled or over -filled G Variance due to over hiring for open and soon -to -be open positions; up to 18-months of lead time is necessary for background and training. Though temporary, the forecast assumes the trend continues for the remainder of the year. �1�S` �{ Budget to Actuals Report y0� �G Health Services - Fund 274 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance State Grant 13,262,344 13,053,849 98% 14,080,644 6,520,991 46% 12,566,921 89% (1,513,723); OHP Capitation 8,652,200 8,142,094 94% 7,242,430 3,856,666 53% 7,713,331 107% 470,901 Title 19 1,345,100 3,069,162 228% 4,862,726 1,736,794 36% 4,020,412 83% (842,314) Federal Grants i 990,189 1,311,567 132% 3,277,616 589,010 18% 3,306,919 101% 29,303! Environmental Health Fees 1,169,600 1,076,036 92% 1,058,206 768,284 73% 1,173,000 111% 114,794! State Miscellaneous i 899,734 1,808,299 201% 1,040,153 53,334 5% 1,345,160 129% 305,007! State - OMAP 11147,168 1,108,622 97% � 991,900 376,954 38% � � 742,488 75% � (249,412)� Local Grants 1,208,623 1,025,508 85% 985,900 879,800 89% 1,234,941 125% 249,041 Patient Fees 236,500 637,910 270% 564,750 335,354 59% 672,876 119% 108,126 Other 422,593 477,834 113% 432,015 290,566 67% ! 483,577 112% 51,562, Vital Records 212,000 241,727 114% 220,000 123,523 56% 237,296 108% 17,296 Divorce Filing Fees 157,603 157,603 100% 173,030 173,030 100% 173,030 100% Interest on Investments 135,000 i 218,767 162% 171,000 131,130 77% 219,876 129% 48,876 Liquor Revenue 151,000 166,372 110% 150,800 58,841 39% 99,504 66% (51,296) Interfund Contract- Gen Fund 127,000 127,000 100% 127,000 57,860 46% 127,000 100% State Shared- Family Planning - 168,007 120,000 97,206 81% 194,413 162% 74,413 CCBHC Grant i 5,327,800 4,805,382 90% TOTAL RESOURCES 35,444,454 37,595,739 106% ; 35,498,170 16,049,344 45% 34,310,744 97% (1,187,426); REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % n Variance Administration Allocation - - Personnel Services 31,702,065 29,780,257 94% 33,071,492 15,830,206 48% t� 32,061,892 97% 1,009,600 t i Materials and Services 13,033,299 12,455,1U2 96 ° IJ,bb7,979 i,99s,682 29 ° 10,346,351 76% 3,321,628; Capital Outlay 239,000 206,031 86% 695,000 - 0% 695,000 100% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 44,974,364 42,441,390 94% ; 47,434,471 19,823,888 42% ; 43,103,243 91% 4,331,228: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfers In- General Fund 6,366,223 6,367,892 100% 5,747,090 2,873,536 50% 5,747,090 100% Transfers In- OHP Mental Health 548,601 0% 548,601 100% ' Transfers Out (188,688) (188,688) 100% (193,326) (96,662) 50% (193,326) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS 6,177,535 6,179,204 100% ; 6,102,365 2,776,874 46% ; 6,102,365 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 7,202,714 9,304,552 129% = 10,120,803 10,638,105 105% 10,638,105 105% 517,302 Resources over Requirements (9,529,910) (4,845,651) (11,936,301) (3,774,544) (8,792,499) 3,143,802! Net Transfers - In (Out) 6,177,535 6,179,204 6,102,365 2,776,874 6,102,365 0� � � tE � TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 3,850,339 $ 10,638,105 276% $ 4,286,867 $ 9,640,436 225% $ 7,947,971 185% , $3,661,104 co ,< Budget to Actuals Report Health Services - Admin - Fund 274 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 1 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Federal Grants 108,940 303,065 278% 726,655 202,057 28% 693,202 95% (33,453)� A Interest on Investments 135,000 218,767 162% 171,000 131,130 77% 219,876 129% 48,876! B Other 9,000 16,192 180% 9,000 7,233 80% 12,132 135% 3,132! CCBHC Grant 946,400 876,190 93% - - TOTAL RESOURCES 1,199,340 1,414,215 118% ; 906,655 340,421 38% ; 925,210 102% ; 18,555: REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Personnel Services 5,067,132 4,946,052 98% 5,241,265 2,463,923 47% 5,082,098 97% 159,167� C Materials and Services 4,600,091 4,688,516 102% 4,971,179 2,324,904 47% 4,666,184 94% 304,995� Capital Outlay 5,000 - 0% 5,000 - 0% 5,000 100% Administration Allocation (8,327,487) (8,295,196) 100% (9,308,295) (4,653,000) 50% (9,289,585) 100% (18,710), TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 1,344,736 1,339,372 100% ; 909,149 135,827 15% 463,697 51% 445,452; TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $`variance Transfers In- General Fund 40,000 19,996 50% 40,000 100% Transfers Out (188,688) (188,688) 100% (193,326) (96,662) 50% (193,326) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS (188,688) (188,688) 100% ; (153,326) (76,666) 50% ; ; (153,326) 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 2,642,514 2,862,108 108% 2,660,832 2,748,263 103% 2,748,263 103% 87,431, Resources over Requirements (145,396) 74,843 (2,494) 204,594 461,513 464,007 Net Transfers - In (Out) ' (188,688) (188,688) k (153,326) (76,666) ! E (153,326) 0 TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 2,308,430 $ 2,748,263 119% $ 2,505,012 $ 2,876,191 115% $ 3,056,450 122% : $551,438 A CCBHC Expansion was originally budgeted in the "CCBHC funding line; however, the grant through the US Department of Health and Human Services is a traditional grant and more appropriately placed in the "Federal Grants' line. A revised budget corrects this amount. Any continuation of CCBHC through the state will come through as a "CCBHC Grant' line item B Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances C Projected Personnel savings based on YTD Personnel expenditures o� �1 E S`�{ Budget to Actuals Report Health Services - Behavioral Health - Fund 274 50.0% FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 1 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance State Grant 10,187,361 9,796,391 96% 11,203,914 5,127,358 46% 9,314,201 83% (1,889,713): A OHP Capitation 8,652,200 8,142,094 94% 7,242,430 3,856,666 53% 7,713,331 107% 470,901! Title 19 1,345,100 3,069,162 228% 4,862,726 1,736,794 36% 4,020,412 83% (842,314)! B Federal Grants 499,249 639,680 128% 2,168,961 358,736 17% 2,175,930 100% 6,969! C Patient Fees 236,500 515,196 218% 443,450 258,879 58% 519,926 117% 76,476: D State Miscellaneous 351,200 995,622 283% 437,100 - 0% 708,712 162% 271,612! E Local Grants 412,987 424,012 103% 412,900 70,287 17% 421,076 102% 8,176! Other 334,545 346,812 104% 342,655 184,893 54% 365,119 107% 22,464! Divorce Filing Fees 157,603 157,603 100% 173,030 173,030 100% 173,030 100% Liquor Revenue 151,000 166,372 110% 150,800 58,841 39% 99,504 66% (51,296)! State - OMAP 131,900 270,591 205% 131,900 105,158 80% 210,316 159% 78,416 Interfund Contract- Gen Fund 127,000 127,000 100% 127,000 57,860 46% 127,000 100% CCBHC Grant 4,381,400 3,929,191 90% TOTAL RESOURCES 26,968,045 28,579,727 106% ; 27,696,866 11,988,501 43% ; , 25,848,557 93% (1,848,309); REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Administration Allocation 6,253,121 6,248,556 100% 6,978,412 3,488,460 50% _ 6,978,412 100% Personnel Services 19,172,838 17,819,840 93% 20,059,465 9,733,991 49% 19,319,242 96% 740,223! F Materials and Services 6,509,514 5,549,421 85% 6,849,904 1,030,541 15% 4,108,416 60% 2,741,488! G Capital Outlay 234,000 199,979 85% 690,000 0% 690,000 100% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 32,169,473 29,817,796 93% 34,577,781 14,252,992 41% 31,096,070 90% 3,481,711: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % projection % $ Variance Transfers In- General Fund 2,282,708 2,282,580 100% 1,734,107 867,043 50% 1,734,107 100% Transfers In- OHP Mental Health 548,601 0% 548,601 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS 2,282,708 2,282,580 100% ; 2,282,708 867,043 38% ; , 2,282,708 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 3,976,398 5,628,746 142% 6,122,347 6,673,256 109% _ 6,673,256 109% 550,909- Resources over Requirements (5,201,428) (1,238,069) (6,880,915) (2,264,491) (5,247,513) 1,633,402! Net Transfers - In (Out) 2,282,708 2,282,580 2,282,708 867,043 2,282,708 0 TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 1,057,678 $ 6,673,256 631% $ 1,524,140 $ 5,275,809 346% $ 3,708,451 243% $2,184,311: A Budgeted funds was a pass -through from the Behavioral Health State IGA for residential treatment provides, which will be paid directly during an 18 -month contract. B There is less in Title 19 fees collected relative to budgeted expectations. C CCBHC Expansion was originally budgeted in the "CCBHC' funding line; however, the grant through the US Department of Health and Human Services is a traditional grant and more appropriately placed in the "Federal Grants" line. A revised budget corrects this amount. Any continuation of CCBHC through the state will come through as a "CCBHC Grant" line item. D There is an uptick in patient insurance fees collected relative to budgeted expectations. E Increased to be reflective of awarded Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities state base rate and FY20 estimate of state match amounts F Projected Personnel savings based on YTD Personnel expenditures G Reduction in Contracted Services related to footnote A COBudget to Actuals Report yL� l G Health Services - Public Health - Fund 274 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 1 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance State Grant 3,074,983 3,257,457 106% 2,876,730 1,393,633 48% 3,252,720 113% 375,990� A Environmental Health Fees 1,169,600 1,076,036 92% 1,058,206 768,284 73% 1,173,000 111% 114,794! B State - OMAP € 1,015,268 838,031 83% 860,000 271,796 32% 532,172 62% (327,828)t State Miscellaneous € 548,534 812,677 148% 603,053 53,334 9% 636,448 106% 33,395, C Local Grants € 795,636 601,497 76% 573,000 809,514 141% 813,865 142% 240,865! D Federal Grants 382,000 368,821 97% 382,000 28,217 7% 437,787 115% 55,787! Vital Records € 212,000 241,727 114% 220,000 123,523 56% 237,296 108% 17,296! Patient Fees € 122,714 121,300 76,475 63% 152,950 126% 31,650! State Shared- Family Planning - 168,007 120,000 97,206 81% 194,413 162% 74,413! Other 79,048 114,830 145% 80,360 98,440 122% < 106,326 132% 25,966 TOTAL RESOURCES 7,277,069 7,601,797 104% ; 6,894,649 3,720,421 54% 7,536,977 109% ; 642,328: REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Administration Allocation 2,074,366 2,046,640 99% 2,329,883 1,164,540 50% 2,311,173 99% 18,710; Personnel Services 7,462,095 7,014,365 94% 7,770,762 3,632,292 47% 7,660,552 99% 110,210, E Materials and Services € 1,923,694 2,217,165 115% 1,846,896 638,236 35% 1,571,751 85% 275,145 Capital Outlay 6,051 999% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS ; 11,460,155 11,284,222 98% 11,947,541 5,435,069 45% 11,543,476 97% 404,065: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % projection % $ Variance Transfers In- General Fund 4,083,515 4,085,312 100% 3,972,983 1,986,497 50% 3,972,983 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS 4,083,515 4,085,312 100% ; 3,972,983 1,986,497 50% 3,972,983 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 583,802 813,698 139% 1,337,624 1,216,586 91% 1,216,586 91% (121,038); Resources over Requirements (4,183,086) (3,682,425) (5,052,892) (1,714,647) (4,006,499) 11046,393• Net Transfers - In (Out) 4,083,515 4,085,312 3,972,983 1,986,497 3,972,983 01 TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 484,231 $ 1,216,586 251% ; $ 257,715 $ 1,488,435 578% $ 1,183,070 459% ; $925,355, A Public Health State IGA increased funds for Regional and Local Public Health Modernization B Fees were budgeted at an increase of 3%, but were adopted at an 8.5% rate increase C Payments are reimbursed on a quarterly basis, and include the Medicaid Administrative Claims payment for which is currently outstanding D Funds include the Diabetes Prevention Program, which was awarded for the calendar year 2020 E Projected Personnel savings based on YTD Personnel expenditures Budget to Actuals Report Community Development - Fund 295 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 1 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Admin - Operations 114,500 152,827 133% , 162,000 70,014 43% 146,900 91% (15,100)' A Code Enforcement 664,291 635,453 96% 693,960 329,177 47% 693,960 100% Building Safety 3,312,714 3,075,409 93% 3,433,780 1,574,611 46% 3,358,950 98% (74,830); B Electrical 804,849 738,580 92% 809,500 379,106 47% 808,000 100% (1,500)� B Environmental On -Site 782,984 819,608 105% 877,400 433,361 49% 877,400 100% Current Planning 1,795,453 1,701,840 95% 1,807,176 817,999 45% 1,713,776 95% (93,400); C Long Range Planning k 678,955 632,170 93% 685,004 325,494 48% 685,004 100% TOTAL RESOURCES 8,153,746 7,755,886 95% ; 8,468,820 3,929,761 46% 8,283,990 98% (184,830); REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Admin - Operations 2,477,738 2,386,276 96% 2,492,316 1,250,262 50% 2,466,583 99% 25,733; D Code Enforcement k 456,162 445,254 98% 535,590 227,187 42% 489,151 91% 46,439� D Building Safety 1,676,037 1,565,140 93% 1,743,298 788,759 45% 1,635,432 94% 107,867! E Electrical 445,433 439,104 99% 462,183 224,949 49% 448,185 97% 13,998! E Environmental On -Site k 612,596 547,203 89% 616,279 277,370 45% 580,872 94% 35,407, E Current Planning 1,554,847 1,456,128 94% 1,501,588 720,406 48% 1,469,588 98% 32,000! Long Range Planning 503,344 492,687 98% 554,385 246,002 44% 556,285 100% (1,900) F TOTAL REQUIREMENTS ; 7,726,157 7,331,793 95% 7,905,639 3,734,935 47% 7,646,095 97% ; 259,544: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfers In - General Fund 300,000 289,193 96% 100,000 50,000 50% 100,000 100% Transfers Out (79,945) (79,945) 100% (85,695) (42,844) 50% (85,695) 100% Transfers Out - CDD Reserve (1,372,679) (1,379,420) 100% (1,462,386) (731,188) 50% (1,462,386) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS (1,152,624) (1,170,172) 102% ; (1,448,081) (724,032) 50% (1,448,081) 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 2,203,711 2,529,615 115% 1,982,004 1,783,536 90% 1,783,536 90% (198,468): Resources over Requirements 427,589 424,093 563,181 194,826 4 637,895 74,714 Net Transfers - In (Out) k (1,152,624) (1,170,172) f (1,448,081) (724,032) k k (1,448,081) 01 E i TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 1,478,676 $ 1,783,536 121% $ 1,097,104 $ 1,254,330 114% 7 $ 973,350 89% ($123,754)" Note: Requirements projection decreased across divisions to reflect credits from the PERS Reserve Fund A Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances B Projection decreased due to lower than expected volume C Change in accounting procedure for hearings officer deposits, which are held as a liability instead of recognized as revenue. Projection decreased due to lower than expected volume. D Overall, projection decreased due to year to date unfilled positions and increased to include unbudgeted health benefits trust E Overall, projection decreased due to year to date unfilled positions F Projection increased due to time management leave payout `o Budget to Actuals Report Road - Fund 325 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Motor Vehicle Revenue 16,234,849 16,726,428 103% 17,609,539 8,724,978 50% 17,609,539 100% Federal - PILT Payment 1,900,000 2,153,308 113% 1,510,450 2,310,002 153% 2,310,002 153% 799,552! A Other Inter -fund Services 1,044,353 1,096,023 105% 1,156,581 72,124 6% 1,156,581 100% Forest Receipts 963,410 801,125 83% 915,000 - 0% 915,000 100% Cities-Bend/Red/Sis/La Pine 635,000 400,849 63% 660,000 117,550 18% 404,553 61% (255,447)! B Sale of Equip & Material 365,000 327,920 90% 358,000 48,047 13% 357,535 100% (465)! C Interest on Investments 150,000 220,062 147% 246,000 103,077 42% 208,000 85% (381000)! D Federal Reimbursements 544,000 363,910 67% 181,757 363,514 200% < 363,514 200% 181,757! E Mineral Lease Royalties 175,000 69,422 40% 60,000 1,674 3% ! 60,000 100% Miscellaneous 45,000 118,699 264% 57,500 45,499 79% 74,500 130% 17,000! F State Miscellaneous 739,811 735,114 99% ! 20,000 34,325 172% ! 34,325 172% 14,325, G Assessment Payments (P&I) ! 80,000 22,350 28% 11,000 5,456 50% ! 11,000 100%, TOTAL RESOURCES 22,876,423 23,035,209 101% ; 22,785,827 11,826,246 52% 23,504,549 103% ; 718,722: REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Personnel Services 6,595,561 6,246,351 95% 6,447,671 3,143,697 49% 6,259,371 97% 188,300; H Materials and Services 8,094,192 5,912,553 73% 8,094,165 3,033,837 37% ! 7,579,196 94% 514,969' 1 Capital Outlay ! 31,500 7,000 22% ! t 31,500 100% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 14,689,753 12,158,904 83% ; 14,573,336 6,184,534 42% 13,870,067 95% 703,269: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfers Out (14,464,308) (14,464,308) 100% (11,910,575) (1,313,601) 11% (11,910,575) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS ; (14,464,308) (14,464,308) 100% ; (11,910,575) (1,313,601) 11% ; (11,910,575) 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 8,693,653 10,314,842 119% 6,001,989 6,726,840 112% 6,726,840 112% 724,851, Resources over Requirements 8,186,670 10,876,306 ! 8,212,491 5,641,712 9,634,482 1,421,991! Net Transfers - In (Out) ! E (14,464,308) (14,464,308) ! k (11,910,575) (1,313,601) { { (11,910,575) 1 0. f TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 2,416,014 $ 6,726,840 278% $ 2,303,905 $ 11,054,951 480% 7 $ 4,450,747 193% $2,146,842 A PILT payment received in July. Exceeded amounts as budgeted due to a decrease in Timber revenue B Contracted work for City of Redmond will be completed in FY 21 instead of FY 20 C Anticipated decrease in sale of signs D Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances E A two-year federal project was completed in one year, so full amount of reimbursement was requested in year one. F Restitution receipts are higher than anticipated G Updated based on actual receipts H Projected Personnel savings based on FY19 and YTD average vacancy rate of 3.1 % I Contracted road services and on -call engineering anticipated to be less than budgeted due to lack of snow and emergency work. Aggregate & Asphalt anticipated to be less than budgeted due to City of Redmond work being pushed to FY 21. Budget to Actuals Report hC'� OG Adult P&P - Fund 355 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) RESOURCES DOC Grant in Aid SB 1145 CJC Justice Reinvestment DOC Measure 57 Probation Supervision Fees DOC-Family Sentence Alt Interest on Investments Interfund- Sheriff Gen Fund/Crime Prevention State Subsidy Probation Work Crew Fees Electronic Monitoring Fee Miscellaneous Oregon BOPPPS State Miscellaneous TOTALRESOURCES REQUIREMENTS Personnel Services Materials and Services Capital Outlay 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 4,781,604 i 4,781,604 100%, 4,353,626 2,310,891 53% 4,621,782 106% 268,156, A 844,831 853,831 101% � 712,530 - 0% � � 774,281 109% � 61,751, A 233,900 233,900 100% 236,142 239,005 101% 239,005 101% 2,863! A 210,000 191,536 91% 160,000 90,255 56% 180,000 113% 20,000! B 114,683 114,683 100% 114,682 223,746 195% 230,000 201% ! 115,318! C 40,000 77,778 194% 77,500 33,540 43% 70,000 90% (7,500)' D 50,000 51,034 102% 50,000 27,500 55% 50,000 100% 50,000 50,000 100% 50,000 12,500 25% 50,000 100% 17,000 16,337 96% 16,298 8,352 51% 16,298 100% 4,000 2,800 70% t 2,000 1,240 62% 2,000 100% 10,000 84,165 842% 2,000 13,606 680% 18,000 900% 16,000, E 500 6,102 999% 500 6,252 999% 8,000 999% 7,500! F - 16,653 40,934 40,934 G 4,300 0% ------------------- 6,360,818 6,463,769 102% ; 5,775,278 2,983,539 52% ; 6,300,300 109% ; 525,021 Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % 4,656,363 4,522,266 97% 4,809,644 2,355,684 49% 1,828,765 1,686,408 92% 1,764,847 771,179 44% 20,000 - 0% 15,000 0% Projection % $ Variance 4,717,624 98% 92,020 H 1,769,000 100% (4,153), I 15,000 100% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 6,505,128 6,208,673 95% ; 6,589,491 3,126,863 47% 6,501,624 99% ; 87,867: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfers In- General Funds 285,189 285,189 100% 285,189 142,590 50% 285,189 100% Transfer to Vehicle Maint (120,000) (120,000) 100% (62,000) (31,000) 50% (62,000) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS 165,189 165,189 100% ; 223,189 111,590 50% 223,189 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 2,200,000 2,333,720 106% 2,590,000 2,754,005 106% 2,754,005 106% 164,00S Resources over Requirements (144,310) 255,096 (814,213) (143,324) (201,324) 612,889! Net Transfers - In (Out) � 165,189 165,189 G 223,189 111,590 3 p( 223,189 f 0 E TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 2,220,879 $ 2,754,005 124% $ 1,998,976 $ 2,722,271 136% $ 2,775,870 139% $776,894, A State Dept. of Corrections and Criminal Justice Commission received more funding for dispersal than anticipated at time of budgeting B Projection based on YTD actuals C State Dept. of Corrections under allocated resources at the time of budgeting D Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances E Revenue from prior pretrial EM clients more than anticipated at time of budgeting due to account close-out offer in June -Aug 2019 and Dept. Revenue fees from closed/previous accounts. F Revenue includes miscellaneous refunds, staff uniform overage fees and payment from participants attending a Nov 2019 training event hosted by Adult P&P G State makes one payment per biennium to conduct hearings for sanctioned offenders. Will receive both FY19 and FY21 biennial payments in FY20. H Projected Personnel savings based on FY19 and YTD average vacancy rate of 3.2% less anticipated retirement vacation payouts I Projection based on YTD actuals. Higher than anticipated pass -through grant contributions (JRI) I ES C, Budget to Actuals Report Road CIP - Fund 465 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 1 Fiscal Year 2020 1 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance State Miscellaneous 853,104 - 0% 1,944,893 1,058,217 54% 2,456,362 126% 511,469: A Interest on Investments E 106,000 261,131 246% 198,000 184,225 93% 260,000 131% 62,000! B Interfund Payment - - - 111,560 111,560 111,560! C TOTAL RESOURCES 959,104 261,131 27% 2,142,893 1,354,003 63% 2,827,922 132% 685,029: REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Materials and Services 73,153 73,153 100% 71,748 35,874 50% 71,748 100% Capital Outlay E 8,236,348 5,411,213 66% 13,764,165 2,182,894 16% 13,375,595 97% 388,570, D TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 8,309,501 5,484,366 66% 13,835,913 2,218,768 16% 13,447,343 97% 388,570: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfers In 13,811,725 13,393,963 97% 12,014,914 0% 11,805,052 98% (209,862)�E TOTAL TRANSFERS 13,811,725 13,393,963 97% 12,014,914 0% 11,805,052 98% (209,862); FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 7,687,037 9,588,827 125% 15,616,536 17,759,555 114% 17,759,555 114% 2,143,019: Resources over Requirements (7,350,397) (5,223,236) (11,693,020) (864,765) (10,619,421) 1,073,599! Net Transfers - In (Out) 13,811,725 13,393,963 12,014,914 11,805,052 (209,862), TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 14,148,365 $ 17,759,555 126%: $ 15,938,430 $ 16,894,789 106% 7$ —18,945,186 119% $3,006,7-56: A Updated based on reimbursable projects planned to be completed this fiscal year B Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances C Unbudgeted revenue to offset expenses for Spring River Road Improvements D Variance due to unanticipated project delays projected to advance FY 20 budgeted CIP project costs into FY 21 E Revised estimate based on SDC eligible projects anticipated to be completed in fiscal year a Budget to Actuals Report Road CIP (Fund 465) - Capital Outlay Summary by Project 50.0% FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) Year Completed Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $Variance Burgess Road / Day Road Inter. 900,106 658,203 73% 1 - - Deschutes Market / Dale Road Inter. 1,500,000 1,285,822 86% Erickson Road Paving - 468,544 - Old Bend Redmond Highway Phase II - 3rd Street Drainage Extension 300,000 112,655 38% - US 20 at Tumalo 300,000 1,100,000 367%1 300,000 - 0% € - 0% € 300,0 Paving Knott Rd 850,286 495,978 58% S. Canal / Helmholtz Way 714,937 141,751 20% € 800,000 22,334 3% € 842,226 105%1 (42,22 S. Canal - "Six" Corners 798,699 537,724 67% ° 900,000 932,938 104%1 1,007,432 112%? (107,43 Six Corners Irrigation - Tumalo Road /Tumalo Place 406,879 49,123 12% ` 769,521 22,566 3% € 759,788 99% € 9,7; Quail Road Improvements 100,000 100,000 100%- La Pine Guardrail Repair 40,099 C Avenue: Hwy 97 to 6th St Impry 180,746 35,351 20% 1 300,000 369,705 123%= _ 369,705 123%1 (69,70 Solar Drive Bridge 160,000 70,334 44% Old Bend Rdm/Tumalo Rd Inter 346,426 50,355 15% 625,642 27,284 4% 1 682,150 109%1 (56,50 Sisemore Bridge 220,000 100,596 46% 1 632,174 68,349 11% € 801,109 127% (168,93 Spring River Bridge Parking Imp - 163,776 - 12,122 - _ 12,122 (12,12 NE Negus and 17TH 360,000 221 0% 1,025,472 0% 1 180,000 18% € 845,4' Paving Ward Road 339,810 681 0% I 598,269 715,504 120%i 715,504 120%i (117,23 Hunnel Rd: Loco Rd to Tumalo Rd - 275,000 236 0% 1 100,000 36% 1 175,01 Cascade Lakes Hwy Bike Facilities 39,856 11,856 30% 39,856 100%1 Fyrear Rd US 20 to Stevens - - 300,000 0% 1 300,000 100%1 Alfalfa Mkt Rd: Powell Butte Hwy 300,000 0% € 450,000 150% (150,00 Bend District Local Roads 558,459 - 0% 1 - - City of LaPine Local Roads - 500,000 0% 1 500,000 100%1 US 97 Bend North Corridor 5,000,000 - 0% _ 5,000,000 100% I Tumalo Res Rd: OB Riley to Bailey Rd - - 247,342 0% 1 0% 24713, US 20 Ward Rd to Hamby - 500,000 0% 500,000 100% Transportation System Plan Update 250,000 - 0% 80,000 32% 170,01 Gribbling Rd Bridge 60,000 - 0% 60,000 100%1 Slurry Seal 2020 - - _ 150,000 (150,00 Paving of S. Century Dr - - 484,813 (484,81 Sisemore Rd Canal Piping Signage Improvements 100,000 - 0% € 60,144 0% 60,144 100% Guardrail Improvements 100,000 0% 100,000 0% - 100,000 low ARTS Project I - 1 180,746 0% 1 1 180,746 100%1 TOTAL CAPITAL OUTLAY $ 8,236,348 $ 5,411,213 66%1 $ 13,764,165 $ 2,182,894 16W € $ 13,375,595 97%1 $ 388,5' Budget to Actuals Report Solid Waste - Fund 610 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 1 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Franchise Disposal Fees 6,497,676 6,356,636 98% 6,437,500 3,344,905 52% 6,437,500 100% Private Disposal Fees 2,709,370 2,379,061 88% 2,419,046 1,245,262 51% 2,419,046 100% Commercial Disp. Fee 2,042,050 2,060,523 101% 2,252,225 1,301,341 58% 2,252,225 100% Franchise 3% Fees 265,000 291,340 110% 265,000 28,760 11% 265,000 100% A Yard Debris 216,761 268,830 124% 216,761 164,018 76% 216,761 100%, B Interest 44,000 58,235 132% 59,000 21,536 37% 50,000 85% (9,000), C Miscellaneous 49,955 57,067 114% 48,336 135,775 281% 156,428 324% 108,092! D Special Waste 15,000 21,487 143% 15,000 12,243 82% 15,000 100% Recyclables 18,000 11,063 61% 12,000 6,880 57% 12,000 100% Leases 10,801 1 0% 1 - 0% 1 100% TOTAL RESOURCES 11,868,613 11,504,244 97% 11,724,869 6,260,718 53% ; ; 11,823,961 101% ; 99,092, REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ `variance Personnel Services 2,504,623 2,331,135 93% 2,538,776 1,189,409 47% 2,387,617 94% 151,159; E Materials and Services 4,772,159 4,341,881 91% 4,927,163 1,712,236 35% 4,927,163 100% ! -1 F Capital Outlay 173,000 109,681 63% 56,000 11,724 21% 56,000 100%! G Debt Service 860,938 860,937 100% 862,100 309,595 36% 862,100 100% H TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 8,310,720 7,643,635 92% ; 8,384,039 3,222,963 38% 8,232,880 98% 151,159: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance SW Capital & Equipment (4,688,023) (5,000,029) 107% ; (3,296,192) (1,616,182) 49% (3,296,192) 100% Reserve TOTAL TRANSFERS (4,688,023) (5,000,029) 107% ; (3,296,192) (1,616,182) 49% ; (3,296,192) 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $Variance Beginning Fund Balance 1,730,130 1,938,991 112% 600,000 799,570 133% 799,570 133% 199,570; Resources over Requirements 3,557,893 3,860,608 3,340,830 3,037,755 3,591,081 250,251 Net Transfers - In (Out) t (4,688,023) (5,000,029) E (3,296,192) (1,616,182) �i (3,296,192) � 0 E TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 600,000 $ 799,570 133% $ 644,638 $ 2,221,143 345% 7 $ 1,094,459 170% : $449,821: A Fees due April 15, 2020 B Revenue is seasonal with higher utilization in the summer months C Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances D Includes an unbudgeted sale of loader 7-279 for $95K, CEC LED light incentive and Taylor NW royalty payments E Projected Personnel savings based on FY19 and YTD average vacancy rate of 4.8% F Expecting to reach budget with a waste characterization study, seasonal items such as mulching from the Fire Free events, bird control, etc. G FY19 extended the life of an existing vehicle and did not purchase a second pick-up; FY20 purchased the budgeted gas monitoring equipment H Principal and interest payments due in Nov and May Budget to Actuals Report Fair & Expo - Fund 615 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) RESOURCES Events Revenue Food & Beverage Rights & Signage Storage Horse Stall Rental Interfund Payment Camping Fee Miscellaneous Interest TOTALRESOURCES REQUIREMENTS Personnel Services Personnel Services - F&B Materials and Services Materials and Services - F&B Debt Service TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 655,000 615,300 94% 687,000 234,256 34% 594,150 86% (92,850): A 540,000 629,875 117% 568,000 144,719 25% 531,600 94% (36,400)! B 105,000 115,650 110% 120,000 24,600 21% 110,900 92% (9,100)! 83,100 76,735 92% 71,000 32,810 46% 74,700 105% 3,700! 57,000 71,855 126% 62,000 36,296 59% 61,200 99% (800) 30,000 54,573 182% 30,000 15,000 50% 30,000 100% C i 18,200 199975 110% 18,000 3,350 19% 15,500 86% (2,500)' 8,400 6,374 76% 3,500 2,236 64% 4,000 114% 500 2,400 (518) -22% 2,000 (1,692) -85% (2,000) -100%i (4,000) 1,499,100 1,589,820 106% ; 1,561,500 491,575 31% 1,420,050 91% ; (141,450); Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 1,248,512 1,259,337 101% 1,176,169 558,144 47% 1,121,869 95% 54,300: D 149,296 149,947 100% 157,430 76,073 48% 150,030 95% 7,400! E t 967,441 912,724 94% 795,788 448,860 56% 929,688 117% (133,900)! F 222,500 365,951 164% 234,600 125,448 53% 343,000 146% < (108,400)! B 101,136 101,136 100% 100,800 55,290 55% 100,800 100% 2,688,885 2,789,095 104% ; 2,464,787 1,263,815 51% 2,645,387 107% ; (180,600); TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget. Actuals % Transfers In - Room Tax 517,996 517,996 100% < t 409,654 204,824 50% i Transfers In - County Fair 472,998 417,000 88% 395,000 250,000 63% Transfers In - General Fund 200,000 200,000 100% 200,000 99,996 50% Transfers In - Park Fund 30,000 30,000 100% 30,000 15,000 50% Transfers Out - - (11,791) (5,894) 50% TOTAL TRANSFERS 1,220,994 1,164,996 95% 1,022,863 563,926 55% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Beginning Fund Balance (60,285) 999% 80,000 (94,564) -118%; Resources over Requirements (1,189,785) (1,199,275) (903,287) (772,240) Net Transfers - In (Out) i 1,220,994 1,164,996 t 1,022,863 563,926 t TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 31,209 ($ 94,564) -303% $ 199,576 ($ 302,878) -152% , Projection % $ Variance 409,654 100% 25U,000 W% i (145,000); U t t 200,000 100% t 30,000 100%, t t (11,791) 100% 877,863 86% ; (145,000); Projection % $ Variance (94,564) -118%, (174,564); H (1,225,337) (322,050)� 877,863 (145,000); t i E 17- ($ 442,038) -221%; ($641,614): A Current year receipts are 34% of budget YTD; prior year receipts were 37% of budget at this point last year. Revenue projections down due to loss of/postponement of Endurocross and other events. B Net earnings from F&B activities YTD are $(56,802). Monthly fixed costs have a greater impact on earnings during off-season months. C Reimbursement from RV Park for personnel expenditures recorded in F&E. D Projected Personnel savings based on FY19 and YTD average vacancy rate of 3.8% E Net earnings from F&B activities YTD are $(56,802). Monthly fixed costs have a greater impact on earnings during off-season months. Projected Personnel savings based on FY19 and YTD average vacancy rate of 3.8% F Projected increase primarily driven by Utilities, R&M and Advertising G Net proceeds from the County Fair are recorded in a separate fund and transferred in at year-end (Final estimate of $250k) H Prior year losses, relative to budget, are compounded into the beginning working capital to start the fiscal year. FINANCE ES c GZ� Budget to Actuals Report O RV Park - Fund 618 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance RV Park Fees < 31 Days 340,200 458,331 135% 405,200 281,752 70% 463,372 114% 58,172; A Interest on Investments 4,400 12,255 279% 12,000 6,641 55% 13,500 113% 1,500; B RV Park Fees > 30 Days 5,000 11,600 232% 5,000 7,250 145% 13,450 269% 8,450 Cancellation Fees 4,000 12,497 312% 5,000 4,326 87% 5,626 113% 626 Washer / Dryer 3,500 4,650 133% 4,000 3,936 98% 5,063 127% 1,063 Vending Machines 1,500 1,716 114% 3,000 1,596 53% 2,073 69% (927) Miscellaneous 2,231 2,000 1,636 82% 2,356 118% 356! Good Sam Membership Fee 2,561 1,500 351 23% 351 23% (1,149); C Good Sam Discounts - (17,220) 999% (7,109) 999% (7,109) 999% (7,109); C TOTAL RESOURCES 358,600 488,620 136% ; 437,700 300,379 69% 498,682 114% ; 60,982: REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Materials and Services 298,870 276,007 92% 318,273 158,478 50% 279,291 88% 38,98Z Debt Service 223,101 223,101 100% 222,100 161,528 73% 222,100 100% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS ; 521,971 499,108 96% 540,373 320,006 59% 501,391 93% 38,982; TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals %, Projection % $ Variance Transfers In - Park Fund 160,000 160,000 100% 160,000 160,000 100% 160,000 100% Transfers In - TRT Fund 35,000 17,500 50% t 35,000 100% Transfer Out - RV Reserve (502,000) (251,000) 50% (502,000) 100% 4 TOTAL TRANSFERS 160,000 160,000 100% ; (307,000) (73,500) 24% ; ; (307,000) 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 319,000 443,480 139% 560,000 592,992 106% 592,992 106% 32,992; Resources over Requirements (163,371) (10,488) (102,673) (19,627) (2,709) 99,964 Net Transfers - In (Out) 160,000 160,000 (307,000) (73,500) (307,000) 0! TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 315,629 $ 592,992 188% $ 150,327 $ 499,865 333% $ 283,283 188% $132,956, A 8,257 RV spaces, 42.34% utilization YTD. Prior year comparable was 7,762 RV spaces, 39.80% utilization YTD Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances C The Good Sam incentive program was discontinued during Fall 2019. �I ES`{ Budget to Actuals Report Risk Management - Fund 670 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 RESOURCES Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Workers' Compensation 1,247,279 1,273,816 102% 1,255,108 655,571 52% 1,255,108 100% General Liability 1,063,675 1,063,675 100% 1,072,326 527,743 49% 1,072,326 100% Property Damage 394,291 394,291 100% 392,923 197,961 50% 392,923 100% Unemployment 280,921 297,540 106% 323,572 283,039 87% 323,572 100% A Vehicle 195,250 195,250 100% 195,580 101,503 52% 195,580 100% Interest on Investments 85,000 148,890 175% 137,000 78,280 57% 161,000 118% 24,000: B Claims Reimbursement 269,198 57,073 21% 82,000 374,091 456% 380,000 463% 298,000, Skid Car Training 32,000 44,910 140% 34,000 19,350 57% 34,000 100% Process Fee- Events/ Parades 1,800 1,575 88% 2,000 540 27% 2,000 100% Miscellaneous 500 5 1% 500 5 1% 500 100% Loss Prevention 30 30 100%! 30 - 0% 30 100% TOTAL RESOURCES 3,569,944 3,477,056 97% 3,495,039 2,238,082 64% ; 3,817,039 109% ; 322,000; REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Workers' Compensation 1,360,000 1,013,256 75% 1,460,000 436,142 30% 1,460,000 100% General Liability 900,000 633,248 70% 1,400,000 201,927 14% 850,000 61% 550,000, C Insurance Administration 599,459 529,833 88% 592,059 237,902 40% 524,059 89% 68,000! D Property Damage 728,638 548,796 75% 400,236 648,590 162% 800,000 200% (399,764)f E Vehicle 120,000 100,150 83% 150,000 78,855 53% t 150,000 100% Unemployment 150,000 37,481 25% 130,000 8,774 7% 90,000 69% 40,000, F TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 3,858,097 2,862,764 74% ; 4,132,295 1,612,189 39% ; 3,874,059 94% 258,236: TRANSFERS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Transfers Out - Vehicle Replace (3,168) (3,168) 100% (6,918) (3,458) 50% (6,918) 100% TOTAL TRANSFERS (3,168) (3,168) 100% ; (6,918) (3,458) 50% ; (6,918) 100% ; FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 5,600,000 6,582,283 118% 6,100,000 7,193,407 118% 7,193,407 118% 1,093,407 Resources over Requirements (288,153) 614,292 (637,256) 625,894 (57,020) 580,23& Net Transfers - In (Out) (3,168) (3,168) (6,918) (3,458) (6,918) 0! TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 5,308,679 $ 7,193,407 136% $ 5,455,826 $ 7,815,843 143% ; $ 7,129,469 131% $1,673,643; A Unemployment collected on first $25K of employee's salary in fiscal year B Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances C Claims are difficult to project, but General Liability claims are trending less than budget D Part of projected Personnel savings based on 1.00 vacant FTE in July and August, which has been transferred to Administrative Services E Majority of Fair/Expo roof replacement costs were expected in FY19, but significant portion incurred in FY20. F Fewer unemployment claims than anticipated. p �IEs`ry< Budget to Actuals Report yL� GG Health Benefits - Fund 675 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) RESOURCES Internal Premium Charges COIC Premiums Retiree / COBRA Premiums Employee Co -Pay Interest Prescription Rebates Claims Reimbursement & Other TOTAL RESOURCES REQUIREMENTS Health Benefits Deschutes On -Site Pharmacy Deschutes On -Site Clinic Wellness TOTAL REQUIREMENTS 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 17,054,563 18,051,440 106% 17,411,292 8,816,058 51% 17,632,117 101% 220,825: 1,834,000 1,794,789 98% 1,967,021 814,935 41% 1,620,000 82% (347,021)! A 1,280,000 i 1,144,088 89% 1,433,000 438,626 31% t 1,100,000 77% (333,000)" 963,000 1,016,748 106% � 1,041,120 492,054 47% � � 1,026,114 99% � (15,006): 220,000 366,207 166% 346,000 190,275 55% 397,000 115% 51,000 60,000 148,847 248% 75,000 88,890 119% 90,000 120% 15,000! - 177,557 45,000 750 2% 45,000 100% 21,411,563 22,699,675 106% ; 22,318,433 10,841,588 49% 21,910,231 98% (408,202); Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 19,559,777 17,493,075 89% 18,550,836 7,921,317 43% 19,127,836 103% (577,000); B 2,284,744 2,514,038 110% 2,242,104 1,207,819 54% 2,823,025 126% (580,921), B 1,114,864 1,045,588 94% 1,141,691 473,034 41% 1,141,691 100% B 184,870 158,384 86% 180,380 89,429 50% t 180,380 100% B 23,144,255 21,211,086 92% ; 22,115,011 9,691,600 44% 23,272,932 105% ; (1,157,921); FUND BALANCE Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Beginning Fund Balance 16,051,586 15,075,316 94% 16,106,294 16,563,905 103% 16,563,905 103% 457,611 Resources over Requirements (1,732,692) 1,488,590 203,422 1,149,988 � f (1,362,701) (1,566,123 ) Net Transfers - In (Out) 0' TOTAL FUND BALANCE � $ 14,318,894 $ 16,563,905 116% $ 16,309,716 $ 17,713,893 109% $ 15,201,204 93% ($1,108,511 A Prior year monthly average was $149K, whereas YTD monthly average is $135K; COIC rates reduced by 5% at start of fiscal year B Amounts are paid 1 month in arrears; projection compared to historical costs for reasonableness o� ES`�{ Budget to Actuals Report ,02 911 - Fund 705 FY20 YTD December 31, 2019 (unaudited) RESOURCES Property Taxes - Current Yr Telephone User Tax Police RMS User Fees Interest State Reimbursement Property Taxes - Prior Yr Data Network Reimbursement Contract Payments User Fee Property Taxes - Jefferson Co. Miscellaneous TOTAL RESOURCES 50.0% Year Complete Fiscal Year 2019 Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance 8,311,833 8,426,089 101% 8,809,419 8,235,375 93% 8,782,719 100% (26,700): A 890,000 955,187 107% 900,000 232,660 26% 900,000 100%! B 300,680 335,192 111% 250,000 69,679 28% 250,000 100% ! C 200,000 205,570 103% 157,000 91,665 58% 202,000 129% ! 45,000! D 125,000 162,900 130% 125,000 15,000 12% 125,000 100%! -! E 110,000 108,419 99% 100,000 222,142 222% _ 228,091 228% 128,091! F 50,000 106,592 213% 55,000 - 0% 55,000 100% 51,300 175 0% 51,300 2,083 4% 51,300 100%! C 180,000 141,980 79% 73,680 2,156 3% 73,680 100%! C 30,000 33,453 112% 30,000 31,962 107% r 31,962 107% 1 1,962 11,200 38,757 346% 11,951 7,696 64% 11,951 100% 10,260,013 10,514,313 102% ; 10,563,350 8,910,421 84% 10,711,703 101% ; 148,353, REQUIREMENTS Budget Actuals % Budget Actuals % Projection % $ Variance Personnel Services 7,646,307 6,743,116 88% 7,462,575 3,548,359 48% 6,967,953 93% 494,622, G Materials and Services 3,370,357 3,297,619 98% 3,387,761 1,693,751 50% 3,387,761 100% Capital Outlay 2,362,400 529,377 22% 1,400,000 93,288 7% 1,400,000 100% TOTAL REQUIREMENTS ; 13,379,064 10,570,113 79% 12,250,336 5,335,399 44% 11,755,714 96% ; 494,622: FUND BALANCE Budget. Actuals % Budget Actuals e ccn cee enn0i 7 7c4 7nr- a and Q4r 4440/ ; Beginning Fund Balance o,625,000 .1...1. 11 .VV.0 , . , - -v ... Resources over Requirements (3,119,051) (55,800) (1,686,986) 3,575,022 V Net Transfers - In (Out) , t 6 TOTAL FUND BALANCE $ 5,505,949 $ 8,604,816 156% $ 6,066,720 $ 12,179,838 201% A Actual 19-20 TAV is a 5.36% increase compared to FY 18-19 vs. 5.5% budgeted B Telephone maintenance reimbursements are received in a lump sum by early spring C Majority of billings sent at the end of March, revenue expected in early May D Interest projection based on current investment rate and anticipated cash balances E State GIS reimbursements are received quarterly F TDS Baja deferred billing credits per ORS 305.286 in addition to settlement payment G Projected Personnel savings based on FY19 and YTD average vacancy rate of 8.2% Projection % $ Variance 8,604,816 111% 851 109� (1,044,011) 642,975! i 01 $ 7,560,805 125% $1,494,085, COI E S CO o Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - https://www.deschutes.org/ AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT For Board of Commissioners BOCC Monday Meeting of January 27, 2020 DATE: January 21, 2020 FROM: Matthew Martin, Community Development, 541-330-4620 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Preparation for Public Hearing: City of Bend Plan Amendment to Allow Sewer at Outback Water Facility BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The City of Bend owns and operates a water treatment plant, water reservoirs, water wells and related facilities at 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend ("Outback Facility"). The Outback Facility is outside of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) of the City on unincorporated lands. Currently the sewage produced is stored on -site in a holding tank and periodically trucked off -site and rlicnncPrt of intn the City SPwPr SvGtPrn within the HGR _•-I----- -. ...-- -'- - - -J - - - - ---.,---'-'--- -..-.. _..- - --- The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) advised the City that the sewage holding tank is located too close to a drinking water well. Although the City obtained a waiver for its location, OHA strongly recommends that the City seek an alternative to the holding tank. The preferred option for disposal of the sewage is through a line connecting to the City's sewer system. An existing water line currently connects the Outback Facility to the City sewer system that is used to transport process water (not sewage) for disposal. This line could be used to transport both the process water and sewage produced from the existing on -site facilities. Oregon Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11 and Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660- 011-0060(2)(a) generally prohibit the establishment of new sewer systems outside UGB. However, OAR 660-04 provides a goal exception process that allows sewer to be established outside of a UGB or unincorporated community. The City of Bend submitted an application for a plan amendment with a goal exception to allow sewer outside UGB. A public hearing before the Hearings Officer was held on November 12, 2019 and the Hearings Officer issued a decision approving the proposed plan amendment December 10, 2019. Pursuant to Section 22.28.030(C) of the County Land Use Procedures Ordinance, plan amendments requiring an exception to the Oregon Statewide Land Use Goals shall be heard de novo before the Board. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: none. ATTENDANCE: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner MEMORANDUM TO: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners FROM: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner DATE: January 27, 2020 SUBJECT: Preparation for Public Hearing: Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to Allow a Sewer Line on Unincorporated Lands. (File No. 247-19-000628-PA). The Board of Commissioners ("Board") is conducting a work session on January 27, 2020, in preparation for a public hearing to consider a proposal by the City of Bend ("City") for a comprehensive plan amendment with an exception to Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow a sewer line on unincorporated lands. I. BACKGROUND The City owns and operates a water treatment plant, water reservoirs, water wells and related facilities at 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend ("Outback Facility"). The Outback Facility is outside of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) of the City on unincorporated lands. The site contains restrooms, drinking fountains, and floor drains. Currently the sewage produced is stored on -site in a holding tank and periodically trucked off -site and disposed of into the City sewer system within the UGB. The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) advised the City that the sewage holding tank is located too close to a drinking water well. Although the City obtained a waiver for its location, OHA strongly recommends that the City seek an alternative to the holding tank. The preferred option for disposal of the sewage is through a line connecting to the City's sewer system. An existing water line currently connects the Outback Facility to the City sewer system that is used to transport process water (not sewage) for disposal. This line could be used to transport both the process water and sewage produced from the existing on -site facilities. Oregon Statewide Land Use Planning Goal 11 and Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-011- 0060(2)(a)' generally prohibit the establishment of new sewer systems outside UGB. However, OAR 660-042 provides a goal exception process that allows sewer to be established outside of a UGB or unincorporated community. II. PROCDURAL HISTORY The application was submitted on August 13, 2019, and a public hearing before the Hearings Officer was held on November 12, 2019. No testimony citing concern or opposition has been submitted. On December 10, 2019, the Hearings Officer issued a decision approving the proposed plan amendment. Pursuant to Section 22.28.030(C) of the County Land Use Procedures Ordinance, plan amendments requiring an exception to the Oregon Statewide Land Use Goals shall be heard de novo before the Board without the necessity of filing an appeal, regardless of the determination of the Hearings Officer. III. NEXT STEPS The public hearing before the Board is scheduled on February 5, 2020. According to Deschutes County Code 22.20.040(D), the review of the proposed quasi-judicial Plan Amendment and Zone Change application is not subject to the 150-day review period. Attachments 2020-01-21 Draft Ordinance No. 2020-003 2020-01-15 Mailed Notice of Public Hearing 2019-12-10 Hearings Officer Decision 2019-11-12 Staff Hearing Presentation 2019-11-12 Hearing Sign -In Sheet 2019-11-12 Hearing Agenda 2019-11-06 Staff Report 2019-11-05 Freund (Deschutes Co. EH) Email 2 2019-11-05 Freund (Deschutes Co. EH) Email 2019-11-01 Land Use Action Sign Affidavit 2019-10-24 Mailed Notice of Public Hearing 2019-10-22 Affidavit of Publication Bend Bulletin 2019-10-08 Confirmation of PAPA submission 2019-08-13 Application Materials 1 Link to OAR 660-011: https://secure.sos state.or.us/oard/displayDivisionRules.action?selected Division=3061 Z Lint to OAR 660-04: https•//secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/displayDivisionRules.action?selectedDivision=3054 Page 2 of 2 REVIEWED LEGAL COUNSEL BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON An Ordinance Amending Deschutes County Code Title 23, the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, * ORDINANCE NO. 2020-003 to add an Exception to Statewide Planning Goal 11 (Public Facilities and Services) to allow a Sewer Line on Unincorporated Lands near the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary. WHEREAS, the City of Bend applied for an amendment (247-19-000628-PA) to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan to provide reasons for a Goal 11 Exception to allow a sewer line on unincorporated lands near the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB); and WHEREAS, after notice was given in accordance with applicable law, a public hearing was held on November 12, 2019, before the Deschutes County Hearings Officer and, on December 10, 2019, the Hearings Officer recommended approval of the comprehensive plan amendment; and WHEREAS, after notice was given in accordance with applicable law, a de novo public hearing was held on February 5, 2020, before the Board of County Commissioners ("Board"); and WHEREAS, the Board, after review conducted in accordance with applicable law, the plan amendment to allow a sewer line on unincorporated lands near City of Bend UGB; now, therefore, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS as follows: Section 1. AMENDMENT. DCC Section 23.01.010, Introduction, is amended to read as described in Exhibit "A" attached and incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined. Section 2. AMENDMENT. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Section 5.10, Goal Exception Statements, is amended to read as described in Exhibit "B" attached and incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined. Section 3. AMENDMENT. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12, Legislative History, is amended to read as described in Exhibit "C" attached and incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined. Section 4. FINDINGS. The Board adopts as its findings in support of this Ordinance, the Decision of the Hearings Officer as set forth in Exhibit "D", and incorporated by reference herein. PAGE 1 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO.2020-003 Dated this of , 2020 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON ATTEST: Recording Secretary Date of I" Reading: Date of 2' Reading: PATTI ADAIR, Chair ANTHONY DEBONE, Vice Chair PHILIP G. HENDERSON day of , 2020. day of 12020. Record of Adoption Vote: Commissioner Yes No Abstained Excused Patti Adair Anthony DeBone Philip G. Henderson Effective date: day of , 2020. PAGE 2 OF 2 - ORDINANCE NO.2020-003 Chapter 23.01 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Chapter 23.01 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 23.01.010. Introduction. A. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2011-003 and found on the Deschutes County Community Development Department website, is incorporated by reference herein. B. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2011-027, are incorporated by reference herein. C. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-005, are incorporated by reference herein. D. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-012, are incorporated by reference herein. E. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-016, are incorporated by reference herein. F. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-002, are incorporated by reference herein. G. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-009, are incorporated by reference herein. H. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-012, are incorporated by reference herein. I. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-007, are incorporated by reference herein. T.-ia.an-+-,4 1—+],- i—A * rira,v anteJ. lne Deschutes County Comprehensive 1ia.«u amcnLIMCM A, uoYu.0 vy uiv 130uiu in vuu 2014-005, are incorporated by reference herein. K. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-006, are incorporated by reference herein. L. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-012, are incorporated by reference herein. M. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-021, are incorporated by reference herein. N. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-027, are incorporated by reference herein. O. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-021, are incorporated by reference herein. P. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-029, are incorporated by reference herein. Q. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-018, are incorporated by reference herein. R. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-010, are incorporated by reference herein. S. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-001, are incorporated by reference herein. Page 1 of 3 — EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-003 T. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-022, are incorporated by reference herein. U. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-005, are incorporated by reference herein. V. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-027, are incorporated by reference herein. W. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-029, are incorporated by reference herein. X. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2017-007, are incorporated by reference herein. Y. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-002, are incorporated by reference herein. Z. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-006, are incorporated by reference herein. AA. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-011, are incorporated by reference herein. BB. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-005, are incorporated by reference herein. CC. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-008, are incorporated by reference herein. DD. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-002, are incorporated by reference herein. EE. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-001, are incorporated by reference herein. FF. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-003, are incorporated by reference herein. GG. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-004, are incorporated by reference herein. HH. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-011, are incorporated by reference herein. II. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-006, are incorporated by reference herein. ii. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-016, are incorporated by reference herein. KK. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-018, are incorporated by reference herein. LL. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-019, are incorporated by reference herein. MM. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-003 are incorporated by reference herein. (Ord. 2020-003 1, 2020, Ord. 2019-019 §2, 2019; Ord. 2019-018 §26, 2019; Ord. 2019-016 §3, 2019; Ord. 2019-006 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-011 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-004 §1, 2019; Ord. 2019-003 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-001 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-002 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2018-008 § 1, 2018; Ord. 2018-005 Page 2 of 3 - EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-003 §2, 2018; Ord. 2018-011 §1, 2018; Ord. 2018-006 §1, 2018; Ord. 2018-002 §1, 2018; Ord. 2017-007 § 1, 2017; Ord. 2016-029 § 1, 2016; Ord. 2016-027 § 1, 2016; Ord. 2016-005 § 1, 2016; Ord. 2016-022 §1, 2016; Ord. 2016-001 §1, 2016; Ord. 2015-010 §1, 2015; Ord. 2015-018 § 1, 2015; Ord. 2015-029 § 1, 2015; Ord. 2015-021 § 1, 2015; Ord. 2014-027 § 1, 2014; Ord. 2014-021 §1, 2014; Ord. 2014-12 §1, 2014; Ord. 2014-006 §2, 2014; Ord. 2014-005 §2, 2014; Ord. 2013-012 §2, 2013; Ord. 2013-009 §2, 2013; Ord. 2013-007 §1, 2013; Ord. 2013-002 §1, 2013; Ord. 2013-001 §1, 2013; Ord. 2012-016 § 1, 2012; Ord. 2012-013 § 1, 2012; Ord. 2012-005 § 1, 2012; Ord. 2011-027 § 1 through 12, 2011; Ord. 2011-017 repealed; Ord.2011-003 §3, 2011) Click here to be directed to the Comprehensive Plan (http://www.deschutes.org/compplan) Page 3 of 3 — EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-003 it sectwo' 5.-10 coal C-/cept'ow StateMeWts Background The purpose of this section is to identify the lands where Deschutes County demonstrated an exception to meeting the requirements of the Statewide Planning Goals. The intent of goal exceptions is to allow some flexibility in rural areas under strictly defined circumstances. Goal exceptions are defined and regulated by Statewide Planning Goal 2 and Oregon Administrative Rule 660-004 (excerpt below). 660-004-0000(2) An exception is a decision to exclude certain land from the requirements of one or more applicable statewide goals in accordance with the process specified in Goal 2, Part II, Exceptions. The documentation for an exception must be set forth in a local government's comprehensive plan. Such documentation must support a conclusion that the standards for an exception have been met. Statewide Planning Goals with Deschutes County Exceptions ■ Goal 3 Agricultural Lands ■ Goal 4 Forest Lands ■ Goal I I Public Facilities and Services ■ Goal 14 Urbanization Three types of exceptions are permitted by Oregon Administrative Rule 660-004 ■ Irrevocably committed ■ Physically developed KeasoI s----- The summary below identifies approved goal exceptions and identifies the adopting ordinance for those interested in further information. The ordinances listed are incorporated by reference into this Plan. 1979 Exceptions Comprehensive Plan entire County — PL 20 - 1979 During the preparation of the 1979 Comprehensive Plan it was apparent that many rural lands had already received substantial development and were committed to non -resource uses. Areas were examined and identified where Goal 3 and 4 exceptions were taken. At this time exceptions to Goals I I and 14 were not required. The total area excepted was 41,556 acres. These lands were residentially developed, committed to development or needed for rural service centers. Additional Exceptions Bend Municipal Airport — Ordinances 80-203, 1980 and 80-222, 1980 The Bend Municipal Airport received an exception to Goal 3 to allow for the necessary and expected use of airport property. La Pine UUC Boundary — Ordinance 98-001, 1998 Exceptions to Goals 3, 11 and 14 were taken to allow lands to be included in the La Pine UUC boundary and planned and zoned for commercial use. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE No. 2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION S. I I GOAL 5 ADOPTED ORDINANCES Spring River Rural Service Center — Ordinances 90-009, 1990; 90-010, 1990, 96-022, 1996; 96-045„ 1996 A reasons exception was taken to Goal 14 to allow the establishment of the Spring River Rural Service Center on residentially designated lands. Burgess Road and Highway 97 — Ordinance 97-060, 1997 An exception was taken to Goal 4 to allow for road improvements. Rural Industrial Zone — Ordinances 2010-030, 2010; 2009-007, 2009 Two separate ordinances for rural industrial uses. The 2009 exception included an irrevocably committed exception to Goal 3 and a reasons exception to Goal 14 with a Limited Use Combining Zone for storage, crushing, processing, sale and distribution of minerals. The 2010 exception took a reasons exception to Goal 14 with a Limited Use Combing Zone for storage, crushing, processing, sale and distribution of minerals. Prineville Railway — Ordinance 98-017 An exception was taken to Goal 3 to accommodate the relocation of the Redmond Railway Depot and the use of the site for an historic structure to be utilized in conjunction with the Crooked River Dinner Train operations. Resort Communities — Ordinance 2001-047, 2001 An exception was taken to Goal 4 for Black Butte Ranch and Inn of the 7' Mountain/Widgi Creek during the designation of those communities as Resort Communities under OAR 660- 22. Barclay Meadows Business Park — Ordinance 2003-11, 2003 A reasons exception was taken to Goal 3 to include certain property within the Sisters Urban Growth Boundary. Sisters School District # 6 — Ordinance 2003-1 I, 2003 A reasons exception was taken to Goal 3 to include certain property within the Sisters Urban Growth Boundary. Sisters Organization of Activities and Recreation and Sisters School District #6 — Ordinance 2003-017, 2003 A reasons exception was taken to Goal 4 to include certain property within the Sisters Urban Growth Boundary. Oregon Water Wonderland Unit 2 Sewer District — Ordinances 2010-015, 2010, 2003-015, 2003 A reasons exception was taken to Goals 4 and I I to allow uses approved by the Board of County Commissioners in PA-02-5 and ZC-02-3 as amended by PA-09-4. City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary Amendment Quniper Ridge) — Ordinance 97-060. 1997 An exception was taken to Goal 3 to allow an amendment of the Bend Urban Growth Boundary to incorporate 513 acres for industrial uses. Joyce Coats Revocable Trust Johnson Road and Tumalo Reservoir Road Properties — Ordinance 2005- 015, 2005 An irrevocably committed exception was taken to Goal 3 to allow a change of comprehensive plan designation from Surface Mining to Rural Residential Exception Area and zoning from Surface Mining to Multiple Use Agriculture for Surface Mine Sites 306 and 307. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE No. 2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Watson/Generation Development inc — Ordinance 2005-015 An exception was taken to Goal 3 to include a portion of agricultural property. Oregon Department of Transportation — Ordinance 2005-019, 2005 An exception was taken to Goal 3 to include a portion of agricultural property. Conklin/Eady Property — Ordinance 2005-035, 2005 An exception was taken to Goal 3 to include a portion of agricultural property. City of Sisters Property — Ordinance 2005-037, 2005 An exception was taken to Goal 4 to include a portion of forest property. McKenzie Meadows Property — Ordinance 2005-039, 2005 An exception was taken to Goal 4 to include a portion of forest property. Bend Metro Park and Recreation District Properties — Ordinance 2006-025 A reasons exception was taken to Goal 3 to include a portion of agricultural property. Harris and Nancy Kimble Property and Portion of CLR, Inc Property A.K.A. the Klippel Pit Property — Ordinance 2008-001, 2008 An irrevocably committed exception was taken to Goal 3 to allow reclassification and zoning from Surface Mine to Rural Residential Exception Area and Rural Residential 10 acre for Surface Mine Site 294. Sunriver Service District, Sunriver Fire Department — Ordinance 2014-021, 2014 A reasons exception was taken to Goal 4 to include a portion of forest property. To ensure that the uses in the Sunriver Utility District Zone on the approximate 4.28 acre site of Tax Lot 102 on Deschutes County Assessor's Map 19-1 1-00 are limited in nature and scope to those justifying the exception to Goal 4 for the site, the Sunriver Forest (SUF) zoning on the subject site shall be subject to a Limited Use Combining Zone, which will limit the uses on the subject site to a fire training facility and access road for the Sunriver Service District and Sunriver Fire Department. Frances Ramsey Trust Property — Ordinance 2014-027, 2014 An "irrevocably committed" exception was taken to Goal 14 to allow for reclassification and rezoning from agricultural property to Rural Industrial for a 2.65 acre portion of a parcel zoned EFU/RI. Westside Transect Zone — Ordinances 2019 — 001, 2019 Reasons exceptions to Goals 3, 4, and 14 were taken to allow the application of the Westside Transect Zone to 717 acres of land on the west side of Bend between the urban area and the park and public lands to the west for the development of stewardship communities where low density residential communities are developed and managed to protect wildlife habitat and establish wildfire mitigation and prevention strategies. City of Bend Outback Water Facility Sewer — Ordinance 2020-003, 2020 Reasons exception to Goal I I was taken to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) The sewage transported is produced exclusively at the Bend Outback Water Facility. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE No. 2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.11 GOAL 5 ADOPTED ORDINANCES Sect�ow 6:i2. l�g�sl,At�ve History Background This section contains the legislative history of this Comprehensive Plan. Table S.12.1 Comprehensive Plan Ordinance History Ordinance Date Adopted/ Chapter/Section Amendment Effective All, except Transportation, Tumalo and Terrebonne 201 1-003 8-10-1 1/ 1 1-9-1 1 Community Plans, Deschutes Junction, Comprehensive Plan update Destination Resorts and ordinances adopted in 2011 2.5, 2.6, 3.4, 3.10, 3.5, Housekeeping amendments to 201 1-027 10-31-1 1 / 1 1-9-1 1 4.6, 5.3, 5.8, 5.1 1, 23.40A, 23.40B, ensure a smooth transition to 23.40.065, 23.01.010 the updated Plan 23.60, 23.64 (repealed), Updated Transportation 2012-005 8-20-12/ 1 1-19-12 3.7 (revised), Appendix C System Plan ( 2012-012 8-20-12/8-20-12 4.1, 4.2 La Pine Urban Growth Boundary Housekeeping amendments to 2012-016 12-3-12/3-4-13 3.9 Destination Resort Chapter Central Oregon Regional 2013-002 1-7-13/ 1-7-13 4.2 Large -lot Employment Land Need Analysis Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2013-009 2-6-13/5-8-13 1.3 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area Comprehensive Plan Map 2013-012 5-8-13/8-6-13 23.01.010 Amendment, including certain property within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary Newberry Country: A Plan 2013-007 5-29-13/8-27-13 3.10, 3.1 1 for Southern Deschutes County EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE No. 2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Comprehensive Plan Map 2013-016 10-21-13/ 10-21-13 23.01.010 Amendment, including certain property within City of Sisters Urban Growth Boundary Comprehensive Plan Map 2014-005 2-26-14/2-26-14 23.01.010 Amendment, including certain property within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary 2014-012 4-2-14/7-1-14 3.10, 3.1 1 Housekeeping amendments to Title 23. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain 2014-021 8-27-14/ 1 1-25-14 23.01.010, 5.10 property from Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Forest to Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Utility Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain 2014-021 8-27-14/ 1 1-25-14 23.01.010, 5.10 property from Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Fvr e$t to Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Utility Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2014-027 12-15-14/3-31-15 23.01.010, 5.10 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Industrial Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2015-021 1 1-9-15/2-22-16 23.01.010 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Surface Mining. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2015-029 1 1-23-15/ 1 1-30-15 23.01.010 designation of certain property from Tumalo Residential 5-Acre Minimum to Tumalo Industrial 2015-018 12-9-15/3-27-16 23.01.010, 2.2, 4.3 Housekeeping Amendments to Title 23. EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO.2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Comprehensive Plan Text and 2015-010 12-2-15/12-2-15 2.6 Map Amendment recognizing Greater Sage -Grouse Habitat Inventories Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2016-001 12-21-15/04-5-16 23.01.010; 5.10 designation of certain property from, Agriculture to Rural Industrial (exception area) Comprehensive Plan Amendment to add an exception to Statewide 2016-007 2-10-16/5-10-16 23.01.010; 5.10 Planning Goal I I to allow sewers in unincorporated lands in Southern Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Amendment recognizing non- 2016-005 1 1-28-16/2-16-17 23.01.010, 2.2, 3.3 resource lands process allowed under State law to change EFU zoning Comprehensive plan LV I O-VIL n '1A I,III I A I, 7-LO- 1 O/ 1 1- I T- 10 ,'O, nI A I A I , A 7 LJ.V 1 .V IV, I .J, T.L Amendment, including certain property within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2016-029 12-14-16/ 12/28/ 16 23.01.010 designation of certain property from, Agriculture to Rural Industrial Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2017-007 10-30-17/ 10-30-17 23.01.010 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area Comprehensive Plan 2018-002 1-3-18/ 1-25-18 23.01, 2.6 Amendment permitting churches in the Wildlife Area Combining Zone EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE No. 2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION S.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Housekeeping Amendments correcting tax lot numbers in Non -Significant Mining Mineral 2018-006 8-22-18/ 1 1-20-18 23.01.010, 5.8, 5.9 and Aggregate Inventory; modifying Goal 5 Inventory of Cultural and Historic Resources Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2018-01 1 9-12-18/ 12-1 1-18 23.01.010 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, removing Flood 23.01.010, 2.5, Tumalo Plain Comprehensive Plan 2018-005 9-19- 18/ 10-10-18 Community Plan, Designation; Comprehensive Newberry Country Plan Plan Amendment adding Flood Plain Combining Zone purpose statement. Comprehensive Plan Amendment allowing for the 2018-008 9-26-18/ 10-26-18 23.01.010, 3.4 potential of new properties to be designated as Rural Commercial or Rural Industrial Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment changing designation of certain property from Surface Mining 2019-002 1-2-19/4-2-19 23.01.010, 5.8 to Rural Residential Exception Area; Modifying Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Inventory; Modifying Non - Significant Mining Mineral and Aggregate Inventory Comprehensive Plan and Text 2019-001 1-16-19/4-16-19 1.3, 3.3, 4.2, 5.10, 23.01 Amendment to add a new zone to Title 19: Westside Transect Zone. EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO.2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment changing designation of certain 2019-003 02-12-19/03-12-19 23.01.010, 4.2 property from Agriculture to Redmond Urban Growth Area for the Large Lot Industrial Program Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to 2019-004 02-12-19/03-12-19 23.01.010, 4.2 Redmond Urban Growth Area for the expansion of the Deschutes County Fairgrounds and relocation of Oregon Military Department National Guard Armory. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to adjust the Bend Urban Growth Boundary to accommodate the refinement of the Skyline Ranch Road alignment and the 2019-01 1 05-01-19/05-16/ 19 23.01.010, 4.2 refinement of the West Area Master Plan Area I boundary. The ordinance also amends the Comprehensive Plan designation of Urban Area Reserve for those lands leaving the UGB. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2019-006 03-13-19/06-1 1-19 23.01.010, designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments incorporating language from DLCD's 2014 2019-016 1 1-25-19/02-24-20 23.01.01, 2.5 Model Flood Ordinance and Establishing a purpose statement for the Flood Plain Zone. EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE No. 2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments to provide procedures related to the 2019-019 12-1 1-19/ 12-1 1-19 23.01.01, 2.5 division of certain split zoned properties containing Flood Plain zoning and involving a former or piped irrigation canal. Comprehensive Plan Amendment with exception to Statewide Planning Goal I I (Public Facilities and Services) 2020-003 xx-xx-xx/ xx-xx- 23.01.01, 5.10 to allow a sewer line on xx unincorporated lands near the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary to serve the City of Bend Outback Water Facility. EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO.2020-003 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY �dw NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Mailing Date: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners will hold a public hearing on February 5, 2019, at 10:00 a.m. in the Barnes and Sawyer Rooms of the Deschutes Services Center, 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, to consider the following request: FILE NUMBER: 247-19-000628-PA APPLICANT/ OWNER: City of Bend PROPOSAL: Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). LOCATION: 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend; Tax Lot 800 on County Tax Map 17-11-34 STAFF CONTACT: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner Email: matt.martin@deschutes.org; Telephone: 541-330-4620 DOCUMENTS: Can be viewed and downloaded from: h, ildi .-r,i+r r.rnrtnn q-xi nnA httn•/Mial rlocrhiitcc nro' VVyyyy.uuiiuii gper i n��.vi cgvi i.gvv ui — 11—N.1 — 4; STANDARDS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA: Title 18. The Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance. Chapter 18.04, Title, Purpose and Definitions Chapter 18.60. Rural Residential Zone. Chapter 18.88. Wildlife Area Combining Zone. Title 22. Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660 All documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost at the Deschutes County Community Development Department (CDD) at 117 NW Lafayette Avenue. Seven (7) days prior to the public hearing, a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at no cost at CDD. Copies of all documents, evidence and the staff report can be purchased at CDD for (25) cents a page. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS MAY APPEAR, BE HEARD, BE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, OR SEND WRITTEN SIGNED TESTIMONY. ANY PARTY TO THE APPLICATION IS ENTITLED TO A CONTINUANCE OF THE INITIAL EVIDENTIARY HEARING OR TO HAVE THE RECORD LEFT OPEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 22.24.140 OF THE DESCHUTES COUNTY CODE. 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes.org @ www.deschutes.org/cd Failure to raise an issue in person at a hearing or in writing precludes appeal by that person to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), and that failure to provide statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to LUBA based on that issue. Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible, please call the ADA Coordinator at (541) 617-4747. DOCUMENT SUBMISSION Any person may submit written comments on a proposed land use action. Documents may be submitted to our office in person, U.S. mail, or email. In Person We accept all printed documents. Email U.S. Mail Deschutes County Community Development Planning Division, Matthew Martin P.O. Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 Email submittals must comply with the following guidelines: Submission is 20 pages or less Documents can be printed in black and white only Documents can be printed on 8.5" x 11" paper Any email submittal which exceeds the guidelines provided above, must be submitted as a paper copy. Limitations Deschutes County does not take responsibility for retrieving information from a website link or a personal cloud storage service. It is the submitter's responsibility to provide the specific information they wish to enter into the record. We will print the email which includes the link(s), however, we will not retrieve any information on behalf of the submitter. Deschutes County makes an effort to scan all submittals as soon as possible. Recognizing staff availability and workload, there is often a delay between the submittal of a document to the record, and when it is scanned and uploaded to Accela Citizen Access (ACA) and Deschutes County Property Information (DIAL). For this reason, the official record is the file that resides in the Community Development office. The electronic record in ACA and DIAL is not a substitute for the official record. To ensure your submission is entered into the correct land use record, please specify the land use file number(s). 247-19-000628-PA Page 2 of 3 For the open record period after a public hearing, electronic submittals are valid if received by the County's server by the deadline established for the land use action. IF YOU WISH TO BE NOTIFIED OF ANY DECISION RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION, YOU MUST PROVIDE A MAILING ADDRESS. NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: ORS CHAPTER 215 REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT MUST PROMPTLY BE FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. This Notice was mailed pursuant to Deschutes County Code Chapters 22.20 and 22.24. 247-19-000628-PA Page 3 of 3 co m Ln d' O O O OO O^ N O 01 01 01 01 m Oi 01 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 >cc_cco zza 4� m v v v w w W U m m m m m m m 0 LU W cr- Q N w Q Ln z H z Q m H U � s J S S pp 2 J M } � U O � N O W U c-I W Ln x m Z x 0 Ln 1 m Z r, N Om T L c O N� Ln m O can t6 d l0 � N n d lD z S S LAN W W W z LLJ Z S m 2 = w Ln W J J J Z N = = Z w W 4D Q Q Q w co a a -, H U H 0 Z O s i= Q � w S w Ln � m w 06 m z LL O w Q 0 u a p O Z W w W W H w w w m H LL LL LL LL a) O O O v O v 0 D U U 0 m U t� Mailing Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2019 HEARINGS OFFICER DECISION FILE NUMBER: 247-19-000628-PA SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). APPLICANT/ City of Bend OWNER: Paul Rheault PO Box 97709 Bend, OR 97709 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: November 12, 2019, 6:00 p.m. STAFF CONTACT: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner HEARINGS BODY: Hearings Officer Gregory Frank A public hearing was held on November 12, 2019 (the "Hearing") in the Barnes and Sawyer Room (Deschutes Services Center - 1300 NW Wall Street, Bend, Oregon 97703). Matthew Martin ("Martin"), Associate Planner for Deschutes County (the "County"), appeared at the Hearing and testified on behalf of the County. Mr. Paul Rheault ("Rheault"), Utility Director, appeared at the Hearing and testified on behalf of Applicant City of Bend ("Applicant"). Ian Leitheiser ("Leitheiser"), Attorney in Applicant's City Attorney's Office, appeared at the Hearing and testified on behalf of Applicant. No additional persons appeared at the Hearing to testify or submit written evidence in the record. Martin, in addition to his Hearing testimony, submitted into the record a Staff Report (the "Staff Report"). The Staff Report was provided to Applicant and available to other persons interested in this matter. Martin noted that the Staff Report, in the findings for ORS 197.732(2)(c)(D) [page 18], stated the following: "The use in this matter is allowing a sewer line outside of an UGB to serve the existing water facility on the subject property. The adjacent properties are currently undeveloped, forested open space. Given that there is new development associated with this exception, the use is compatible with other adjacent uses and there will be no additional adverse impacts." Martin testified, at the Hearing, that the above -quoted section contained a scrivener's error. Martin stated that there is no new development being proposed in this application. Martin requested that the Hearings Officer correct the scrivener's error to reflect no new development is being proposed. Leitheiser agreed with Martin's characterization of the findings for ORS 197.732(2)(c)(D) and requested that the findings reflect no new development is being proposed. The Hearings Officer, at the Hearing, proposed that he adopt the Staff Report as his decision subject only to the correction of the scrivener's error. Martin, on behalf of the County, and Leitheiser, on behalf of Applicant, agreed with the Hearings Officer's proposal to adopt the Staff Report as the Hearings Officer's decision subject only to the correction of the scrivener's error. II. DECISION: It is the decision of the Hearings Officer to adopt and incorporate into this decision the facts, findings, and conclusions set forth in the attached Staff Report subject to correcting a scrivener's error in the findings for ORS 197.732(2)(c)(D). The findings for ORS 197.732(2)(c)(D) are modified to read as follows: "The use in this matter is allowing a sewer line outside of an UGB to serve the existing water facility on the subject property. The adjacent properties are currently undeveloped, forested open space. Given that there is no new development associated with this exception, the use is compatible with other adjacent uses and there will be no additional adverse impacts." III. APPROVAL: Applicant's request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary. This decision becomes final twelve (12) days after the date of mailing, unless appealed by a party of interest. GregorrFran Hearings Officer Attachment: 247-19-000628-PA Staff Report Dated this 101h day of December, 2019 Mailed on the 10th day of December, 2019 247-19-000628-PA Page 2 of 2 FILE NUMBER: STAFF REPORT 247-19-000628-PA HEARING: November 12, 2019, 6:00 p.m. Barnes & Sawyer Rooms Deschutes Services Center 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, OR 97708 APPLICANT/OWNER: City of Bend Paul Rheault PO Box 97709 Bend, OR 97709 Mailing Date: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 PROPOSAL: Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to _ I _ _ L the _ _ I Bend J transport both process water and sewage outside dr the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). STAFF REVIEWER: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner Email: Matt.martin@deschutes.org; Telephone: 541-330-4620 I. APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: Deschutes County Code, Title 22, Procedures Ordinance Deschutes County Code, Title 23, Comprehensive Plan Chapter 1, Comprehensive Planning Chapter 2, Resource Management Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR), Chapter 660 Division 4, Interpretation of Goal 2 Exceptions Process Division 11, Public Facilities Planning Division 15, Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 (541) 388-6575 cdd@deschutes .org www.deschutes.org/cd ORS 197.732, Goal Exceptions II. FINDINGS OF FACT: A. LOCATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend, and is identified on Deschutes County Assessor's Map 17-11-34 as Tax Lot 800. B. LOT OF RECORD: The subject property is a legal lot of record as was previously found in the findings and decision for file nos. SP-02-58 and LM-02-283 C. PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to amend the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). D. ZONING AND PLAN DESIGNATIONS: The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR- 10), Landscape Management Combining (LM), and Wildlife Area Combining (WA). The comprehensive plan designation is Rural Residential Exception Area. E. SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property is approximately 10.5 acres in size and irregular shaped. The property is currently developed as the City of Bend water reservoir facility. Facilities on the property include water storage reservoirs, a chlorine contact reservoir, a wireless telecommunications facility, drinking water wells that supply water to the City of Bend, exterior lighting, and miscellaneous accessory structures used for operating and 247-19-000628-PA Page 2 of 19 maintaining the utility facility. The development includes a structure that contains a restrooms, drinking fountains and floor drains. The sewage wastewater produced is currently stored on -site in a holding tank and periodically trucked off -site and disposed of into the City's sewer system within the UGB. A process water line currently connects the water treatment plant to the sewer system and is used to transport process water (not sewage) for disposal. That line could be used to transport both the process water and sewage. The proposed plan amendment would permit the use of this process line to only provide wastewater disposal for the existing restrooms, drinking fountains, and floor drains. F. SURROUNDING LAND USES: The property is surrounded on all sides by undeveloped forested land. The properties to the north, west, and east are zoned Rural Residential (RR- 10) and publically owned by the Bend Metro Park and Recreation District. The property to the south is zoned Forest Use (F-2) and publically owned by the federal government. G. SOILS: According to Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maps of the area, the subject property contains three different soil types, as described below. 156C Wanoga-Fremkle-Henkle Complex. 0 to 15 percent slopes: This soil complex is composed of 35 percent Wanoga soils and similar inclusions; 30 percent Fremkle soils and similar inclusions; 20 percent Henkle soils and similar inclusion; and 15 percent contrasting inclusions. The Wanoga and Fremkle soils are well drained, with a moderately rapid permeability and an available water capacity of about two to four inches. The major use of this soil complex is livestock grazing and woodland. The Henkle soils are somewhat excessively drained, with a moderately rapid permeability and available water capacity of about 2 inches. The agricultural capability rating for the Wanoga and Fremkle soils is 6e with or without irrigation. The agricultural capability rating for the Henkle soils is 7e with or without irrigation. Section 18.04.030 of the DCC does not consider this soil type high -value farmland when irrigated. The entire property is composed of this soil type. H. NOTICE REQUIREMENT: The applicant complied with the posted notice requirements of Section 22.23.030(B) of Deschutes County Code (DCC) Title 22. The applicant submitted a Land Use Action Sign Affidavit, dated November 1, 2019, indicating the applicant posted notice of the land use action on the property on October 31, 2019. On October 24, 2019, the Planning Division mailed a Notice of Public Hearing to all property owners within 250 feet of the subject property. A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Bend Bulletin on October 22, 2019. Notice of the first evidentiary hearing was submitted to the Department of Land Conservation and Development on October 8, 2019. I. PUBLIC COMMENTS: No written comments have been received at the time of this staff report. J. AGENCY COMMENTS: No comments were received at the time this staff reportwas finalized. 247-19-000628-PA Page 3 of 19 K. REVIEW PERIOD: The application was submitted on August 13, 2019. The application was deemed complete on September 12, 2019. According to Deschutes County Code 22.20.040(D), the review of the proposed quasi-judicial Plan Amendment and Zone Change application is not subject to the 150-day review period. L. BACKGROUND: The City of Bend owns and operates a water treatment plant, water reservoirs, water wells and related facilities on the subject property. The Outback water facility site is outside of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) of the City of Bend. As previously noted, the site contains restrooms, drinking fountains and floor drains. Currently the sewage is stored on -site in a holding tank and periodically trucked off -site and disposed of into the City's sewer system within the UGB. The City has been advised by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) that the sewage holding tank is located too close to a drinking water well. Although the City of Bend has obtained a waiver for its location, OHA strongly recommends that the City seek an alternative to the holding tank, preferably disposal of the sewage waste through a line connecting to the City's sewer system. The applicant is applying for this plan amendment with exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Service, to allow the line to be used as a sewage line outside an UGB. III. CONCLUSIONS OF L AM - TITLE 23 OF THE DESCHUTES COUNTY CODE (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) Chapter 1. Comprehensive Planning Section 1.2 Community Involvement Policies Goal and Policies Goal 1. Maintain an active and open community involvement program that is accessible to all members of the community and engages the community during development and implementation of land use policies and codes. FINDING: The proposed comprehensive plan amendment complies with the actions required by the Deschutes County Code, including a public hearing before the Deschutes County Hearings Officer and notice of the hearing published in a newspaper (the Bend Bulletin) at least twenty days in advance. Public agencies and neighboring property owners were mailed notice of the public hearing. In accordance with the Deschutes County Code, property owners potentially affected by the amendment (in this case, within 250 feet of the applicant property) were provided notice of the proposed amendment and hearing. Section 1.3, Land Use Planning 247-19-000628-PA Page 4 of 19 Goal 1. Maintain an open and public land use process in which decisions are based on the objective evaluation of facts. FINDING: The applicant has requested a comprehensive plan amendment with a goal exception to allow a sewer line outside of an UGB. Staff will follow procedures outlined in Title 22, the Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance, in order to ensure a land use process that is open and based on objective evaluation of facts. Chapter 2. Resource Management Section 2.4, Goal 5 Overview Policies Goal 1. Protect Goal S resources FINDING: The submitted application materials address the various protected Goal 5 resources as follows: • Wildlife Habitat: The site is located within the Tumalo Deer Winter Range, a Goal 5 wildlife habitat resource. The proposed removal of the holding tank and use of an existing line for disposing of wastewater will not impact this resource or its use. • Scenic Areas: The subject property is located more than one quarter mile of Tumalo Creek. A portion of the subject property is located within one quarter mile of Century Drive. The creek and Century Drive are protected with a Landscape Management Combining Zone. The proposa1 .w.11 not imnmrt cithcr f thoco rocni ir�oc ..ill 11,L ,..• Historic Areas: There are no historic resources identified on the site or on adjoining properties. • Open Space: There are no Open Space resources that were identified. • Surface Mines: There are no Goal 5 aggregate resources within one-half mile of the Outback site zoned Surface Mining (SM). The subject property is not located within a Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA). Section 2.5, Water Resources Policies Goal S. Protect and improve water quality in the Deschutes River Basin. FINDING: The applicant has been advised by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) that the sewage holding tank is located too close to a drinking water well. Although the applicant has obtained a waiver for its location, OHA strongly recommends that the applicant seek an alternative to the holding tank, preferably disposal of the sewage waste through a line connecting to the City's sewer system. The abandonment of the holding tank will eliminate the potential for associated negative impact of the ground water well resources on the property. Goal 6. Coordinate land use and water policies. 247-19-000628-PA Page 5 of 19 FINDING: Notice of the proposed plan amendment was sent to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Oregon Department of Environment Quality (DEQ), Oregon Health Authority (OHA), the Deschutes County Environmental Soils Division, the Deschutes County Environmental Health Division, and others. No adverse comments have been received at the time of this staff report. Section 2.8 Energy Policies Goal 1. Promote energy conservation. FINDING: The applicant provides responses pertaining to this goals in their response to Statewide Planning Goal 6, Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality, below. Section 2.9 Environmental Quality Goal 1. Maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land. FINDING: The applicant provides responses pertaining to this goals in their response to Statewide Planning Goal 6, Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality, below. OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES (OAR) CHAPTER 660- LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OAR 66v, Division e� 1KIIT`DDQETATIn1U nr n:nA1 2 FYPFPTInN PROCESS OAR 660-004-0000 Purpose (1) The purpose of this division is to interpret the requirements of Goal 2 and ORS 197.732 regarding exceptions. This division explains the three types of exceptions set forth in Goal 2 "Land Use Planning, Part 11, Exceptions." Rules in other divisions of OAR 660 provide substantive standards for some specific types of goal exceptions. Where this is the case, the specific substantive standards in the other divisions control over the more general standards of this division. However, the definitions, notice, and planning and zoning requirements of this division apply to all types of exceptions. The types of exceptions that are subject to specific standards in other divisions are. (a) Standards for a demonstration of reasons for sanitary sewer service to rural lands are provided in OAR 660-011-0060(9), (b) Standards for a demonstration of reasons for urban transportation improvements on rural land are provided in OAR 660-012-0070; (c) Standards to determine irrevocably committed exceptions pertaining to urban development on rural land are provided in OAR 660-014-0030, and standards for demonstration of reasons for urban development on rural land are provided in OAR 660- 014-0040. FINDING: The submitted application addresses compliance with OAR 660-011-0060(9) as well as OAR Chapter 660 Division 4, in compliance with this section. 247-19-000628-PA Page 6 of 19 OAR 660-004-0010, Application of the Goal Exception Process to Certain Goals (1) The exceptions process is not applicable to Statewide Goal 1 "Citizen Involvement" and Goal "Land Use Planning." The exceptions process is generally applicable to all or part of those statewidegools that prescribe or restrict certain uses of resource land, restrict urban uses on rural land, or limit the provision of certain public facilities and services. These statewide goals include but are not limited to: (c) Goal 11 "Public facilities and Services" as provided in OAR 660-011-0060(9); FINDING: The proposed plan amendment includes an exception to Goal 11. Therefore, the criteria applied are those provided in OAR 660-011-0060(9) and are addressed below. OAR 660-004-0020, Goal Z Part ll(c), Exception Requirements (1) If a jurisdiction determines there are reasons consistent with OAR 660-004-0022 to use resource lands for uses not allowed by the applicable Goal or to allow public facilities or services not allowed by the applicable Goal, the justification shall be set forth in the comprehensive plan as an exception. As provided in OAR 660-004-0000(1), rules in other divisions may also apply. FINDING: The City is requesting an exception to Goal 11 to allow a sewer line outside of a UGB to serve only the public VVULt r fa.'.iiity. ASs part of th.- pr^�e�� -11- arty apprn%ialtho ictifiratinn fnr this exception will be set forth in the comprehensive plan. (2) The four standards in Goal 2 Part ll(c) required to be addressed when taking an exception to a goal are described in subsections (a) through (d) of this section, including general requirements applicable to each of the factors: (a) "Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply." The exception shall set forth the facts and assumptions used as the basis for determining that a state policy embodied in a goal should not apply to specific properties or situations, including the amount of land for the use being planned and why the use requires a location on resource land, FINDING: The applicant's burden of proof states: The policy embodied in the prohibition in Goal 11's prohibition on extending sewer lines outside the UGB is the policy to not allow urban development on rural lands. That policy does not apply in this situation because there will be no change in the use of the Outback site or of any surrounding property. The Outback site currently is developed with a water treatment system, wells, reservoirs, and related facilities. It has restrooms for employee use. With or without the exception, it will have the same facilities and restrooms. The exception will not allow any new use of the Outback site and will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby property. There will be no urban type or urban level development of the Outback site or any other property. There is no 247-19-000628-PA Page 7 of19 other possible location for a sewer line from the Outback site to the UGB that would not have significantly greater impact resulting from the need to install a new line rather than adding sewer to an existing line. The requested exception complies with this section. Staff concurs with this conclusion. (b) "Areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use". The exception must meet the following requirements. (A) The exception shall indicate on a map or otherwise describe the location of possible alternative areas considered for the use that do not require a new exception. The area for which the exception is taken shall be identified, FINDING: A site plan of the existing facility and the line proposed to be used to transport sewage are included with the application. The site plan shows the extent of existing development and why other areas could not be used for onsite sewer disposal. All possible sewer line routes between the subject property and the UGB involve extending a sewage line outside the UGB. (B) To show why the particular site is justified, it is necessary to discuss why other areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Economic factors may be considered along with other relevant factors in determining that the use cannot reasonably be accommodated in other areas. Under this test the following questions shall be addressed. (i) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on nonresource land that ri'ouid not r equir a an exception, lncl��dLng LncreasL. b *he densi.*y of lines on nonresource land? If not, why not? FINDING: The subject property is zone RR-10 and the areas between the subject property and the UGB are zoned either RR-10 or Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10). All of these zones are rural residential exception, nonresource zones. (ii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on resource land that is already irrevocably committed to nonresource uses not allowed by the applicable Goal, including resource land in existing unincorporated communities, or by increasing the density of uses on committed lands? If not, why not? FINDING: The subject property is zone RR-10 and the areas between the subject property and the UGB are zoned either RR-10 or UAR-10. There is no resource land in the impacted area. (iii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated inside an urban growth boundary? If not, why not? FINDING: The water facility is outside and a distance from the UGB. Therefore, the sewer line cannot be within the UGB. Given the need to at some point decommission the waste storage tank 247-19-000628-PA Page 8 of 19 and the infeasibility of constructing an on -site septic system on a site that has so many municipal water wells, the proposed use of the line for sewage is necessary to accommodate the existing use. (iv) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated without the provision of a proposed public facility or service? If not, why not? FINDING: The proposed amendment is directly related to the public water facility on the subject property. The applicant is requesting to use the existing process water line to also transport sewage for the public water facility. (C) The "alternative areas" standard in paragraph B may be met by a broad review of similar types of areas rather than a review of specific alternative sites. Initially, a local government adopting an exception need assess only whether those similar types of areas in the vicinity could not reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Site specific comparisons are not required of a local government taking an exception unless another party to the local proceeding describes specific sites that can more reasonably accommodate the proposed use. A detailed evaluation of specific alternative sites is thus not required unless such sites are specifically described, with facts to support the assertion that the sites are more reasonable, by another party during the local exceptions proceeding. FINDING: The specific nature of the proposed exception and the factual circumstances limit the alternative areas analysis to an analysis of whether there is an alternative routing for the line. While a separate se;,.,er lino rni"Irl ha c^nctriirtaril that line wnl ldd nerecsarily gn thrOU m sigh areas that would also require an exception. In addition, construction of an alternative line would have greater negative impacts than using the existing process water line. Analysis of onsite alternatives is also necessary. The water facility site contains several municipal drinking water wells. The number of wells and the extent of development of the site do not allow alternative locations for either a holding tank to comply with the minimum of 50-foot separation from a well or for a septic field to comply with the 100-foot separation from a well as required in Table 1 of OAR 340-071-0220. Therefore, an on -site septic holding tank or drain field are not realistic alternatives for disposal of the sewage generated at facility. (c) 'The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the some proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site." The exception shall describe: the characteristics of each alternative area considered by the jurisdiction in which an exception might be taken, the typical advantages and disadvantages of using the area for a use not allowed by the Goal, and the typical positive and negative consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. A detailed evaluation of specific alternative sites is not required unless such sites are specifically described with facts to support the assertion that the sites have significantly fewer adverse impacts during 247-19-000628-PA Page 9 of 19 the local exceptions proceeding. The exception shall include the reasons why the consequences of the use at the chosen site are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site. Such reasons shall include but are not limited to a description of.• the facts used to determine which resource land is least productive, the ability to sustain resource uses near the proposed use, and the long-term economic impact on the general area caused by irreversible removal of the land from the resource base. Other possible impacts to be addressed include the effects of the proposed use on the water table, on the costs of improving roads and on the costs to special service districts; FINDING: The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences of allowing the sewer line extension are all positive rather than negative. The extension of the sewer line will not allow or support any new urban development outside the site. The re-routed sewer line will allow for the removal of a sewage holding tank, and provide wastewater disposal for the existing facility. There are no long-term negative environmental consequences of connecting the sinks, drains, water fountains, and toilets to an existing line, the environmental impacts are beneficial. The replacement of truck trips that use fuel and have emissions with non-polluting gravity flow through an existing pipe. Truck trips past nearby property will be eliminated. There will be no negative economic impacts. The use of the line will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby uses economically or otherwise. The use of the line will result in more economic operation of the site because the costs of trucking will be avoided. The line operates by gravity, so there a are no pumpingc�5LS. There are no social impacts of the use of the line. (d) "The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts." The exception shall describe how the proposed use will be rendered compatible with adjacent land uses. The exception shall demonstrate that the proposed use is situated in such a manner as to be compatible with surrounding natural resources and resource management or production practices. "Compatible" is not intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses. FINDING: The use in this matter is allowing a sewer line outside of an UGB to serve the existing water facility on the subject property. The adjacent properties are currently undeveloped, forested open space. Surrounding natural resources include forest lands, scenic areas, and wildlife habitat. Given that there is no new development associated with this exception, the use is compatible with other adjacent uses and there will be no additional adverse impacts. (3) if the exception involves more than one area for which the reasons and circumstances are the same, the areas may be considered as a group. Each of the areas shall be identified on a map, or their location otherwise described, and keyed to the appropriate findings. 247-19-000628-PA Page 10 of 19 FINDING: The proposed exception does not involve more than one area. Only the subject property is the subject of this request. 660-004-0022, Reasons Necessary to Justify an Exception Under Goal 2, Part 11(c) An exception under Goal 2, Part H(c) may be taken for any use not allowed by the applicable goal(s) or for a use authorized by a statewide planning goal that cannot comply with the approval standards for that type of use. The types of reasons that may or may not be used to justify certain types of uses not allowed on resource lands are set forth in the following sections of this rule. Reasons that may allow an exception to Goal 11 to provide sewer service to rural lands are described in OAR 660-011-0060. Reasons that may allow transportation facilities and improvements that do not meet the requirements of OAR 660-012-0065 are provided in OAR 660-012-0070. Reasons that rural lands are irrevocably committed to urban levels of development are provided in OAR 660-014-0030. Reasons that may justify the establishment of new urban development on undeveloped rural land are provided in OAR 660- 014-0040. FINDING: As stated in this section, the reasons that may allow an exception to Goal 11 to provide sewer service to rural lands are described in OAR 660-011-0060. The provisions of OAR 660-011- 0060 are addressed below. OAR 660, Division 11, PUBLIC FACILITIES PLANNING cc,n 0.,v9.-n con Cnuinr C0Nft4`N '* to Pwerfsr/ / nndC vvv- i7-v v , rc w— . 2 (1) As used in this rule, unless the context requires otherwise: (a) "Establishment of a sewer system" means the creation of a new sewage system, including systems provided by public or private entities; (b) "Extension of a Sewer System" means the extension of a pipe, conduit, pipeline, main, or other physical component from or to an existing sewer system in order to provide service to a use, regardless of whether the use is inside the service boundaries of the public or private service provider. The sewer service authorized in section (8) of this rule is not an extension of a sewer, (c) "No practicable alternative to a sewer system" means a determination by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) or the Oregon Health Division, pursuant to criteria in OAR chapter 340, division 71, and other applicable rules and laws, that an existing public health hazard cannot be adequately abated by the repair or maintenance of existing sewer systems or on -site systems or by the installation of new on -site systems as defined in OAR 340-071-0100, (d) "Public health hazard" means a condition whereby it is probable that the public is exposed to disease -caused physical suffering or illness due to the presence of inadequately treated sewage; (e) "Sewage" means the water -carried human, animal, vegetable, or industrial waste from residences, buildings, industrial establishments or other places, together with such ground water infiltration and surface water as may be present; 247-19-000628-PA Page 11 of 19 (fl "Sewer system" means a system that serves more than one lot or parcel, or more than one condominium unit or more than one unit within a planned unit development, and includes pipelines or conduits, pump stations, force mains, and all other structures, devices, appurtenances and facilities used for treating or disposing of sewage or for collecting or conducting sewage to an ultimate point for treatment and disposal. The following are not considered a "sewer system" for purposes of this rule. - (A) A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of storm water runoff, (B) A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of animal waste from a farm use as defined in ORS 215.303. FINDING: This section provides definitions rather than substantive criteria, and is included only to provide context for responses to the substantive sections of the rule. (2) Except as provided in sections (3), (4), (8), and (9) of this rule, and consistent with Goal 11, a local government shall not allow. (a) The establishment of new sewer systems outside urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries, (b) The extension of sewer lines from within urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries in order to serve uses on land outside those boundaries, (c) The extension of sewer systems that currently serve land outside urban growth boundaries and unincorporated community boundaries in order to serve uses that are outside such boundaries and are not served by the system on july28, 1998. FINDING: The proposed use of the line for sewer would result in the extension of a sewer line from within the UGB to serve a use outside the UGB, so an exception is being requested. The proposed plan amendment includes an exception to Goal 11 as permitted under Section 9 of the rule. (9) A local government may allow the establishment of new sewer systems or the extension of sewer lines not otherwise provided for in section (4) of this rule, or allow a use to connect to an existing sewer line not otherwise provided for in section (8) of this rule, provided the standards for an exception to Goal 11 have been met, and provided the local government adopts land use regulations that prohibit the sewer system from serving any uses or areas other than those justified in the exception. Appropriate reasons and facts for an exception to Goal 11 include but are not limited to the following. (a) The new system, or extension of an existing system, is necessary to avoid an imminent and significant public health hazard that would otherwise result if the sewer service is not provided, and, there is no practicable alternative to the sewer system in order to avoid the imminent public health hazard, or FINDING: The applicant is requesting an exception to allow use of an existing line to take sewage from the water facility on the subject property outside the UGB to within the UGB. The applicant specifies the sewer line may be used only for the water facility on the subject property. While the rule lists two possible reasons for allowing an exception, the rule allows other reasons to justify the 247-19-000628-PA Page 12 of 19 exception. In this case, there is no imminent public health hazard. These other reasons are discussed below. The water facility site contains several municipal drinking water wells. The number of wells and the extent of development of the site do not allow alternative locations for a holding tank to comply with the minimum of 50-foot separation from a well or for a septic field to comply with the 100-foot separation from a well as required in Table 1 of OAR 340-071-0220. Therefore, an on -site septic holding tank or drain field are not realistic options for disposal of the sewage generated at the water treatment plant. The existing process water line can be used to transport sewage as well as process water with proper construction including the use of appropriate back -flow protection. Because of the limited amount of sewage generated on -site, the process water line has capacity to handle both process water and sewage generated on site. The Oregon Health Authority has indicated that use of the holding tank, while acceptable in the short-term, is not an acceptable long-term option. Given the extent of development of the site and the number and location of drinking water wells on -site, other locations for the holding tank or an alternative septic drain field are not feasible and would have the same well setback problems as the existing location. OAR 660-015, Division 15, Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines Goal 1, Citizen Involver lent. To develop a citizen involvement p _gran, that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. FINDING: The proposed comprehensive plan amendment complies with the actions required by the Deschutes County Code, including a public hearing before the Deschutes County Hearings Officer and notice of the hearing published in a newspaper (the Bend Bulletin) at least twenty days in advance. Public agencies and neighboring property owners were mailed notice of the public hearing. In accordance with the Deschutes County Code, property owners potentially affected by the amendment (in this case, within 250 feet of the applicant property) were provided notice of the proposed amendment and hearing. Goal 2, Land Use Planning. To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. FINDING: The applicant is requesting a reasons exception as permitted under OAR 660-004-0020 and previously addressed. Goal 3, Agricultural Lands. To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. FINDING: The proposal does not contain any agricultural lands and therefore this goal is not applicable. 247-19-000628-PA Page 13 of 19 Goal 4, Forest Lands. To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state's forest economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the leading use on forest land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture. FINDING: The proposal does not contain any forest lands and therefore this goal is not applicable. Goal 5, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources. To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. FINDING: The submitted application materials address the various protected Goal 5 resources as described below: • Wildlife Habitat: The site is located within the Tumalo Deer Winter Range, a Goal 5 wildlife habitat resource. The proposed removal of the holding tank and use of an existing line for disposing of wastewater will not impact this resource or its use. • Scenic Areas: The subject property is located more than one quarter mile of Tumalo Creek. A portion of the subject property is located within one quarter mile of Century Drive. The creek and Century Drive are protected with a Landscape Management Combining Zone. The proposal will not impact either of these resources. • Historic Areas: There are no historic resources identified on the site or on adjoining nrnnartiec, • Open Space: There are no Open Space resources that were identified. • Surface Mines: There are no Goal 5 aggregate resources within one-half mile of the Outback site zoned Surface Mining (SM). The subject property is not located within a Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA). Given this information provided by the applicant, staff finds the proposal to comply with Goal 5. Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality. To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state. FINDING: The applicant's burden of proof provides the following: The only impact on air, water, or land resources quality if the exception is adopted will be a small positive impact on air quality from the elimination of truck trips to transport the sewage from Outback to the UGB. The proposal will satisfy Goal 6 because the use of an existing line to transport wastewater will protect water quality at the Outback site. There are no additional land resources affected by this proposal outside of the subject property. To the extent Goal 6 is applicable, the proposed exception is consistent with Goal 6. Staff concurs with this assessment that the proposal to comply with Goal 6. 247-19-000628-PA Page 14 of 19 Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards. To protectpeople and propertyfrom natural hazards. FINDING: The applicant's burden of proof provides the following: The proposal will meet Goal 7 because it will not increase the risk of natural hazards on the site or on the adjoining properties. For this proposed exception, the natural hazard of greatest concern is wildfire. The site itself is not located within an area subject to landslides or within a mapped flood plain, and the County has not identified any other potential natural hazards beyond wildfire. The proposal involves a requested exception to Goal 11 to use an existing process water line to transport wastewater to the City's wastewater treatment facility. The proposed use has no characteristics that will increase the risk of wildfire. Staff concurs with this assessment that the proposal to comply with Goal 7. Goal 8, Recreational Needs. To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. FINDING: The applicant indicates this goal is not applicable because the exception will not create any demand for recreational needs nor prevent the development or use of any recreational facility. The subject property is not used or needed for recreation. Staff also notes that the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan does not identify existing or planned parks, trails or other recreation ., the, e-�.hioe•t r�r�nnrt�e %ivnn Chic infnrm�tinn nrnviricrl by tha annlirant ctaff finfic ti'1P areas o� � the -subject p ope Ly. ..,iv.., , th is infra.. ...in . nrnx ..,.... h% ...nnli......., rzt;% . ..nrio,- _.._ proposal to comply with Goal 8. Goal 9, Economy Development. To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. FINDING: The applicant contends this goal is not applicable because the exception will not have any impact on economic development and will not in anyway limit economic development because the property is not used or not used or needed for economic development. With that said, the applicant further noted the existing water service the facility provides and would continue to provide does provide a needed component, water, that is used in economic activities within the City. Staff agrees concurs with these opinions. Goa110, Housing. To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. FINDING: The applicant contends this goal is not applicable because the exception will not create any demand for housing nor prevent the development or use of housing. The subject property and existing facility are not used or needed for housing. Staff agrees. 247-19-000628-PA Page 15 of 19 Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services. To plan and develop a timely, orderly, and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. FINDING: The applicant is seeking an exception to the provision in Goal 11 prohibiting extension of sewer lines outside urban growth boundaries. The extension of the line will not allow residential development outside the UGB because the line will be restricted to providing service to the subject property and existing water facility and will not be available for residential use. Goal 12, Transportation. To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation program. FINDING: The applicant contends the proposed plan amendment is consistent with Goal 12 because its only effect on transportation will be to eliminate one periodic truck trip, which increases safety and convenience for other users of the transportation system. Staff agrees. Goal 13, Energy Conservation. To conserve energy. FINDING: The applicant contends the plan amendment is consistent with Goal 13 because it will eliminate a periodic truck trip, which uses energy. Staff agrees. Goal 14, Urbanization. To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to -en -cure o#iriont :lse o f land and to nrovide far Evan -hie communities_ FINDING: Goal 14 is not applicable because the plan amendment does not change any use of the property. The property is not being urbanized because no use is changing and the applicant has not proposed urban levels of development that would be served through this exception. The proposed plan amendment would not facilitate or contribute to urbanization. Staff agrees Goals 15 through 19. FINDING: These goals, which address the Willamette Greenway, estuarine, coastal, beaches and dunes, and ocean resources, are not applicable to the proposal because the subject property is not located in or adjacent to any such areas or resources. OREGON REVISTED STATUTES (ORS) ORS 197 - COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANNING ORS 197.732 Goal exceptions, criteria, rules, review. (1) As used in this section: (a) "Compatible" is not intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses. 247-19-000628-PA Page 16 of 19 (b) "Exception" means a comprehensive plan provision, including an amendment to an acknowledged comprehensive plan, that. (A) Is applicable to specific properties or situations and does not establish a planning or zoning policy of general applicability, (B) Does not comply with some or all goal requirements applicable to the subject properties or situations, and (C) Complies with standards under subsection (2) of this section. FINDING: The applicant has requested goal exception applicable only to the City of Bend water facility and its particular circumstances. The requested exception would not establish a planning or zoning policy of general applicability but would be limited to the site. The site is outside the UGB and Goal 11 prohibits extension of sewer lines to serve areas outside the UGB. The exception would authorize the use of an existing line that takes process water from the site to a location within the UGB to also transport sewage. As demonstrated below, the standards of Subsection (2) are met. (2) A local government may adopt an exception to a goal if. (c) The following standards are met. (A) Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply, FINDING: The applicant has request a reasons exception as allowed under Subsection (2)(c) based on the following: The state policy embodied in the applicable goal is a policy to not allow urban development on rural lands; the prohibition on sewer extensions outside the UGB is to prevent intensive residential or other development in rural areas. That policy is not applicable in this situation because the sewer line will serve only a public water treatment facility, which is a permitted use in the rural area; it is listed as a permissible use in the RR-10 zone, where the Property is located. In that regard, the state policygoals are not implicated by the proposal because the proposed exception will not contribute in any way to actual or potential urban development at the Outback site or elsewhere outside of the City's UGB. (B) Areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use, FINDING: The applicant indicates no other area could reasonably accommodate the "use." The exception is sought to allow an existing line to serve an existing, lawfully established use at a specific location. The sinks, toilets, and floor drains will be used at the site will continue to be used whether or not the exception is granted. There is no possibility of constructing a different line to accommodate the use on property that would not be subject to an exception. (C) The long term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the 247-19-000628-PA Page 17 of 19 same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site; and FINDING: The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences of allowing the sewer line extension are all positive rather than negative. The extension of the sewer line will not allow or support any new urban development outside the site. The re-routed sewer line will allow for the removal of a sewage holding tank, and provide wastewater disposal for the existing facility. There are no long-term negative environmental consequences of connecting the sinks, drains, water fountains, and toilets to an existing line, the environmental impacts are beneficial -the replacement of truck trips that use fuel and have emissions with non-polluting gravity flow through an existing pipe. Truck trips past nearby property will be eliminated. There will be no negative economic impacts. The use of the line will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby uses economically or otherwise. The use of the line will result in more economic operation of the Outback site because the costs of trucking will be avoided. The line operates by gravity, so there are no pumping costs. There are no social impacts of the use of the line. (D) The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. FINDING: The use in this matter is allowing a sewer line outside of an UGB to serve the existing water faciii y oiii U ie Subjeci pr v^per y. The adjacent prnpertinc arc ri irrantl% unr evelonod fnracter) open space. Given that there is new development associated with this exception, the use is compatible with other adjacent uses and there will be no additional adverse impacts. (3) The commission shall adopt rules establishing. (a) That an exception may be adopted to allow a use authorized by a statewide planning goal that cannot comply with the approval standards for that type of use; (b) Under what circumstances particular reasons may or may not be used to justify an exception under subsection (2)(c)(A) of this section; and (c) Which uses allowed by the applicable goal must be found impracticable under subsection (2) of this section. FINDING: The Land Conservation and Development Commission adopted rules as codified in OAR 660. (4) A local government approving or denying a proposed exception shall set forth findings of fact and a statement of reasons that demonstrate that the standards of subsection (2) of this section have or have not been met. FINDING: The hearings officer will provide the details set forth in the section. 247-19-000628-PA Page 18 of 19 (5) Each notice of a public hearing on a proposed exception shall specifically note that a goal exception is proposed and shall summarize the issues in an understandable manner. FINDING: Notice of the public hearing explicitly indicated a goal exception was requested and provided an understandable description of the reason for the request. IV. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the applicant has met the burden of proof necessary to justify Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) through effectively demonstrating compliance with the applicable criteria of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and applicable sections of OAR and ORS. DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION Writtenttiy: MattheW Martin, Associate Planner 247-19-000628-PA Page 19 of 19 N O O O c c c +, v v v U m m m 0 cc N W cr F- U N a J J rn 0 d O m� v m n z O N o ro a Lo n J J LU :D N a a w W uj = K m LU � J J _I N z rro a a Q 0 0 0 z z z Lu w Lu m on m LL. LL LL. O O O c F F- O U U V Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11 - Public Facilities and Services File Nos.: 247-19-000628-PA Address: 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend �I s�,'0, RE 1 Cf Applicant: City of Bendti ry Proposal Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11 - Public Facilities and Services • Allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). • Sewage is limited that produced at the City of Bend water facility. • "Reasons" exception based on: • Limited area for onsite sewage disposal. • Availability of existing connection to City sewer system to transport sewage. 11/13/2019 1 11/13/2019 Background • The Subject property is developed with the City of Bend water facility. • Onsite sewage is stored in a holding tank and trucked off for disposal. • A process water (not sewage) line currently connects the site to the City of Bend sewer system for process water disposal. • The Oregon Health Authority (OHA) has advised that the sewage holding tank is located too close to a drinking water well. r� Vi,?.,=L:a+.?J,v<..a..�'irf;�x �i..u��a's K 11/13/2019 .ntt•%+rat..sre�uarma } r � +c�.kNw±nmt p. m Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services File Nos.: 247-19-000628-PA Address: 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend�t [ xM' Applicant: City of Bend L 11/13/2019 CI In N U a) U) N D L C) N N C O w 0 O J C d d rn 0 N N N .Q O z d co N O O O N 1% 0 Z LL a.i o� M e 1 � ` �7 fl cl G v cn J" � 3 G� r6 J l D E S C COMMUNiTY DEVELOPMENT AGENDA DESCHUTES COUNTY HEARINGS OFFICER November 12, 2019, 6:00 p.m. BARNES AND SAWYERS ROOMS DESCHUTES SERVICES CENTER 1300 NW WALL STREET BEND, OREGON 97701 Public Hearing I. Hearings Officer Hearings FILE NUMBERS: 247-19-000628-PA OWNER/ APPLICANT: City of Bend REQUEST: Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). LOCATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend, and is identified on Assessor's Map 17-11-34 as tax lot 800. STAFF CONTACT: Matthew Martin, AICP, Associate Planner Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible, please call the ADA Coordinator at (541) 617-4747. 1 1 7 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 i F.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708 6005 ��(541)388-6575 @cdd@deschutes.org ®www.deschutes.org/cd Mailing Date: Wednesday, November 6, 2019 COMNAWNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT FILE NUMBER: 247-19-000628-PA HEARING: November 12, 2019, 6:00 p.m. Barnes & Sawyer Rooms Deschutes Services Center 1300 NW Wall Street Bend, OR 97708 APPLICANT/OWNER: City of Bend Paul Rheault PO Box 97709 Bend, OR 97709 PROPOSAL: Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of U e f.fiy of DeHu Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). STAFF REVIEWER: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner Email: Matt.martin@deschutes.org; Telephone: 541-330-4620 1. APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND CRITERIA: Deschutes County Code Title 22, Procedures Ordinance Deschutes County Code Title 23, Comprehensive Plan Chapter 1, Comprehensive Planning Chapter 2, Resource Management Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR). Chapter 660 Division 4, Interpretation of Goal 2 Exceptions Process Division 11, Public Facilities Planning Division 15, Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 1 1 7 NW Larayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 (54-1) 388-6575 cdd@deschutes .org wnnwd.dcschutes.org/cd ORS 197.732, Goal Exceptions 11. FINDINGS OF FACT: A. LOCATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend, and is identified on Deschutes County Assessor's Map 17-11-34 as Tax Lot 800. B. LOT OF RECORD: The subject property is a legal lot of record as was previously found in the findings and decision for file nos. SP-02-58 and LM-02-283 C. PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to amend the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). D. ZONING AND PLAN DESIGNATIONS: The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR- 10), Landscape Management Combining (LM), and Wildlife Area Combining (WA). The comprehensive plan designation is Rural Residential Exception Area. E. SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property is approximately 10.5 acres in size and irregular shaped. The property is currently developed as the City of Bend water reservoir facility. Facilities on the property include water storage reservoirs, a chlorine contact reservoir, a wireless telecommunications facility, drinking water wells that supply water to the City of Bend, exterior lighting, and miscellaneous accessory structures used for operating and 247-19-000628-PA Page 2 of 19 maintaining the utility facility. The development includes a structure that contains a restrooms, drinking fountains and floor drains. The sewage wastewater produced is currently stored on -site in a holding tank and periodically trucked off -site and disposed of into the City's sewer system within the UGB. A process water line currently connects the water treatment plant to the sewer system and is used to transport process water (not sewage) for disposal. That line could be used to transport both the process water and sewage. The proposed plan amendment would permit the use of this process line to only provide wastewater disposal for the existing restrooms, drinking fountains, and floor drains. F. SURROUNDING LAND USES: The property is surrounded on all sides by undeveloped forested land. The properties to the north, west, and east are zoned Rural Residential (RR- 10) and publically owned by the Bend Metro Park and Recreation District. The property to the south is zoned Forest Use (F-2) and publically owned by the federal government. G. SOILS: According to Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maps of the area, the subject property contains three different soil types, as described below. 156C Wanoga-Fremkle-Henkle Complex 0 to 15 percent slopes: This soil complex is composed of 35 percent Wanoga soils and similar inclusions; 30 percent Fremkle soils and similar inclusions; 20 percent Henkle soils and similar inclusion; and 15 percent contrasting inclusions. The Wanoga and Fremkle soils are well drained, with a moderately rapid permeability and an available water capacity of about two to four inches. The major use of this soil complex is livestock grazing and woodland. The Henkle soils are somewhat excessively drained, with a moderately rapid permeability and available water capacity of about 2 inches. The agricultural capability rating for the Wanoga and Fremkle soils is 6e with or without irrigation. The agricultural capability rating for the Henkle soils is 7e with or without irrigation. Section 18.04.030 of the DCC does not consider this soil type high -value farmland when irrigated. The entire property is composed of this soil type. H. NOTICE REQUIREMENT: The applicant complied with the posted notice requirements of Section 22.23.030(B) of Deschutes County Code (DCC) Title 22. The applicant submitted a Land Use Action Sign Affidavit, dated November 1, 2019, indicating the applicant posted notice of the land use action on the property on October 31, 2019. On October 24, 2019, the Planning Division mailed a Notice of Public Hearing to all property owners within 250 feet of the subject property. A Notice of Public Hearing was published in the Bend Bulletin on October 22, 2019. Notice of the first evidentiary hearing was submitted to the Department of Land Conservation and Development on October 8, 2019. 1. PUBLIC COMMENTS: No written comments have been received at the time of this staff report. J. AGENCY COMMENTS: No comments were received at the time this staff report was finalized. 247-19-000628-PA Page 3 of 19 K. REVIEW PERIOD: The application was submitted on August 13, 2019. The application was deemed complete on September 12, 2019. According to Deschutes County Code 22.20.040(D), the review of the proposed quasi-judicial Plan Amendment and Zone Change application is not subject to the 150-day review period. L. BACKGROUND: The City of Bend owns and operates a water treatment plant, water reservoirs, water wells and related facilities on the subject property. The Outback water facility site is outside of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) of the City of Bend. As previously noted, the site contains restrooms, drinking fountains and floor drains. Currently the sewage is stored on -site in a holding tank and periodically trucked off -site and disposed of into the City's sewer system within the UGB. The City has been advised by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) that the sewage holding tank is located too close to a drinking water well. Although the City of Bend has obtained a waiver for its location, OHA strongly recommends that the City seek an alternative to the holding tank, preferably disposal of the sewage waste through a line connecting to the City's sewer system. The applicant is applying for this plan amendment with exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Service, to allow the line to be used as a sewage line outside an UGB. nI rONC USIONS OF LAW TITLE 23 OF THE DESCHUTES COUNTY CODE (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) Chapter 1. Comprehensive Planning Section 1.2 Community Involvement Policies Goal and Policies Goal 1. Maintain an active and open community involvement program that is accessible to all members of the community and engages the community during development and implementation of land use policies and codes. FINDING: The proposed comprehensive plan amendment complies with the actions required by the Deschutes County Code, including a public hearing before the Deschutes County Hearings Officer and notice of the hearing published in a newspaper (the Bend Bulletin) at least twenty days in advance. Public agencies and neighboring property owners were mailed notice of the public hearing. In accordance with the Deschutes County Code, property owners potentially affected by the amendment (in this case, within 250 feet of the applicant property) were provided notice of the proposed amendment and hearing. Section 1.3, Land Use Planning 247-19-000628-PA Page 4 of 19 Goal 1. Maintain an open and public land use process in which decisions are based on the objective evaluation of facts. FINDING: The applicant has requested a comprehensive plan amendment with a goal exception to allow a sewer line outside of an UGB. Staff will follow procedures outlined in Title 22, the Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance, in order to ensure a land use process that is open and based on objective evaluation of facts. Chapter 2 Resource Management Section 2.4, Goal 5 Overview Policies Goal 1. Protect Goal 5 resources FINDING: The submitted application materials address the various protected Goal 5 resources as follows: • Wildlife Habitat: The site is located within the Tumalo Deer Winter Range, a Goal 5 wildlife habitat resource. The proposed removal of the holding tank and use of an existing line for disposing of wastewater will not impact this resource or its use. • Scenic Areas: The subject property is located more than one quarter mile of Tumalo Creek. A portion of the subject property is located within one quarter mile of Century Drive. The creek and Century Drive are protected with a Landscape Management Combining Zone. The r. r0 rncol %mill nnf irnnnrt nithnr of tha-za rPCnl IrrPC • Historic Areas: There are no historic resources identified on the site or on adjoining properties. • Open Space: There are no Open Space resources that were identified. • Surface Mines: There are no Goal 5 aggregate resources within one-half mile of the Outback site zoned Surface Mining (SM). The subject property is not located within a Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA). Section 2.5, Water Resources Policies Goal 5. Protect and improve water quality in the Deschutes River Basin. FINDING: The applicant has been advised by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) that the sewage holding tank is located too close to a drinking water well. Although the applicant has obtained a waiver for its location, OHA strongly recommends that the applicant seek an alternative to the holding tank, preferably disposal of the sewage waste through a line connecting to the City's sewer system. The abandonment of the holding tank will eliminate the potential for associated negative impact of the ground water well resources on the property. Goal 6. Coordinate land use and water policies. 247-19-000628-PA Page 5 of 19 FINDING: Notice of the proposed plan amendment was sent to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), Oregon Department of Environment Quality (DEQ), Oregon Health Authority (OHA), the Deschutes County Environmental Soils Division, the Deschutes County Environmental Health Division, and others. No adverse comments have been received at the time of this staff report. Section 2.8 Energy Policies Goal 1. Promote energy conservation. FINDING: The applicant provides responses pertaining to this goals in their response to Statewide Planning Goal 6, Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality, below. Section 2.9 Environmental Quality Goal 1. Maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land. FINDING: The applicant provides responses pertaining to this goals in their response to Statewide Planning Goal 6, Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality, below. OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES (OAR) CHAPTER 660 - LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT OAR CC% r%;.,;LFIVIiivn A, IKITEDDDCTATION OF GOAL 2 EXCEPTION PROCESS OAR 660-004-0000 Purpose (1) The purpose of this division is to interpret the requirements of Goal 2 and ORS 197.732 regarding exceptions. This division explains the three types of exceptions set forth in Goal 2 "Land Use Planning, Part 11, Exceptions." Rules in other divisions of OAR 660 provide substantive standards for some specific types of goal exceptions. Where this is the case, the specific substantive standards in the other divisions control over the more general standards of this division. However, the definitions, notice, and planning and zoning requirements of this division apply to all types of exceptions. The types of exceptions that are subject to specific standards in other divisions are: (a) Standards for a demonstration of reasons for sanitary sewer service to rural lands are provided in OAR 660-011-0060(9), (b) Standards for a demonstration of reasons for urban transportation improvements on rural land are provided in OAR 660-012-0070, (c) Standards to determine irrevocably committed exceptions pertaining to urban development on rural land are provided in OAR 660-014-0030, and standards for demonstration of reasons for urban development on rural land are provided in OAR 660- 014-0040. FINDING: The submitted application addresses compliance with OAR 660-011-0060(9) as well as OAR Chapter 660 Division 4, in compliance with this section. 247-19-000628-PA Page 6 of 19 OAR 660-004-0010, Application of the Goal Exception Process to Certain Goals (1) The exceptions process is not applicable to Statewide Goal 1 "Citizen Involvement" and Goal "Land Use Planning." The exceptions process is generally applicable to all or part of those statewide goals that prescribe or restrict certain uses of resource land, restrict urban uses on rural land, or limit the provision of certain public facilities and services. These statewide goals include but are not limited to: (c) Goal 11 "Public Facilities and Services" as provided in OAR 660-011-0060(9), FINDING: The proposed plan amendment includes an exception to Goal 11. Therefore, the criteria applied are those provided in OAR 660-011-0060(9) and are addressed below. OAR 660-004-0020, Goal Z Part 11(c), Exception Requirements (1) If a jurisdiction determines there are reasons consistent with OAR 660-004-0022 to use resource lands for uses not allowed by the applicable Goal or to allow public facilities or services not allowed by the applicable Goal, the justification shall be set forth in the comprehensive plan as an exception. As provided in OAR 660-004-0000(1), rules in other divisions may also apply. FINDING: The City is requesting an exception to Goal 11 to allow a sewer line outside of a UGB to serve only the pubiic water facility. As part of this pr^viceSS :.upon any approval the �uirtifiratinn fnr this exception will be set forth in the comprehensive plan. (2) The four standards in Goal 2 Part ll(c) required to be addressed when taking an exception to a goal are described in subsections (a) through (d) of this section, including general requirements applicable to each of the factors: (a) "Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply." The exception shall set forth the facts and assumptions used as the basis for determining that a state policy embodied in a goal should not apply to specific properties or situations, including the amount of land for the use being planned and why the use requires a location on resource land, FINDING: The applicant's burden of proof states: The policy embodied in the prohibition in Goal 11's prohibition on extending sewer lines outside the UGB is the policy to not allow urban development on rural lands. That policy does not apply in this situation because there will be no change in the use of the Outback site or of any surrounding property. The Outback site currently is developed with a water treatment system, wells, reservoirs, and related facilities. It has restrooms for employee use. With or without the exception, it will have the same facilities and restrooms. The exception will not allow any new use of the Outback site and will not in anyway affect any adjacent or nearby property. There will be no urban type or urban level development of the Outback site or any other property. There is no 247-19-000628-PA Page 7 of19 other possible location for a sewer line from the Outback site to the UGB that would not have significantly greater impact resulting from the need to install a new line rather than adding sewer to an existing line. The requested exception complies with this section. Staff concurs with this conclusion. (b) "Areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use". The exception must meet the following requirements: (A) The exception shall indicate on a map or otherwise describe the location of possible alternative areas considered for the use that do not require a new exception. The area for which the exception is taken shall be identified, FINDING: A site plan of the existing facility and the line proposed to be used to transport sewage are included with the application. The site plan shows the extent of existing development and why other areas could not be used for onsite sewer disposal. All possible sewer line routes between the subject property and the UGB involve extending a sewage line outside the UGB. (B) To show why the particular site is justified, it is necessary to discuss why other areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Economic factors may be considered along with other relevant factors in determining that the use cannot reasonably be accommodated in other areas. Under this test the following questions shall be addressed: (i) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on nonresource land that would not YPgIGI%YP an eYrephan� %nrl�inl%r!g li1fYP/YCIE1g the density of uses on nonresource land? If not, why not? FINDING: The subject property is zone RR-10 and the areas between the subject property and the UGB are zoned either RR-10 or Urban Area Reserve (UAR-10). All of these zones are rural residential exception, nonresource zones. (H) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on resource land that is already irrevocably committed to nonresource uses not allowed by the applicable Goal, including resource land in existing unincorporated communities, or by increasing the density of uses on committed lands? If not, why not? FINDING: The subject property is zone RR-10 and the areas between the subject property and the UGB are zoned either RR-10 or UAR-10. There is no resource land in the impacted area. (iii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated inside an urban growth boundary? If not, why not? FINDING: The water facility is outside and a distance from the UGB. Therefore, the sewer line cannot be within the UGB. Given the need to at some point decommission the waste storage tank 247-19-000628-PA Page 8 of 19 and the infeasibility of constructing an on -site septic system on a site that has so many municipal water wells, the proposed use of the line for sewage is necessary to accommodate the existing use. (iv) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated without the provision of a proposed public facility or service? If not, why not? FINDING: The proposed amendment is directly related to the public water facility on the subject property. The applicant is requesting to use the existing process water line to also transport sewage for the public water facility. (C) The "alternative areas" standard in paragraph a may be met by a broad review of similar types of areas rather than a review of specific alternative sites. Initially, a local government adopting an exception need assess only whether those similar types of areas in the vicinity could not reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Site specific comparisons are not required of a local government taking an exception unless another party to the local proceeding describes specific sites that can more reasonably accommodate the proposed use. A detailed evaluation of specific alternative sites is thus not required unless such sites are specifically described, with facts to support the assertion that the sites are more reasonable, by another party during the local exceptions proceeding. FINDING: The specific nature of the proposed exception and the factual circumstances limit the alternative areas analysis to an analysis of whether there is an alternative routing for the line. While a separate r.-gGlC ate c 1AInr lino rnl 11A he rnnctrhrtoA that line Mini dr] nereccirily go thmi Igh arPac that wnl Ild JGVVI..I 111 v Lvuu .-., � also require an exception. In addition, construction of an alternative line would have greater negative impacts than using the existing process water line. Analysis of onsite alternatives is also necessary. The water facility site contains several municipal drinking water wells. The number of wells and the extent of development of the site do not allow alternative locations for either a holding tank to comply with the minimum of 50-foot separation from a well or for a septic field to comply with the 100-foot separation from a well as required in Table 1 of OAR 340-071-0220. Therefore, an on -site septic holding tank or drain field are not realistic alternatives for disposal of the sewage generated at facility. (c) "The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site." The exception shall describe: the characteristics of each alternative area considered by the jurisdiction in which an exception might be taken, the typical advantages and disadvantages of using the area for a use not allowed by the Goal, and the typical positive and negative consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. A detailed evaluation of specific alternative sites is not required unless such sites are specifically described with facts to support the assertion that the sites have significantly fewer adverse impacts during 247-19-000628-PA Page 9 of 19 the local exceptions proceeding. The exception shall include the reasons why the consequences of the use at the chosen site are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site. Such reasons shall include but are not limited to a description of.• the facts used to determine which resource land is least productive, the ability to sustain resource uses near the proposed use, and the long-term economic impact on the general area caused by irreversible removal of the land from the resource base. Other possible impacts to be addressed include the effects of the proposed use on the water table, on the costs of improving roads and on the costs to special service districts, FINDING: The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences of allowing the sewer line extension are all positive rather than negative. The extension of the sewer line will not allow or support any new urban development outside the site. The re-routed sewer line will allow for the removal of a sewage holding tank, and provide wastewater disposal for the existing facility. There are no long-term negative environmental consequences of connecting the sinks, drains, water fountains, and toilets to an existing line, the environmental impacts are beneficial. The replacement of truck trips that use fuel and have emissions with non-polluting gravity flow through an existing pipe. Truck trips past nearby property will be eliminated. There will be no negative economic impacts. The use of the line will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby uses economically or otherwise. The use of the line will result in more economic operation of the site because the costs of trucking will be avoided. The line operates by gravity, so +b... pumping rr\c+c u ier a are no pui i pii g There are no social impacts of the use of the line. (d) "The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts." The exception shall describe how the proposed use will be rendered compatible with adjacent land uses. The exception shall demonstrate that the proposed use is situated in such a manner as to be compatible with surrounding natural resources and resource management or production practices. "Compatible" is not intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses. FINDING: The use in this matter is allowing a sewer line outside of an UGB to serve the existing water facility on the subject property. The adjacent properties are currently undeveloped, forested open space. Surrounding natural resources include forest lands, scenic areas, and wildlife habitat. Given that there is no new development associated with this exception, the use is compatible with other adjacent uses and there will be no additional adverse impacts. (3) if the exception involves more than one area for which the reasons and circumstances are the same, the areas may be considered as a group. Each of the areas shall be identified on a map, or their location otherwise described, and keyed to the appropriate findings. 247-19-000628-PA Page 10 of 19 FINDING: The proposed exception does not involve more than one area. Only the subject property is the subject of this request. 660-004-0022, Reasons Necessary to Justify an Exception Under Goal2, Part 11(c) An exception under Goal 2, Part 11(c) may be taken for any use not allowed by the applicable goal(s) or for a use authorized by a statewide planning goal that cannot comply with the approval standards for that type of use. The types of reasons that may or may not be used to justify certain types of uses not allowed on resource lands are set forth in the following sections of this rule. Reasons that may allow an exception to Goal 11 to provide sewer service to rural lands are described in OAR 660-011-0060. Reasons that may allow transportation facilities and improvements that do not meet the requirements of OAR 660-012-0065 are provided in OAR 660-012-0070. Reasons that rural lands are irrevocably committed to urban levels of development are provided in OAR 660-014-0030. Reasons that may justify the establishment of new urban development on undeveloped rural land are provided in OAR 660- 014-0040. FINDING: As stated in this section, the reasons that may allow an exception to Goal 11 to provide sewer service to rural lands are described in OAR 660-011-0060. The provisions of OAR 660-011- 0060 are addressed below. OAR 660, Division 11, PUBLIC FACILITIES PLANNING 660=011=0060, Se ver Se; .rice to Rural 1 ands. (1) As used in this rule, unless the context requires otherwise: (a) "Establishment of a sewer system" means the creation of a new sewage system, including systems provided by public or private entities, (b) "Extension of a Sewer System" means the extension of a pipe, conduit, pipeline, main, or other physical component from or to an existing sewer system in order to provide service to a use, regardless of whether the use is inside the service boundaries of the public or private service provider. The sewer service authorized in section (8) of this rule is not an extension of a sewer, (c) "No practicable alternative to a sewer system" means a determination by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) or the Oregon Health Division, pursuant to criteria in OAR chapter 340, division 71, and other applicable rules and laws, that an existing public health hazard cannot be adequately abated by the repair or maintenance of existing sewer systems or on -site systems or by the installation of new on -site systems as defined in OAR 340-071-0100, (d) "Public health hazard" means a condition whereby it is probable that the public is exposed to disease -caused physical suffering or illness due to the presence of inadequately treated sewage, (e) "Sewage" means the water -carried human, animal, vegetable, or industrial waste from residences, buildings, industrial establishments or other places, together with such ground water infiltration and surface water as may be present, 247-19-000628-PA Page 11 of 19 (f) "Sewer system" means a system that serves more than one lot or parcel, or more than one condominium unit or more than one unit within a planned unit development, and includes pipelines or conduits, pump stations, force mains, and all other structures, devices, appurtenances and facilities used for treating or disposing of sewage or for collecting or conducting sewage to an ultimate point for treatment and disposal. The following are not considered a "sewer system" for purposes of this rule: (A) A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of storm water runoff, (B) A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of animal waste from a farm use as defined in ORS 215.303. FINDING: This section provides definitions rather than substantive criteria, and is included only to provide context for responses to the substantive sections of the rule. (2) Except as provided in sections (3), (4), (8), and (9) of this rule, and consistent with Goal 11, a local government shall not allow. (a) The establishment of new sewer systems outside urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries, (b) The extension of sewer lines from within urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries in order to serve uses on land outside those boundaries, (c) The extension of sewer systems that currently serve land outside urban growth boundaries and unincorporated community boundaries in order to serve uses that are outside such boundaries and are not served by the system on July 28, 1998. FINDING: The proposed use of the line for sewer would result in the extension of a sewer line from within the UGB to serve a use outside the UGB, so an exception is being requested. The proposed plan amendment includes an exception to Goal 11 as permitted under Section 9 of the rule. (9) A local government may allow the establishment of new sewer systems or the extension of sewer lines not otherwise provided for in section (4) of this rule, or allow a use to connect to an existing sewer line not otherwise provided for in section (8) of this rule, provided the standards for an exception to Goal 11 have been met, and provided the local government adopts land use regulations that prohibit the sewer system from serving any uses or areas other than those justified in the exception. Appropriate reasons and facts for an exception to Goal 11 include but are not limited to the following. - (a) The new system, or extension of an existing system, is necessary to avoid an imminent and significant public health hazard that would otherwise result if the sewer service is not provided, and, there is no practicable alternative to the sewer system in order to avoid the imminent public health hazard, or FINDING: The applicant is requesting an exception to allow use of an existing line to take sewage from the water facility on the subject property outside the UGB to within the UGB. The applicant specifies the sewer line may be used only for the water facility on the subject property. While the rule lists two possible reasons for allowing an exception, the rule allows other reasons to justify the 247-19-000628-PA Page 12 of 19 exception. In this case, there is no imminent public health hazard. These other reasons are discussed below. The water facility site contains several municipal drinking water wells. The number of wells and the extent of development of the site do not allow alternative locations for a holding tank to comply with the minimum of 50-foot separation from a well or for a septic field to comply with the 100-foot separation from a well as required in Table 1 of OAR 340-071-0220. Therefore, an on -site septic holding tank or drain field are not realistic options for disposal of the sewage generated at the water treatment plant. The existing process water line can be used to transport sewage as well as process water with proper construction including the use of appropriate back -flow protection. Because of the limited amount of sewage generated on -site, the process water line has capacity to handle both process water and sewage generated on site. The Oregon Health Authority has indicated that use of the holding tank, while acceptable in the short-term, is not an acceptable long-term option. Given the extent of development of the site and the number and location of drinking water wells on -site, other locations for the holding tank or an alternative septic drain field are not feasible and would have the same well setback problems as the existing location. OAR 660-015, Division 15, Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines Goal 1, riti-7en Inurnivement. To develop a riti7en involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. FINDING: The proposed comprehensive plan amendment complies with the actions required by the Deschutes County Code, including a public hearing before the Deschutes County Hearings Officer and notice of the hearing published in a newspaper (the Bend Bulletin) at least twenty days in advance. Public agencies and neighboring property owners were mailed notice of the public hearing. In accordance with the Deschutes County Code, property owners potentially affected by the amendment (in this case, within 250 feet of the applicant property) were provided notice of the proposed amendment and hearing. Goal 2, Land Use Planning. To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. FINDING: The applicant is requesting a reasons exception as permitted under OAR 660-004-0020 and previously addressed. Goal 3, Agricultural Lands. To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. FINDING: The proposal does not contain any agricultural lands and therefore this goal is not applicable. 247-19-000628-PA Page 13 of 19 Goal 4, Forest Lands. To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state's forest economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the leading use on forest land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture. FINDING: The proposal does not contain any forest lands and therefore this goal is not applicable. Goal 5, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources. To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. FINDING: The submitted application materials address the various protected Goal 5 resources as described below: • Wildlife Habitat: The site is located within the Tumalo Deer Winter Range, a Goal 5 wildlife habitat resource. The proposed removal of the holding tank and use of an existing line for disposing of wastewater will not impact this resource or its use. • Scenic Areas: The subject property is located more than one quarter mile of Tumalo Creek. A portion of the subject property is located within one quarter mile of Century Drive. The creek and Century Drive are protected with a Landscape Management Combining Zone. The proposal will not impact either of these resources. • Historic Areas: There are no historic resources identified on the site or on adjoining rr�rortioe Ni vNci uc.�. • Open Space: There are no Open Space resources that were identified. • Surface Mines: There are no Goal 5 aggregate resources within one-half mile of the Outback site zoned Surface Mining (SM). The subject property is not located within a Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA). Given this information provided by the applicant, staff finds the proposal to comply with Goal 5. Goal 6, Air, Water and Land Resources Quality. To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state. FINDING: The applicant's burden of proof provides the following: The only impact on air, water, or land resources quality if the exception is adopted will be a small positive impact on air quality from the elimination of truck trips to transport the sewage from Outback to the UGB. The proposal will satisfy Goal 6 because the use of an existing line to transport wastewater will protect water quality at the Outback site. There are no additional land resources affected by this proposal outside of the subject property. To the extent Goal 6 is applicable, the proposed exception is consistent with Goal 6. Staff concurs with this assessment that the proposal to comply with Goal 6. 247-19-000628-PA Page 14 of 19 Goal 7, Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards. To protect people and property from natural hazards. FINDING: The applicant's burden of proof provides the following: The proposal will meet Goal 7 because it will not increase the risk of natural hazards on the site or on the adjoining properties. For this proposed exception, the natural hazard of greatest concern is wildfire. The site itself is not located within an area subject to landslides or within a mapped flood plain, and the County has not identified any other potential natural hazards beyond wildfire. The proposal involves a requested exception to Goal 11 to use an existing process water line to transport wastewater to the City's wastewater treatment facility. The proposed use has no characteristics that will increase the risk of wildfire. Staff concurs with this assessment that the proposal to comply with Goal 7. Goal 8, Recreational Needs. To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. FINDING: The applicant indicates this goal is not applicable because the exception will not create any demand for recreational needs nor prevent the development or use of any recreational facility. The subject property is not used or needed for recreation. Staff also notes that the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan does not identify existing or planned parks, trails or other recreation areas on the siibierf prnparty (;ix/on this infnrmatinn rnrnvirinri h\/ the applicant; staff finds the proposal to comply with Goal 8. Goal 9, Economy Development. To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. FINDING: The applicant contends this goal is not applicable because the exception will not have any impact on economic development and will not in any way limit economic development because the property is not used or not used or needed for economic development. With that said, the applicant further noted the existing water service the facility provides and would continue to provide does provide a needed component, water, that is used in economic activities within the City. Staff agrees concurs with these opinions. Goal 10, Housing. To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. FINDING: The applicant contends this goal is not applicable because the exception will not create any demand for housing nor prevent the development or use of housing. The subject property and existing facility are not used or needed for housing. Staff agrees. 247-19-000628-PA Page 15 of 19 Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services. To plan and develop a timely, orderly, and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. FINDING: The applicant is seeking an exception to the provision in Goal 11 prohibiting extension of sewer lines outside urban growth boundaries. The extension of the line will not allow residential development outside the UGB because the line will be restricted to providing service to the subject property and existing water facility and will not be available for residential use. Goal 12, Transportation. To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation program. FINDING: The applicant contends the proposed plan amendment is consistent with Goal 12 because its only effect on transportation will be to eliminate one periodic truck trip, which increases safety and convenience for other users of the transportation system. Staff agrees. Goal 13, Energy Conservation. To conserve energy. FINDING: The applicant contends the plan amendment is consistent with Goal 13 because it will eliminate a periodic truck trip, which uses energy. Staff agrees. Goal 14, Urbanization. To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to e nSUre effi.rient use of land! and to provide f-or livable comm niti-S. FINDING: Goal 14 is not applicable because the plan amendment does not change any use of the property. The property is not being urbanized because no use is changing and the applicant has not proposed urban levels of development that would be served through this exception. The proposed plan amendment would not facilitate or contribute to urbanization. Staff agrees Goals 15 through 19. FINDING: These goals, which address the Willamette Greenway, estuarine, coastal, beaches and dunes, and ocean resources, are not applicable to the proposal because the subject property is not located in or adjacent to any such areas or resources. OREGON REVISTED STATUTES (ORS) ORS 197 - COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLANNING ORS 197.732 Goal exceptions; criteria, rules, review. (1) As used in this section: (a) "Compatible" is not intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses. 247-19-000628-PA Page 16 of 19 (b) "Exception" means a comprehensive plan provision, including an amendment to an acknowledged comprehensive plan, that. (A) Is applicable to specific properties or situations and does not establish a planning or zoning policy of general applicability, (B) Does not comply with some or all goal requirements applicable to the subject properties or situations, and (C) Complies with standards under subsection (2) of this section. FINDING: The applicant has requested goal exception applicable only to the City of Bend water facility and its particular circumstances. The requested exception would not establish a planning or zoning policy of general applicability but would be limited to the site. The site is outside the UGB and Goal 11 prohibits extension of sewer lines to serve areas outside the UGB. The exception would authorize the use of an existing line that takes process water from the site to a location within the UGB to also transport sewage. As demonstrated below, the standards of Subsection (2) are met. (2) A local government may adopt an exception to a goal if: (c) The following standards are met. (A) Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply; FINDING: The applicant has request a reasons exception as allowed under Subsection (2)(c) based on the following: The state policy embodied in the applicable goal is a policy to not allow urban development on rural lands the prohibition on sewer extensions outside the UGB is to prevent intensive residential or other development in rural areas. That policy is not applicable in this situation because the sewer line will serve only a public water treatment facility, which is a permitted use in the rural area; it is listed as a permissible use in the RR-10 zone, where the Property is located. In that regard, the state policy goals are not implicated by the proposal because the proposed exception will not contribute in any way to actual or potential urban development at the Outback site or elsewhere outside of the City's UGB. (B) Areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use, FINDING: The applicant indicates no other area could reasonably accommodate the "use." The exception is soughtto allow an existing line to serve an existing, lawfully established use at a specific location. The sinks, toilets, and floor drains will be used at the site will continue to be used whether or not the exception is granted. There is no possibility of constructing a different line to accommodate the use on property that would not be subject to an exception. (C) The long term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the 247-19-000628-PA Page 17 of19 same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site; and FINDING: The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences of allowing the sewer line extension are all positive rather than negative. The extension of the sewer line will not allow or support any new urban development outside the site. The re-routed sewer line will allow for the removal of a sewage holding tank, and provide wastewater disposal for the existing facility. There are no long-term negative environmental consequences of connecting the sinks, drains, water fountains, and toilets to an existing line, the environmental impacts are beneficial -the replacement of truck trips that use fuel and have emissions with non-polluting gravity flow through an existing pipe. Truck trips past nearby property will be eliminated. There will be no negative economic impacts. The use of the line will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby uses economically or otherwise. The use of the line will result in more economic operation of the Outback site because the costs of trucking will be avoided. The line operates by gravity, so there are no pumping costs. There are no social impacts of the use of the line. (D) The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. FINDING: The use in this matter is allowing a sewer line outside of an UGB to serve the existing water facility on lI the subject property,. The adjacent proper ties are `uirrently uiridaxielnrnarl fnract Pri u, open space. Given that there is new development associated with this exception, the use is compatible with other adjacent uses and there will be no additional adverse impacts. (3) The commission shall adopt rules establishing. (a) That an exception may be adopted to allow a use authorized by a statewide planning goal that cannot comply with the approval standards for that type of use; (b) Under what circumstances particular reasons may or may not be used to justify an exception under subsection (2)(c)(A) of this section; and (c) Which uses allowed by the applicable goal must be found impracticable under subsection (2) of this section. FINDING: The Land Conservation and Development Commission adopted rules as codified in OAR 660. (4) A local government approving or denying a proposed exception shall set forth findings of fact and a statement of reasons that demonstrate that the standards of subsection (2) of this section have or have not been met. FINDING: The hearings officer will provide the details set forth in the section. 247-19-000628-PA Page 18 of 19 (5) Each notice of a public hearing on a proposed exception shall specifically note that a goal exception is proposed and shall summarize the issues in an understandable manner. FINDING: Notice of the public hearing explicitly indicated a goal exception was requested and provided an understandable description of the reason for the request. IV. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the applicant has met the burden of proof necessary to justify Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) through effectively demonstrating compliance with the applicable criteria of the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and applicable sections of OAR and ORS. DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING DIVISION l 1- Written :by: MattherMartin, Associate Planner 247-19-000628-PA Page 19 of19 Q Q a a 000 000 -a a) T Cr V) a-+ l!I In Axi -1 U M z �O Ln X in w v m U LU O O J 2 - w Matt Martin From: Jeff Freund Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 8:06 AM To: Matt Martin Subject: well construction standards if needed https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/HEALTHYENVI RONM ENTS/DRINKINGWATER/RULES/Documents/61-0050.pdf OAR 333-061-0050 Construction Standards (1) General: (a) These standards shall apply to the construction of new public water systems and to major additions or modifications to existing public water systems and are intended to assure that the system facilities, when constructed, will be free of public health hazards and will be capable of producing water which consistently complies with the MCLs; (b) Facilities at public water systems must comply with the construction standards in place at the time the facility was constructed or installed for use at a public water system. A public water system shall not be required to undertake alterations to existing facilities, unless the standard is listed as a significant deficiency as prescribed in OAR 333-061-0076(4) or if MCLs are being exceeded. (c) Non-public water systems that are converted to public water systems shall be modified as necessary to conform to the requirements of this rule. (d) Facilities at public water systems shall be designed and constructed in a manner such that contamination will be effectively excluded, and the structures and piping will be capable of safely withstanding external and internal forces acting upon them; (e) Only materials designed for potable water service and meeting NSF Standard 61: Drinking Water System Components - Health Effects or equivalent shall be used in those elements of the water system which are in contact with potable water, (f) New tanks, pumps, equipment, pipe valves and fittings shall be used in the construction of new public water systems, major additions or modifications to existing water systems. The Authority may permit the use of used items when it can be demonstrated that they have been renovated and are suitable for use in public water systems; (g) Prior to construction of new facilities, the water supplier shall submit plans to the Authority for approval as specified in OAR 333-061-0060(1)(a). (h) Construction may deviate from the requirements of this section provided that documentation is submitted, to the satisfaction of the Authority, that the deviation is equal to or superior to the requirements of this section as specified in OAR 333-061-0055 (variances from construction standards). (i) A public water system or other Responsible Management Authority using groundwater, or groundwater under the direct influence of surface water, derived from springs, confined or unconfined wells that wish to have a state certified wellhead protection program shall comply with the requirements as specified in OAR 333-061-0057, 0060, and 0065, as well as OAR 340-040- 0140 through 0200. Additional technical information is available in the Oregon Wellhead Protection Guidance Manual. (j) As used in this rule, the following definitions apply: (A) "Confined well" means a well that is constructed to draw water from a confined aquifer. More specifically, it is a well which produces water OAR 333-061-0050 Page 1 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 from a formation that is overlain by a low permeability material such as clay or unfractured consolidated rock such that the water -level in the well rises above the top of the aquifer. This well shall be constructed according to OAR chapter 690, division 200 "Water Supply Well Construction Standards." (B) "Impermeable material" means a material that limits the passage of water. (C) "Impounding reservoir" means an uncovered body of water formed behind a dam across a river or stream, and in which water is stored. (D) "Pilot study" means the construction and operation of a scaled down treatment system during a given period of time to determine the feasibility of a full-scale treatment facility. (E) "Sensitivity" means the intrinsic characteristics of a drinking water source such as depth to the aquifer for groundwater or highly erodible soils in a watershed that increase the potential for contamination to take place if a contaminant source is present. (F) "Unconfined well" means a well that is constructed to draw water from an unconfined aquifer. More specifically, it is a well which produces water from a formation that is not overlain by a low permeability material such that the water -level in the well does not rise above the top of the aquifer. This well shall be constructed according to OAR chapter 690, division 200 "Water Supply Well Construction Standards." (k) All new groundwater sources, whether additional or modified wells or springs, are subject to consideration for potential direct influence of surface water as prescribed in OAR 333-061-0032(7). (2) Groundwater: (a) Wells: (A) For the purpose of this rule, wells are defined as holes or other excavations that are drilled, dug or otherwise constructed for the purpose of capturing groundwater or groundwater in hydraulic connection where part of the water supplied by the collection system is derived, either naturally or induced, from a surface water source as a source of public drinking water. (B) The area within 100 feet of the well shall be owned by the water supplier, or a perpetual restrictive easement shall be obtained by the water supplier for all land (with the exception of public rights -of -way) within 100 feet of the well. The easement shall be recorded with the county in which the well is located and with the recorded deed to the property. A certified true copy shall be filed with the Authority. (C) For wells located on land owned by a public entity, (Federal, State, County, Municipality) where the entity is not the water supplier, a permit may be issued by the public entity to the water supplier in lieu of an easement. Said permit shall state that no existing or potential public health hazard shall be permitted within a minimum of 100 feet of a well site; OAR 333-061-0050 Page 2 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (D) Public or private roadways may be allowed within 100 feet of a confined well, provided the well is protected against contamination from surface runoff or hazardous liquids which may be spilled on the roadway and is protected from unauthorized access; (E) The following sanitary hazards are not allowed within 100 feet of a well which serves a public water system unless waived by the Authority: any existing or proposed pit privy, subsurface sewage disposal drain field; cesspool; solid waste disposal site; pressure sewer line; buried fuel storage tank; animal yard, feedlot or animal waste storage; untreated storm water or gray water disposal; chemical (including solvents, pesticides and fertilizers) storage, usage or application; fuel transfer or storage; mineral resource extraction, vehicle or machinery maintenance or long term storage; junk/auto/scrap yard; cemetery; unapproved well; well that has not been properly abandoned or of unknown or suspect construction; source of pathogenic organisms or any other similar public health hazards. No gravity sewer line or septic tank shall be permitted within 50 feet of a well which serves a public water system. Clearances greater than indicated above shall be provided when it is determined by the Authority that the aquifer sensitivity and degree of hazard require a greater degree of protection. Above -ground fuel storage tanks provided for emergency water pumping equipment may be exempted from this requirement by the Authority provided that a secondary containment system is in place that will accommodate 110 percent of the fuel tank storage. (F) Wells shall not be located at sites which are prone to flooding. In cases where the site is subject to flooding, the area around the well shall be mounded, and the top of the well casing shall be extended at least two feet above the anticipated 100-year (1 percent) flood level; (G) Except as otherwise provided herein, wells shall be constructed in accordance with the general standards for the construction and maintenance of water wells in Oregon as prescribed in OAR chapter 690, divisions 200 through 220; (H) Wells as defined in paragraph (2)(a)(A) of this rule that are less than 12 feet in depth must be constructed so as to be cased and sealed from the surface to a minimum of three feet above the bottom of the well. The casing may consist of concrete or metal culvert pipe or other pre - approved materials. The seal shall be watertight, be a minimum of four inches in thickness and may consist of cement, bentonite or concrete (see concrete requirements prescribed in OAR 690-210-315). The construction and placement of these wells must comply with all requirements of this rule. (I) Before a well is placed into operation as the source of supply at a public water system, laboratory reports as required by OAR 333-061-0036 shall be submitted by the water supplier; OAR 333-061-0050 Page 3 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (J) Water obtained from wells which exceed the MCLs shall be treated as outlined in section (4) of this rule; (K) The pump installation, piping arrangements, other appurtenances, and well house details at wells which serve as the source of supply for a public water system, shall meet the following requirements: (i) The line shaft bearings of turbine pumps shall be water -lubricated, except that bearings lubricated with non -toxic approved food -grade lubricants may be permitted in wells where water -lubricated (xii) (xiii) bearings are not feasible due to depth to the water; Where turbine pumps are installed, the top of the casing shall be sealed into the pump motor. Where submersible pumps are installed, the top of the casing shall be provided with a watertight sanitary seal; A casing vent shall be provided and shall be fitted with a screened return bend; Provisions shall be made for determining the depth to water surface in the well under pumping and static conditions; A sampling tap shall be provided on the pump discharge line; Piping arrangements shall include provisions for pumping the total flow from the well to waste; A method of determining the total output of each well shall be provided. This requirement may be waived by the Authority at confined wells which serve as the source of supply for TNCs; A reinforced concrete slab shall be poured around the well casing at ground surface. The slab shall be sloped to drain away from the casing; The ground surface around the well slab shall be graded so that drainage is away from the well; The top of the well casing shall extend at least 12 inches above the concrete slab; Provisions shall be made for protecting pump controls and other above -ground appurtenances at the well head. Where a wellhouse is installed for this purpose, it shall meet applicable building codes and shall be insulated, heated and provided with lights, except that where the wellhouse consists of a small removable box -like structure the requirement for lights may be waived by the Authority; The wellhouse shall be constructed so that the well pump can be removed. Wells equipped with pitless adaptors or units are not required to meet the requirements of subparagraphs (2)(a)(K)(iii) and (viii) of this rule. OAR 333-061-0050 Page 4 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (L) The area in the vicinity of a well, particularly the area uphill or upstream, shall be surveyed by the water supplier to determine the location and nature of any existing or potential public health hazards; (M) The requirements with respect to land ownership, clearances from public health hazards, and protection against flooding for wells in an unconfined aquifer shall be the same or more restrictive than those prescribed for wells in confined aquifers, as determined by the Authority. (N) Before a well is placed into operation as the source of supply for a public water system, the following documents shall be submitted by the water supplier: (i) Reports on pumping tests for yield and drawdown for unconfined wells; (ii) Reports of laboratory analyses on contaminants in the water as required by OAR 333-061-0036; (iii) Performance data on the pumps and other equipment; (iv) Proposals for disinfection as required by section (5) of this rule, if applicable. (v) Reports on determination of potential direct influence by surface water into groundwater source as prescribed in section (3) of this rule. (b) Springs: (A) In addition to those requirements under subsection (2)(a) of this rule, construction of spring supplies shall meet the following requirements: (i) An intercepting ditch shall be provided above the spring to effectively divert surface water; (ii) A fence shall be installed around the spring area unless other provisions are made to effectively prevent access by animals and unauthorized persons; (iii) The springbox shall be constructed of concrete or other impervious durable material and shall be installed so that surface water is excluded; (iv) The springbox shall be provided with a screened overflow which discharges to daylight, an outlet pipe provided with a shutoff valve, a bottom drain, an access manhole with a tightly fitting cover, and a curb around the manhole. (v) Spring collection facilities that meet the definition of a well in paragraph (2)(a)(A) of this rule must comply with construction requirements specified in paragraph (2)(a)(I) of this rule. (B) Reports on flow tests shall be provided to establish the yield of springs. (3) Surface water and groundwater under direct surface water influence source facilities: (a) In selecting a site for an infiltration gallery, or for a direct intake from a stream, lake, or impounding reservoir, consideration shall be given to land use in the watershed. A sanitary survey of the watershed shall be made by the water supplier to evaluate natural and man-made factors which may affect water OAR 333-061-0050 Page 5 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 quality and investigations shall also be made of seasonal variations in water quality and quantity. A report giving the results of this survey shall be submitted for review and approval by the Authority. (b) A determination shall be made as to the status of water rights, and this information shall be submitted to the Authority for review. (c) Impounding reservoirs shall be designed and constructed so that they include the following features: (A) The capacity shall be sufficient to meet projected demands during drought conditions; (B) Outlet piping shall be arranged so that water can be withdrawn from various depths; (C) Facilities shall be provided for releasing undesirable water. (d) Direct intake structures shall be designed and constructed so that they include the following features: (A) Screens shall be provided to prevent fish, leaves and debris from entering the system; (B) Provisions shall be made for cleaning the screens, or self-cleaning screens shall be installed; (C) Motors and electrical controls shall be located above flood level; (D) Provisions shall be made to restrict swimming and boating in the vicinity of the intake; (E) Valves or sluice gates shall be installed at the intake to provide for the exclusion of undesirable water when required. (4) Water treatment facilities (other than disinfection): (a) General: (A) Water treatment facilities shall be capable of producing water which consistently does not exceed MCLs. The type of treatment shall depend on the raw water quality. The Authority shall make determinations of treatment capabilities based upon recommendations in the US EPA Guidance Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources. (B) Investigations shall be undertaken by the water supplier prior to the selection or installation of treatment facilities to determine the physical, chemical and microbiological characteristics of the raw water as appropriate. These investigations shall include a determination of the seasonal variations in water quality, as well as a survey to identify potential sources of contamination which may affect the quality of the raw water. (C) Water obtained from wells constructed in conformance with the requirements of these rules and which is found not to exceed the MCLs, may be used without treatment at public water systems; (D) Laboratory equipment shall be provided so that the water supplier can perform analyses necessary to monitor and control the treatment processes. OAR 333-061-0050 Page 6 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (E) Sampling taps shall be provided before and following the treatment process and before the first user when any form of water treatment is used at a public water system. (b) Best Available Technology: (A) Pilot studies or other supporting data shall be used to demonstrate the effectiveness of any treatment method other than that defined as a BAT. Pilot study protocol shall be approved beforehand by the Authority. When point -of -use (POU) or point -of -entry (POE) devices are used for compliance, programs to ensure proper long-term operation, maintenance, and monitoring shall be provided by the water system to ensure adequate performance. (B) The Authority identifies the following as the BAT, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the MCLs for volatile organic chemicals: (i) Central treatment using packed tower aeration for all these chemicals. (ii) Central treatment using GAC for all these chemicals except vinyl chloride. (C) The Authority identifies the following as the BAT, treatment techniques or other means generally available for achieving compliance with the MCL for fluoride. (i) Activated alumina absorption, centrally applied. (ii) Reverse osmosis, centrally applied. (D) The Authority identifies the following as the BAT, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the MCL for E. coli as specified in OAR 333-061-0030(4). (i) Protection of wells from fecal contamination by appropriate placement and construction. (ii) Maintenance of a disinfectant residual throughout the distribution system. (iii) Proper maintenance of the distribution system including appropriate pipe replacement and repair procedures, main flushing programs, proper operation and maintenance of storage tanks and reservoirs, cross connection control and maintaining a minimum pressure of 20 psi at all service connections. (iv) Filtration treatment or disinfection of surface water or GWUDI or disinfection of groundwater using strong oxidants such as chlorine, chlorine dioxide, or ozone. (v) For systems using only groundwater, compliance with the requirements of an Authority approved wellhead protection program. (E) The Authority identifies the following as the BAT, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the MCLs for organic chemicals. OAR 333-061-0050 Page 7 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (i) Central treatment using packed tower aeration for Dibromochloropropane, Ethylene Dibromide, Hexachlorocyclopentadiene and Di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate. (ii) Central treatment using GAC for all these chemicals except Trihalomethanes and Glyphosate. (iii) Central treatment using oxidation (chlorination or ozonation) for Glyphosate. (F) The Authority identifies the following as the BAT, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the MCLs for inorganic chemicals. Preoxidation may be required to convert Arsenic III to Arsenic V. (i) Central treatment using coagulation/filtration for systems with 500 or more service connections for Antimony, Arsenic V (for systems with populations 501-10,000), Asbestos, Beryllium, Cadmium, Chromium, Mercury (influent concentration > l0ug/L), and Selenium (Selenium IV only). (ii) Central treatment using direct and diatomite filtration for Asbestos. (iii) Central treatment using GAC for Mercury. (iv) Central treatment using activated alumina for Arsenic V (for systems with populations 10,000 or less), Beryllium, Selenium and Thallium. (v) Central treatment using ion exchange for Arsenic V (for systems with populations 10,000 or less), Barium, Beryllium, Cadmium, Chromium, Cyanide, Nickel, Nitrate, Nitrite and Thallium. (vi) Central treatment using lime softening for systems with 500 or more service connections for Arsenic V (for systems with populations of 501-10,000), Barium, Beryllium, Cadmium, Chromium (Chromium III only), Mercury (influent concentration > IOug/L), Nickel and Selenium. (vii) Central treatment using reverse osmosis for Antimony, Arsenic V (for systems with populations of 501-10,000), Barium, Beryllium, Cadmium, Chromium, Cyanide, Mercury (influent concentration > 10ug/L), Nickel, Nitrate, Nitrite, and Selenium. (viii) Central treatment using corrosion control for Asbestos and Lead and Copper. (ix) Central treatment using electrodialysis for Arsenic V (for systems with populations of 501-10,000), Barium, Nitrate, and Selenium. (x) Central treatment using alkaline chlorination (pH>8.5) for Cyanide. (xi) Central treatment using coagulation -assisted microfiltration for Arsenic V (for systems with populations 50140,000). (xii) Central treatment using oxidation/filtration for Arsenic V (to obtain high removals, iron to Arsenic ratio must be at least 20:1). OAR 333-061-0050 Page 8 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (G) (xiii) Point -of -use treatment using activated alumina for Arsenic V (for systems with populations 10,000 or less). (xiv) Point -of -use treatment using reverse osmosis for Arsenic V (for systems with populations 10,000 or less). The Authority identifies the following as the best technology, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the MCLs for disinfection byproducts: (i) For bromate concentrations: control of ozone treatment process to reduce production of bromate. (ii) For chlorite concentrations: control of treatment processes to reduce disinfectant demand and control of disinfection treatment processes to reduce disinfectant levels. (iii) For TTHM and HAA5, for water systems that disinfect their source water and monitor in accordance with OAR 333-061- 0036(4)(c) or (d): enhanced coagulation or enhanced softening plus GAC in filter beds with an empty -bed contact time of 10 minutes based on average daily flow and a carbon reactivation frequency of every 180 days, except that the reactivation frequency for GAC for compliance with OAR 333-061-0030(2)(b) shall be 120 days; or nanofiltration with a molecular weight cutoff less than or equal to 1000 Daltons; or GAC in filter beds with an empty -bed contact time of 20 minutes based on average daily flow and a carbon reactivation frequency of every 240 days. (iv) For TTHMs and HAA5, for purchasing water systems with populations greater than or equal to 10,000 and that monitor in accordance with OAR 333-061-0036(4)(c) or (d) improved distribution system and storage tank management to reduce residence time, plus the use of chloramines for disinfectant residual maintenance. This applies only to the disinfected water that purchasing water systems receive from a wholesale system. (v) For TTHMs and HAA5, for purchasing water systems with populations less than 10,000 and that monitor in accordance with OAR 333-061-0036(4)(c) or (d): improved distribution system and storage tank management to reduce residence time. This applies only to the disinfected water that purchasing water systems receive from a wholesale system. (H) The Authority identifies the following as the best technology, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the MRDLs: Control of treatment processes to reduce disinfectant demand and control of disinfection treatment processes to reduce disinfectant levels. (I) The Authority identifies the following as the BAT, treatment techniques, or other means available for achieving compliance with the MCLs for radionuclides. OAR 333-061-0050 Page 9 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (i) Central treatment using ion exchange for combined radium- 226/228, beta particle/photon activity and uranium. (ii) Central treatment using reverse osmosis for combined radium- 226/228, gross alpha particle activity, beta particle/photon activity, and uranium (for systems with populations 501-10,000). (iii) Central treatment using lime softening for combined radium- 226/228, and uranium (for systems with populations 501-10,000). (iv) Central treatment using enhanced coagulation/filtration for uranium. (v) Central treatment using activated alumina for uranium (for systems with populations of 10,000 or less). (vi) Central treatment using greensand filtration for combined radium- 226/228. (vii) Central treatment using electrodialysis for combined radium- 226/228. (viii) Central treatment using pre -formed hydrous manganese oxide filtration for combined radium-226/228. (ix) Central treatment using co -precipitation with barium for combined radium-226/228. (x) Point -of -use treatment using ion exchange for combined radium- 226/228, beta particle/photon activity, and uranium. (xi) Point -of use treatment using reverse osmosis for combined radium- 226/228, gross alpha particle activity, beta particle/ photon activity, and uranium (for systems with populations of 10,000 or less). (c) Filtration of Surface Water Sources and Groundwater Sources Under the Direct Influence of Surface Water. (A) All water systems using surface water or groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water that fail to meet the criteria for avoiding filtration prescribed in OAR 33-061-0032(2) and (3) must meet all requirements of this subsection for installing filtration treatment. (B) There are four standard filtration methods: conventional filtration, direct filtration, slow sand, and diatomaceous earth. Other filtration technologies are only acceptable if their efficiency at removing target organisms and contaminants can be demonstrated to be equal to or more efficient than these. The assumed log removals credited to filtration of Giardia lamblia and viruses will be based on recommendations in the US EPA Guidance Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources. In all cases, filtration processes must be designed and operated to achieve at least 2.0 log removal of Giardia lamblia. For membrane filtration, removal credits shall be verified by a challenge study according to paragraphs (4)(c)(H) and (I) of this rule. Bag and Cartridge Filtration must have removal credits demonstrated in a OAR. 333-061-0050 Page 10 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 challenge study according to paragraph (4)(c)(J) of this rule. The combination of filtration and disinfection must meet the inactivation levels prescribed in OAR 333-061-0032(1). Any water system wishing to challenge the assumed log removal credits must conduct demonstration studies based on the recommendations in the USEPA SWTR Guidance Manual and have the study protocol approved by the Authority. (C) Pilot studies shall be conducted by the water supplier to demonstrate the effectiveness of any filtration method other than conventional filtration. Pilot study protocol shall be approved in advance by the Authority. Results of the pilot study shall be submitted to the Authority for review and approval. (D) Regardless of the filtration method used, the water system must achieve a minimum of 0.5-log reduction of Giardia lamblia and a 1.0-log reduction of viruses from disinfection alone after filtration treatment. (E) All filtration systems shall be designed and operated so as to meet the requirements prescribed in OAR 333-061-0032(4) and (5). Design of the filtration system must be in keeping with accepted standard engineering references acknowledged by the Authority such as the Great Lakes Upper Mississippi River "Recommended Standards for Water Works" technical reports by the International Reference Center for Community Water Supply and Sanitation, or publications from the World Health Organization. A list of additional references is available from the Authority upon request. (F) Requirements for water systems using conventional or direct filtration. (i) Systems that employ multiple filters shall be designed such that turbidity measurements are monitored for each filter independently of the other filter(s). Each filter shall have a provision to discharge effluent water as waste. (ii) All water treatment plants shall have an auto -dial call out alarm or an automatic shut-off for high turbidity. (G) Additional requirements for membrane filtration. Each membrane filter system must have a turbidimeter installed after each filter unit for continuous indirect integrity monitoring. Once operating, direct and indirect integrity testing must be conducted on each unit as described in OAR 333-061-0036(5)(d). The operation and maintenance manual must include a diagnosis and repair plan such that the ability to remove pathogens is not compromised. (H) Challenge Study criteria for Membrane Filtration. Water systems receive Cryptosporidium treatment credit for membrane filtration, as defined in OAR 333-061-0020(59)(f), that meets the criteria of this paragraph. The level of treatment credit a water system receives is equal to the lower of the values determined in this paragraph. OAR 333-061-0050 Page 11 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (i) The removal efficiency demonstrated during challenge testing conducted under the conditions in accordance with paragraph (4)(c)(I) of this rule. (ii) The maximum removal efficiency that can be verified through direct integrity testing of the membrane filtration process under the conditions prescribed by OAR 333-061-0036(5)(d)(B). (I) Challenge Testing. The membrane filter used by the water system must undergo challenge testing to evaluate removal efficiency, and results of the challenge testing must be reported to the Authority. Challenge testing must be conducted according to the criteria specified in this paragraph. Water systems may use data from challenge testing conducted prior to June 1, 2009 if the prior testing was consistent with the criteria specified in this paragraph. (i) Challenge testing must be conducted on a full-scale membrane module, identical in material and construction to the membrane modules used in the water system's treatment facility, or a smaller - scale membrane module, identical in material and similar in construction to the full-scale module. A module is defined as the smallest component of a membrane unit in which a specific membrane surface area is housed in a device with a filtrate outlet structure. (ii) Challenge testing must be conducted using Cryptosporidium ooc.vstc n_r a. surrogate that is removed no more efficiently than Cryptosporidium oocysts. Cryptosporidium or the surrogate used during challenge testing is referred to as the challenge particulate. The concentration of the challenge particulate, in both the feed and filtrate water, must be determined using a method capable of discretely quantifying the specific challenge particulate used in the test; gross measurements such as turbidity may not be used. (iii) The maximum feed water concentration that can be used during a challenge test is based on the detection limit of the challenge particulate in the filtrate and must be determined according to the following equation: Maximum Feed Concentration = 3.16 x 106 x (Filtrate Detection Limit). (iv) Challenge testing must be conducted according to representative hydraulic conditions at the maximum design flux and maximum design process recovery specified by the manufacturer for the membrane module. Flux is defined as the throughput of a pressure driven membrane process expressed as flow per unit of membrane area. Recovery is defined as the volumetric percent of feed water that is converted to filtrate over the course of an operating cycle uninterrupted by events such as chemical cleaning or a solids removal process (that is, backwashing). OAR 333-061-0050 Page 12 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (v) Removal efficiency of a membrane module must be calculated from the challenge test results and expressed as a log removal value according to the following equation: LRV = LOG 10(Cf) - LOG 10(Cp) Where: LRV = log removal value demonstrated during the challenge test; Cf = the feed concentration measured during the challenge test; and Cp = the filtrate concentration measured during the challenge test. Equivalent units must be used for the feed and filtrate concentrations. If the challenge particulate is not detected in the filtrate, the term Cp is set equal to the detection limit for the purpose of calculating the LRV. An LRV must be calculated for each membrane module evaluated during the challenge test. (vi) The removal efficiency of a membrane filtration process demonstrated during challenge testing must be expressed as a log removal value (LRVC-Test). If fewer than 20 modules are tested, then LRVC-Test is equal to the lowest of the representative LRVs among the modules tested. If 20 or more modules are tested, then LRVC-Test is equal to the 10th percentile of the representative LRVs among the modules tested. The percentile is defined by (i/(n+1))where i is the rank of n individual data points ordered lowest to highest. If necessary, the 10th percentile may be calculated using linear interpolation. (vii) The challenge test must establish a quality control release value (QCRV) for a non-destructive performance test that demonstrates the Cryptosporidium removal capability of the membrane filtration module. This performance test must be applied to each production membrane module used by the system that was not directly challenge tested in order to verify Cryptosporidium removal capability. Production modules that do not meet the established QCRV are not eligible for the treatment credit demonstrated during the challenge test. (viii) If a previously tested membrane is modified in a manner that could change the removal efficiency of the membrane or the applicability of the non-destructive performance test and associated QCRV, additional challenge testing to demonstrate the removal efficiency of, and determine a new QCRV for, the modified membrane must be conducted and submitted to the Authority. Q) Challenge Study requirements for Bag and Cartridge Filtration. (i) The Cryptosporidium treatment credit awarded to bag or cartridge filters must be based on the removal efficiency demonstrated during challenge testing that is conducted according to the criteria specified in this paragraph. A factor of safety equal to 1-log for OAR 333-061-0050 Page 13 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 individual bag or cartridge filters and 0.5-log for bag or cartridge filters in series must be applied to challenge testing results to determine removal credit. Water systems may use results from challenge testing conducted prior to June 1, 2009 if the prior testing was consistent with the criteria specified in this paragraph. (ii) Challenge testing must be performed on full-scale bag or cartridge filters and the associated filter housing or pressure vessel, that are identical in material and construction to the filters and housings the water system will use for removal of Cryptosporidium. Bag or cartridge filters must be challenge tested in the same configuration that the system will use, either as individual filters or as a series configuration of filters. (iii) Challenge testing must be conducted using Cryptosporidium or a surrogate that is removed no more efficiently than Cryptosporidium. The microorganism or surrogate used during challenge testing is referred to as the challenge particulate. The concentration of the challenge particulate must be determined using a method capable of discreetly quantifying the specific microorganism or surrogate used in the test; gross measurements such as turbidity may not be used. (iv) The maximum feed water concentration that can be used during a challenge test must be based on the detection limit of the challenge particulate in the filtrate (that is, filtrate detection limit) and must be calculated using the following equation: Maximum Feed Concentration = 1 x 104 x (Filtrate Detection Limit). (v) Challenge testing must be conducted at the maximum design flow rate for the filter as specified by the manufacturer. (vi) Each filter evaluated must be tested for a duration sufficient to reach 100 percent of the terminal pressure drop, which establishes the maximum pressure drop under which the filter may be used to comply with the requirements of this paragraph. (vii) Removal efficiency of a filter must be determined from the results of the challenge test and expressed in terms of log removal values using the following equation: LRV = LOG 10(Cf)-LOGIO(Cp). Where: LRV = log removal value demonstrated during challenge testing; Cf = the feed concentration measured during the challenge test; and Cp = the filtrate concentration measured during the challenge test. In applying this equation, the same units must be used for the feed and filtrate concentrations. If the challenge particulate is not detected in the filtrate, then the term Cp must be set equal to the detection limit. OAR 333-061-0050 Page 14 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (viii) Each filter tested must be challenged with the challenge particulate during three periods over the filtration cycle: within two hours of start-up of a new filter; when the pressure drop is between 45 and 55 percent of the terminal pressure drop; and at the end of the cycle after the pressure drop has reached 100 percent of the terminal pressure drop. An LRV must be calculated for each of these challenge periods for each filter tested. The LRV for the filter (LRVfilter) must be assigned the value of the minimum LRV observed during the three challenge periods for that filter. (ix) If fewer than 20 filters are tested, the overall removal efficiency for the filter product line must be set equal to the lowest LRVfilter among the filters tested. If 20 or more filters are tested, the overall removal efficiency for the filter product line must be set equal to the 1 Oth percentile of the set of LRVfilter values for the various filters tested. The percentile is defined by (i/(n+l )) where i is the rank of n individual data points ordered lowest to highest. If necessary, the 1 Oth percentile may be calculated using linear interpolation. (x) If a previously tested filter is modified in a manner that could change the removal efficiency of the filter product line, challenge testing to demonstrate the removal efficiency of the modified filter must be conducted and submitted to the Authority. (K) Water systems using cartridge filtration must have pressure gauges installed before and after each cartridge filter. (L) Water systems using diatomaceous earth filtration must add the body feed with the influent flow. (d) Criteria and procedures for public water systems using point -of -entry (POE) or point -of -use (POU) devices. (A) Public water systems may use POE or POU devices to comply with MCLs, where specified in subsection (4)(b) of this rule, only if they meet the requirements of this subsection. (B) It is the responsibility of the public water system to operate and maintain the POE or POU treatment system. (C) The public water system must develop and obtain Authority approval for a monitoring plan before POE or POU devices are installed for compliance. Under the plan approved by the Authority, POE or POU devices must provide health protection equivalent to central water treatment. "Equivalent" means that the water would meet all MCLs as prescribed in OAR 333-061-0030 and would be of acceptable quality similar to water distributed by a well -operated central treatment plant. Monitoring must include contaminant removal efficacy, physical measurements and observations such as total flow treated and mechanical condition of the treatment equipment. OAR 333-061-0050 Page 15 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (5) (D) Effective technology must be properly applied under a plan approved by the Authority and the microbiological safety of the water must be maintained. (i) The water supplier must submit adequate certification of performance, field testing, and, if not included in the certification process, a rigorous engineering design review of the POE or POU devices to the Authority for approval prior to installation. (ii) The design and application of the POE or POU devices must consider the tendency for increase in heterotrophic bacteria concentrations in water treated with activated carbon. It may be necessary to use frequent backwashing, post -contractor disinfection, and Heterotrophic Plate Count monitoring to ensure that the microbiological safety of the water is not compromised. (iii) The POE or POU device must be evaluated to assure that the device will not cause increased corrosion of lead and copper bearing materials located between the device and the tap that could increase contaminant levels of lead and copper at the tap. (E) All consumers shall be protected. Every building connected to the system must have a POE or POU device installed, maintained, and adequately monitored. The Authority must be assured that every building is subject to treatment and monitoring, and that the rights and responsibilities of the public water system customer convey with title upon sale of property. Facilities for disinfection and disinfectant residual maintenance: (a) Water obtained from surface sources or groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water shall, as a minimum, be provided with disinfection for pathogen inactivation before such water may be used as a source of supply for a public water system. Water obtained from wells constructed in conformance with the requirements of these rules and which is found not to exceed microbiological MCLs, may be used without treatment at public water systems; (b) Water obtained from wells and springs shall be considered groundwater unless determined otherwise by the Authority. Wells and springs may be utilized without disinfection if the construction requirements of section (2) of this rule are met and analyses indicate that the water consistently meets microbiological standards. A well or spring that is inadequately constructed must be upgraded to meet current construction standards or disconnected from the water system before disinfection treatment may be utilized when E. coli contamination was confirmed according to OAR 333-061-0032(7) or OAR 333-061-0036(6)0) and where the Authority determines that reconstruction will add a significant measure of public health protection. (c) In public water systems where disinfection for pathogen inactivation is required as the sole form of treatment or as one component of more extensive treatment to meet the requirements prescribed in OAR 333-061-0032(1), the facilities shall be designed so that: OAR 333-061-0050 Page 16 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (A) The disinfectant applied shall be capable of effectively destroying pathogenic organisms; (B) The disinfectant is applied in proportion to water flow; and (C) Disinfectants, other than ultraviolet light (UV) and ozone, shall be capable of leaving a residual in the water which can be readily measured and which continues to serve as an active disinfectant. The disinfectant shall be applied at every entry point so a residual is present throughout the distribution system; and (D) Sufficient contact time shall be provided to achieve "CT" values capable of the inactivation required by OAR 333-061-0032(1). For UV disinfection treatment, sufficient irradiance expressed in milliwatts per square centimeter (mWs/cm2) and exposure time expressed in seconds shall be provided to achieve UV dose levels expressed as (mWs/cm2) or millijoules per square centimeter (mJ/cm2) capable of the inactivation required by OAR 333-061-0032(1). (d) When disinfection for pathogen inactivation, other than UV disinfection, is required for reasons other than the treatment of surface water sources or groundwater sources under the direct influence of surface water, in addition to the requirements of paragraphs (5)(c)(A) through (C) of this rule, the facilities shall be designed so that: (A) The primary disinfection treatment is sufficient to ensure at least 99.99 percent (4-log) inactivation or removal of viruses as determined by the Authority_ , or; (B) There is sufficient contact time provided to achieve disinfection under all flow conditions between the point of disinfectant application and the point of first water use: (i) When chlorine is used as the primary disinfectant, the system shall be constructed to achieve a free chlorine residual of 0.2 mg/1 after 30 minutes contact time under all flow conditions before first water use; (ii) When ammonia is added to the water with the chlorine to form a chloramine as the disinfectant, the system shall be constructed to achieve a combined chlorine residual of at least 2.0 mg/l after three hours contact time under all flow conditions before first water use; (e) Provisions shall be made to alert the water supplier before the chlorine supply is exhausted. Water systems serving more than 3,300 people shall have an auto - dial call out alarm or an automatic shut-off for low chlorine residual when chlorine is used as a disinfectant. (f) Sample taps shall be provided before and after disinfectant application as specified in subsection (4)(a)(E) of this rule; (g) Testing equipment shall be provided to determine the chlorine residual; (h) Chlorinator piping shall be designed to prevent the contamination of the potable water system by backflow of untreated water or water having excessive concentrations of chlorine; OAR 333-061-0050 Page 17 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (i) The disinfectant must be applied in proportion to water flow; (j) Chlorine gas feeders and chlorine gas storage areas shall: (A) Be enclosed and separated from other operating areas; (B) Chlorine cylinders shall be restrained in position to prevent upset by chaining 100 and 150 pound cylinders two-thirds of their height up from the floor and by double chocking one ton cylinders; (C) The room housing the feeders and cylinders shall be above ground surface, shall have doors which open outward and to the outside and shall be ventilated by mechanical means at floor level and shall have an air intake located higher than the exhaust ventilation; (D) Be located so that chlorine gas, if released, will not flow into the building ventilation systems; (E) Have corrosion resistant lighting and ventilation switches located outside the enclosure, adjacent to the door; (F) Be provided with a platform or hydraulic scale for measuring the weight of the chlorine cylinders; (G) Be provided with a gas mask or self-contained breathing apparatus approved by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) for protection against chlorine gas and kept in good working condition. Storage of such equipment shall be in an area adjoining the chlorine room and shall be readily available. (Also see the Oregon Occupational Health and Safety regulations contained in OAR chapter 437.) (k) When disinfection for pathogen inactivation is provided through UV disinfection, the facilities shall be designed to meet the requirements of this subsection: (A) The UV unit must achieve the dosage indicated in Table 32 for the required pathogen inactivation. (B) Ultraviolet lamps are insulated from direct contact with the influent water and are removable from the lamp housing; (C) The treatment unit must have an upstream valve or device that prevents flows from exceeding the manufacturer's maximum rated flow rate, a UV sensor that monitors light intensity through the water during operation, and a visual and audible alarm; (D) There must be a visual means to verify operation of all ultraviolet lamps; (E) The lamps, lamp sleeves, housings and other equipment must be able to withstand the working pressures applied through the unit; (F) The treatment facility must be sheltered from the weather and accessible for routine maintenance as well as routine cleaning and replacement of the lamp sleeves and cleaning of the sensor windows/lenses; (G) The lamps must be changed as per the manufacturer's recommendation; and OAR 333-061-0050 Page 18 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (H) The treatment unit must have shut-off valves at both the inlet side and the outlet side of the treatment unit. There shall be no bypass piping around the treatment unit. (I) Reactor validation testing. All water systems, except those specified in paragraph (5)(1) of this rule, must use UV reactors that have undergone validation testing to determine the operating conditions under which the reactor delivers the UV dose required in OAR 333-061-0036(5)(c) (that is, validated operating conditions). These operating conditions must include flow rate, UV intensity as measured by a UV sensor, UV Transmittance based on reactor validation, and UV lamp status. (i) When determining validated operating conditions, water systems must account for the following factors: UV absorbance by the water; lamp fouling and aging; measurement uncertainty of on-line sensors; UV dose distributions arising from the velocity profiles through the reactor; failure of UV lamps or other critical system components; and inlet and outlet piping or channel configurations of the UV reactor. (ii) Validation testing must include the following: full scale testing of a reactor that conforms uniformly to the UV reactors used by the water system and inactivation of a test microorganism whose dose response characteristics have been quantified with a low pressure mercury vapor lamp. (iii) The Authority may approve an alternative approach to validation testing. (1) At non -Community water systems using only groundwater sources and having minimal distribution systems as determined by the Authority, water suppliers may use UV as the only disinfectant when total coliforms but no E. coli have been detected in the source water. UV units must meet the specifications of a Class A UV system according to NSF Standard 55. (6) Finished water storage: (a) Distribution reservoirs and treatment plant storage facilities for finished water shall be constructed to meet the following requirements: (A) They shall be constructed of concrete, steel, wood or other durable material capable of withstanding external and internal forces which may act upon the structure; (B) Ground -level reservoirs shall be constructed on undisturbed soil, bedrock or other stable foundation material capable of supporting the structure when full; (C) Steel reservoirs, standpipes and elevated tanks shall be constructed in conformance with the AWWA Standards D100 and D103; (D) Concrete reservoirs shall be provided with sufficient reinforcing to prevent the formation of cracks, and waterstops and dowels shall be placed at construction joints. Poured -in -place wall castings shall be provided where pipes pass through the concrete; OAR 333-061-0050 Page 19 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (E) Wooden reservoirs shall be redwood or other equally durable wood and shall be installed on a reinforced concrete base. Where redwood reservoirs are used, separate inlet and outlet pipes are required and the water entering the reservoir must have a disinfectant continuously applied so as to result in a detectable residual in the water leaving the reservoir; (F) Start-up procedures for new redwood tanks shall consist of filling the tank with a solution of water containing a minimum of two pounds of sodium carbonate per 1,000 gallons of water and retaining this solution in the tank a minimum of seven days before flushing; (G) Where ground -level reservoirs are located partially below ground, the bottom shall be above the ground water table and footing drains discharging to daylight shall be provided to carry away ground water which may accumulate around the perimeter of the structure; (H) The finished water storage capacity shall be increased to accommodate fire flows when fire hydrants are provided; (I) Finished water storage facilities shall have watertight roofs; (J) An access manhole shall be provided to permit entry to the interior for cleaning and maintenance. When the access manhole is on the roof of the reservoir there shall be a curbing around the opening and a lockable watertight cover that overlaps the curbing; (K) Internal ladders of durable material, shall be provided where the only access manhole is located on the roof, (L) Screened vents shall be provided above the highest water level to permit circulation of air above the water in finished water storage facilities; (M) A drain shall be provided at the lowest point in the bottom of the storage facility and an overflow of sufficient diameter to handle the maximum flow into the tank shall be provided at or near the top of the sidewall. The outlet ends of the drain and overflow shall be fitted with angle -flap valves or equivalent protection and shall discharge to a watercourse or storm drain capable of accommodating the flow with a vertical separation between the bottom of the pipe and top of the receiving body or structure; (N) A silt stop shall be provided at the outlet pipe; (0) Where a single inlet/outlet pipe is installed and the reservoir floats on the system, provisions shall be made to insure an adequate exchange of water and to prevent degradation of the water quality and to assure the disinfection levels required in subparagraph (5)(c)(D) of this rule; (P) A fence or other method of vandal deterrence shall be provided around distribution reservoirs; (Q) When interior surfaces of finished water storage tanks are provided with a protective coating, the coating shall meet the requirements of NSF Standard 61: Drinking Water System Components - Health Effects or equivalent. OAR 333-061-0050 Page 20 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 (R) Reservoirs and clearwells that are to be used for disinfection contact time to treat surface water shall use a tracer study to determine the actual contact time. The Authority must approve procedures and protocols for the tracer study prior to the initiation of the study. The Authority recommends the US EPA Guidance Manual for Compliance with the Filtration and Disinfection Requirements for Public Water Systems Using Surface Water Sources for a tracer study procedure and protocol. (S) Reservoirs and clearwells that are to be used for disinfection contact time to treat surface water shall have a means to adequately determine the flow rate on the effluent line. (b) Pressure tanks for finished water shall meet the following requirements: (A) Pressure tanks shall be installed above normal ground surface; (B) Bypass piping around the pressure tank shall be provided to permit operation of the system while the tank is being maintained or repaired; (C) Pressure tanks greater than 1,000 gallons shall be provided with an access manhole and a water sight -glass. (D) All pressure tanks shall be provided with a drain, a pressure gauge, an air blow -off valve, means for adding air and pressure switches for controlling the operation of the pump(s); (E) Pressure tanks shall be constructed of steel or an alternative material provided the tank is NSF 61 certified and shall be designed for pressure at least 50 percent greater than the maximum system pressure anticipated. (7) Pumping facilities: (a) Wherever possible, booster pumps shall take suction from tanks and reservoirs to avoid the potential for negative pressures on the suction line which result when the pump suction is directly connected to a distribution main; (b) Pumps which take suction from distribution mains for the purpose of serving areas of higher elevation shall be provided with a low pressure cut-off switch on the suction side set at no less than 20 psi; (c) Suction lift at pumping stations shall be avoided as far as possible, and pumps shall be installed so that the suction line is under a positive head. If suction lift cannot be avoided, provision shall be made for priming with water which does not exceed MCLs; (d) Pumping stations shall be located above maximum anticipated 100-ycar (1 percent) flood level, and the area around the pumping station shall be graded so that surface drainage is away from the station; (e) Pumping stations shall be of durable construction so as to protect the equipment from the elements. The door to the pumping station shall be lockable, and facilities for heating and lighting shall be provided. The floor of the pumping station shall be sloped to provide adequate drainage. (8) Distribution systems: (a) Wherever possible, distribution pipelines shall be located on public property. Where pipelines are required to pass through private property, easements shall OAR 333-061-0050 Page 21 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 be obtained from the property owner and shall be recorded with the county clerk; (b) Pipe, pipe fittings, valves and other appurtenances utilized at Community water systems shall be manufactured, installed and tested in conformance with the latest standards of the American Water Works Association, NSF International or other equivalent standards acceptable to the Authority; (c) In Community water systems, distribution mains located in public roadways or easements, and the portion of the service connections from the distribution main to the customer's property line or service meter where provided are subject to the requirements of these rules. The piping from the customer's property line, or the meter where provided, to the point of water use (the building supply line) is subject to the requirements of the State Plumbing Code; (d) In all Public Water Systems where the system facilities and the premises being served are both on the same parcel of property, requirements relating to pipe materials and pipe installation shall comply with the State Plumbing Code; (e) Distribution piping shall be designed and installed so that the pressure measured at the property line in the case of Community water systems, or at the furthest point of water use, in the case of a TNC of the type described in subsection (d) of this section, shall not be reduced below 20 psi; (f) Distribution piping shall be carefully bedded and fully supported in material free from rocks and shall be provided with a cover of at least 30 inches. Select backfill material shall be tamped in layers around and over the pipe to support and protect it. Large rocks or boulders shall not be used as backfill over the pipe; (g) Provision shall be made at all bends, tees, plugs, and hydrants to prevent movement of the pipe or fitting; (h) Wherever possible, dead ends shall be minimized by looping. Where dead ends are installed, or low points exist, blow -offs of adequate size shall be provided for flushing; (i) Air -relief valves shall be installed at high points where air can accumulate. The breather tube on air -relief valves shall be extended above ground surface and provided with a screened, downward facing elbow; (j) Yarn, oakum, lead or other material which may impair water quality shall not be used where it will be in contact with potable water; (k) Nonconductive water pipe (plastic or other material) that is not encased in conductive pipe or casing must have an electrically conductive wire or other approved conductor for locating the pipe when the pipeline is underground. The wire shall be No. 18 AWG (minimum) solid copper with blue colored insulation. Ends of wire shall be accessible in water meter boxes, valve boxes or casings, or outside the foundation of buildings where the pipeline enters the building. The distance between tracer lead access locations shall not be more than 1,000 feet. Joints or splices in wire shall be waterproof. (1) Piping that is to be used for disinfection contact time shall be verified by plug flow calculations under maximum flow conditions. Plug flow, in this context, OAR 333-061-0050 Page 22 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 means the movement of water in a pipe such that particles pass through the pipe and are discharged in the same sequence in which they entered. (9) Crossings -Sanitary sewers and water lines: (a) All reference to sewers in this section shall mean sanitary sewers; (b) In situations involving a water line parallel to a sewer main or sewer lateral, the separation between the two shall be as indicated in Figure l; (c) In situations where a water line and a sewer main or sewer lateral cross, the separation between the two shall be as follows: (A) Wherever possible, the bottom of the water line shall be 1.5 feet or more above the top of the sewer line and one full length of the water line shall be centered at the crossing; (B) Where the water line crosses over the sewer line but with a clearance of less than 1.5 feet, the sewer line shall be exposed to the sewer line joints on both sides of the crossing to permit examination of the sewer pipe. If the sewer pipe is in good condition and there is no evidence of leakage from the sewer line, the 1.5-foot separation may be reduced. However, in this situation, the water supplier must center one length of the water line at the crossing and must prepare a written report of the findings and indicating the reasons for reducing the separation. If the water supplier determines that the conditions are not favorable or finds evidence of leakage from the sewer line, the sewer line shall be replaced with a full length of pipe centered at the crossing point, of PVC pressure pipe (ASTM D-2241, SDR 32.5), high -density PE pipe (Drisco pipe 1000), ductile -iron Class 50 (AWWA C-51), or other acceptable pipe; or the sewer shall be encased in a reinforced concrete jacket for a distance of 10 feet on both sides of the crossing. (C) Where the water line crosses under the sewer line, the water supplier shall expose the sewer line and examine it as indicated in paragraph (9)(c)(B) of this rule. If conditions are favorable and there is no evidence of leakage from the sewer line, the sewer line may be left in place, but special precautions must be taken to assure that the backfill material over the water line in the vicinity of the crossing is thoroughly tamped in order to prevent settlement which could result in the leakage of sewage. In this situation, the water supplier must center one length of the water line at the crossing and must prepare a written report recording the manner in which the sewer line was supported at the crossing and the material and methods used in backfilling and tamping to prevent settlement of the sewer. If the water supplier determines that conditions are not favorable or finds evidence of leakage from the sewer line, the provisions of paragraph (9)(c)(B) of this rule apply. (d) When a water main is installed under a stream or other watercourse, a minimum cover of 30 inches shall be provided over the pipe. Where the watercourse is more than 15 feet wide, the pipe shall be of special construction with flexible watertight joints, valves shall be provided on both sides of the crossing so that OAR 333-061-0050 Page 23 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 the section can be isolated for testing or repair, and test cocks shall be provided at the valves. Figure 1: Water Line -Sewer Line Separation Zone l: Only crossing restrictions apply Zone 2: Case -by -case determination Zone 3: Parallel water line prohibited Zone 4: Parallel water line prohibited 10' 10' ---+� Ground surface Zone ; Zone , Zone Zone ; 2 3 2 ------------ Zone 1.5' minimum f 4 Existing sewer ' main or sewer lateral (10) Disinfection of facilities: (a) Following construction or installation of new facilities and repairs to existing facilities, those portions of the iaciiities WHICH will uc III con�acL wit I wMVI delivered to users must be cleaned and flushed with potable water and disinfected according to AWWA Standards C651 through C654 before they are placed into service. Disinfection must be by chlorine unless another disinfectant can be demonstrated to be equally effective. (b) For construction of new distribution pipelines (with any associated service connections and other appurtenances installed at the time of construction), disinfection by chlorination must be conducted as specified in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection unless another method from AWWA Standard C651 is used. (A) A solution with a free chlorine residual of at least 25 mg/1 must be introduced to the pipe such that the solution will contact all surfaces and trapped air will be eliminated. The solution must remain in place for at least 24 hours. (B) After 24 hours, if the free chlorine residual is 10 mg/1 or greater, the chlorine solution must be drained and the pipe flushed with potable water. If the free chlorine residual is less than 10 mg/1 after 24-hours, the pipe must be flushed and rechlorinated until a free chlorine residual of 10 mg/1 or more is present after a 24 hour period. (C) After the pipe is disinfected, flushed and filled with potable water, bacteriological samples must be collected to determine the procedures' OAR 333-061-0050 Page 24 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 effectiveness. At least two samples must be collected from the new pipe at least 16 hours apart and analyzed for coliform bacteria. If the pipe has held potable water for at least 16 hours before sample collection, two samples may be collected at least 15 minutes apart while the sample tap is left running. If the results of both analyses indicate the water is free of coliform bacteria, the pipe may be put into service. If either sample indicates the presence of coliform bacteria, the pipe may be re -flushed, filled with potable water and re -sampled. If this second set of samples is free of coliform bacteria, the pipe may be put into service, otherwise the disinfection and flushing process must be repeated until samples are free of coliform. (c) For repaired pipelines that were depressurized and wholly or partly dewatered during repair or that likely experienced contamination during repair, disinfection according to the procedure specified in paragraphs (10)(b)(A) through (C) of this rule must be followed except that bacteriological samples must be collected downstream of the repair site. If the direction of flow is unknown, samples must be collected on each side of the repair site. (d) A water line may be returned to service, following repairs or routine maintenance, prior to receiving a report on the bacteriological analysis if the following procedures have been completed: (A) Customer meters were shut off prior to placing the water line out of service; (B) The area below the water line to be repaired was excavated and dewatered; (C) The exposed pipe was treated with a hypochlorite solution; (D) The water line was flushed thoroughly, and a concentration of residual chlorine has been re-established that is comparable to the level normally maintained by the water system, if applicable; and (E) Bacteriological analysis was conducted to verify repair effectiveness according to this section and samples were collected downstream of the repair site or on each side of the repair site if the direction of flow is unknown. (e) For reservoirs and tanks, disinfection by chlorination shall be accomplished according to AWWA Standard C652 which includes, but is not limited to, the following methods: (A) Filling the reservoir or tank and maintaining a free chlorine residual of not less than 10 mg/1 for the appropriate 6 or 24 hour retention period; or (B) Filling the reservoir or tank with a 50 mg/1 chlorine solution and leaving for six hours; or (C) Directly applying by spraying or brushing a 200 mg/l solution to all surfaces of the storage facility in contact with water if the facility were full to the overflow elevation. (f) When the procedures described in paragraphs (10)(e)(A) and (B) of this rule are followed, the reservoir or tank shall be drained after the prescribed contact OAR 333-061-0050 Page 25 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 period and refilled with potable water, and a sample taken for microbiological analysis. If the results of the analysis indicate that the water is free of coliform organisms, the facility may be put into service. If not, the procedure shall be repeated until a sample free of coliform organisms is obtained; (g) When the procedure described in paragraph (10)(e)(C) of this rule is followed, the reservoir or tank shall be filled with potable water and a sample taken for microbiological analysis. It will not be necessary to flush the reservoir or tank after the chlorine solution is applied by spraying or brushing. Microbiological analysis shall indicate that the water is free of coliform organisms before the facility can be put into service; (h) When a reservoir is chlorinated following routine maintenance, inspection, or repair, it may be put back into service prior to receiving the report on the microbiological analysis provided the water leaving the reservoir has a free chlorine residual of at least 0.4 mg/1 or a combined chlorine residual of at least 2.0 mg/l. (i) Underwater divers used for routine maintenance, inspection, or repair of reservoirs shall use a full body dry suit with hardhat scuba and an external air supply. The diver shall be disinfected by spraying a 200 mg/l solution of chlorine on all surfaces that will come into contact with drinking water. Stat. Auth.: ORS 448.131 Stats. Implemented: ORS 448.131, 448.150, 448.273, 448.279 333-061-0055 Waivers from Construction Standards The Authority may grant waivers from the construction standards prescribed by these rules: (1) When it is demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Authority that strict compliance with the rule would be highly burdensome or impractical due to special conditions or causes; and (2) When the public or private interest in the granting of the waiver is found by the Authority to clearly outweigh the interest of the application of uniform rules; and (3) When alternate measures are provided which, in the opinion of the Authority, will provide adequate protection to the health and safety of the public including the ability to produce water which does not exceed the maximum contaminant levels listed in OAR 333-061-0030. Stat. Auth.: ORS 448.131 Stats. Implemented: ORS 448.131 & 448.135 OAR 333-061-0050 Page 26 of 26 Effective January 28, 2019 Matt Martin From: Jeff Freund Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 8:03 AM To: Matt Martin Subject: RE: Bend goal 11 exemption My only comments are that they should refer to the well construction standards and ensure setbacks are met from sewer lines under OAR 333-061-0050 and they should contact the Oregon Drinking Water Program to inform that the waste holding take has been removed and submit an updated schematic of any new sewer lines with respect to the well(s). Thanks Jeff Freund, RS I Environmental Health Specialist ill DESCHUTES COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 2577 NE Courtney Drive I Bend, Oregon 97701 Tel: (541) 388-6563 1 Fax: (541) 322-7604 LOS Oil Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. From: Matt Martin <Matt.Martin@deschutes.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 7:43 AM To: Jeff Freund <Jeff.Freund@deschutes.org> Subject: RE: Bend goal 11 exemption Thanks, Jeff. Would you like to include this email chain in the project record or would you like to send another message with only your comments? -Matt From: Jeff Freund <Jeff.Freund a@deschutes.org> Sent: Monday, November 4, 2019 2:50 PM To: Matt Martin <Matt.Martin @deschutes.org> Subject: RE: Bend goal 11 exemption Correction. (2)(a)(E) Jeff Freund, RS ( Environmental Health Specialist III g; DESCHUTES COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 2577 NE Courtney Drive I Bend, Oregon 97701 Tel: (541) 388-6563 1 Fax: (541) 322-7604 Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. From: Matt Martin <Matt.Martin CZDdeschutes.or > Sent: Monday, November 4, 2019 2:41 PM To: Jeff Freund <Jeff.Freund deschutes.org> Subject: RE: Bend goal 11 exemption Jeff - To say it differently, the exception would allow the use of the existing process water line for sewage. No new sewer lines are proposed aside for the connection of the existing onsite sewer (bathroom, drinking fountain, floor drain) to the existing process line. The holding tank will be abandoned. Any comments for the record are welcomed. f <; Matthew Martin, A1CP I Associate Planner tta DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT s, 117 NW Lafayette Avenue I Bend, Oregon 97703 PO Box 6005 1 Bend, Oregon 97708 Tel: (541) 330-4620 1 www�deschutes,or cd l Disclaimer: Please note that the information in this email is an informal statement made in accordance with DCC 22.20.005 and shall not be deemed to constitute final County action effecting a change in the status of a persons property or conferring any rights, including any reliance rights, on any person. From: Jeff Freund <Jeff.Freund @deschutes.org> Sent: Monday, November 4, 2019 2:30 PM To: Matt Martin <Matt.Martin @deschute. s.org> Subject: Bend goal 11 exemption Hi Matt, Is the goal 11 exemption for this needed because they are changing the use of the existing effluent line for the process water? Doesn't sound like they are doing anything but utilizing the same line for both process effluent and sewage from the restroom. So, I'm assuming it's requiring an exemption simply because it is technically moving sewage to a community sewer which is conflict with goal 11? If I chime in, I may just remind/refer to the public well construction standards regarding setbacks from sewer lines. Great that they are wanting to remove the storage tank! Thanks Jeff Freund, IRS I Environmental Health Specialist III `%- DESCHUTES COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH q. 2577 NE Courtney Drive I Bend, Oregon 97701 Tel: (541) 388-6563 I Fax: (541) 322-7604 006 Enhancing the lives of citizens by delivering quality services in a cost-effective manner. �0 2 � G ('OV (4 2019 (EtOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LAND USE ACTION SIGNS A land use action requires the posting of a sign, which provides a brief description of the application submitted. It is the applicant's responsibility to post this sign at least ten (10) days before the date set for receipt of comments. The sign is to be posted so that it is clearly visible along the most traveled street. The sign should be mounted on a sturdy backing, such as plywood, and posted within ten (10) to fifteen (15) feet of the street so that it is visible from the street. Please do not attach the sign to a tree. It is advisable to cover the sign with protective material such as plastic wrap to protect it from inclement weather. Please remove the sign at the end of the comment period. THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE AN AFFIDAVIT ATTESTING TO THE FACT THAT THIS SIGN HAS BEEN POSTED. LAND USE ACTION SIGN AFFIDAVIT STATE OF OREGON ) File Number(s) ZN %'C c1-Zg"P ) SS. COUNTY OF DESCHUTES ) I (C0Of bri INous being first duly sworn, depose and state as follows: (Name) I placed a Notice of Land Use Action sign on the Applicant's property on (Date) 20_, where it can be clearly seen from 04f S jJ. 006 (Name of road) If the land use sign notices a hearing, the hearing is to be held on V0VYAjjher" I- (Date) Dated this IS,- day of No J • 20 0 . Affiant Subscribed and sworn to before me this j day of of 20 d OFFICIAL STAMP KIMBERLY SLM WRIGHT If NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.946436 Nota Public f regon 7 MY CO "NION EXPIRES MARCH 24, i020 7 _., , j i �� My Commission Aires: 7 ;7-4 _ 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 t%(541)388-6575 @cdd@deschutes.org @www,deschutes.org/cd Mailing Date: Thursday, October 24, 2019 M 1,V PU,NI`I Y L)itsVt L LIB Mt l.1,. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Deschutes County Hearings Officer will hold a public hearing on November 12, 2019, at 6:00 p.m. in the Barnes and Sawyer Rooms of the Deschutes Services Center, 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, to consider the following request: FILE NUMBER: 247-19-000628-PA APPLICANT/ OWNER: City of Bend PROPOSAL: Comprehensive Plan Amendment with Exception to Goal 11, Public Facilities and Services, to allow use of an existing process water line to transport both process water and sewage outside of the City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). LOCATION: 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend; Tax Lot 800 on County Tax Map 17-11-34 STAFF CONTACT: Matthew Martin, Associate Planner Email: matt.martin@deschutes.org; Telephone: 541-330-4620 DOCUMENTS: Can be viewed and downloaded from: www.buildin2Dermits.ore&on..i�ov and httDWdial.deschutes.org STANDARDS AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA: Title 18. The Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance. Chapter 18.04, Title, Purpose and Definitions Chapter 18.60. Rural Residential Zone. Chapter 18.88. Wildlife Area Combining Zone. Title 22. Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660 All documents and evidence submitted by or on behalf of the applicant and applicable criteria are available for inspection at no cost at the Deschutes County Community Development Department (CDD) at 117 NW Lafayette Avenue. Seven (7) days prior to the public hearing, a copy of the staff report will be available for inspection at no cost at CDD. Copies of all documents, evidence and the staff report can be purchased at CDD for (25) cents a page. ALL INTERESTED PERSONS MAY APPEAR, BE HEARD, BE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL, OR SEND WRITTEN SIGNED TESTIMONY. ANY PARTY TO THE APPLICATION IS ENTITLED TO A CONTINUANCE OF THE INITIAL EVIDENTIARY HEARING OR TO HAVE THE RECORD LEFT OPEN IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 22.24.140 OF THE DESCHUTES COUNTY CODE. 117 NW Lafayette Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 Q, (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes.org @ www.deschutes.org/cd Failure to raise an issue in person at a hearing or in writing precludes appeal by that person to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), and that failure to provide statements or evidence sufficient to afford the decision maker an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal to LUBA based on that issue. Deschutes County encourages persons with disabilities to participate in all programs and activities. This event/location is accessible to people with disabilities. If you need accommodations to make participation possible, please call the ADA Coordinator at (541) 617-4747. DOCUMENT SUBMISSION Any person may submit written comments on a proposed land use action. Documents may be submitted to our office in person, U.S. mail, or email. In Person We accept all printed documents. Email U.S. Mail Deschutes County Community Development Planning Division, Matthew Martin P.O. Box 6005 Bend, OR 97708-6005 Email submittals must comply with the following guidelines: • Submission is 20 pages or less • Documents can be printed in black and white only • Documents can be printed on 8.5" x 11" paper Any email submittal which exceeds the guidelines provided above, must be submitted as a paper copy. Limitations • Deschutes County does not take responsibility for retrieving information from a website link or a personal cloud storage service. It is the submitter's responsibility to provide the specific information they wish to enter into the record. We will print the email which includes the link(s), however, we will not retrieve any information on behalf of the submitter. • Deschutes County makes an effort to scan all submittals as soon as possible. Recognizing staff availability and workload, there is often a delay between the submittal of a document to the record, and when it is scanned and uploaded to Accela Citizen Access (ACA) and Deschutes County Property Information (DIAL). For this reason, the official record is the file that resides in the Community Development office. The electronic record in ACA and DIAL is not a substitute for the official record. • To ensure your submission is entered into the correct land use record, please specify the land use file number(s). 247-19-000628-PA Page 2 of 3 For the open record period after a public hearing, electronic submittals are valid if received by the County's server by the deadline established for the land use action. IF YOU WISH TO BE NOTIFIED OF ANY DECISION RELATED TO THIS APPLICATION, YOU MUST PROVIDE A MAILING ADDRESS. NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR OR SELLER: ORS CHAPTER 215 REQUIRES THAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT MUST PROMPTLY BE FORWARDED TO THE PURCHASER. This Notice was mailed pursuant to Deschutes County Code Chapters 22.20 and 22.24. 247-19-000628-PA Page 3 of 3 File No. 247-19-000628-PA 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend ShevI1@ Perk c Ir J1 � a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a o_ o. a a a o. a o_ o. a a n. a a a -0 01 01 01 rn 01 al D1 Q1 Ol Ol Ol Ol 01 D1 Q1 01 2 S= 2 S 2 2= 2 2 2= S 2 2= w a n. a a a a m a m m m m m m m m a- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z Z z Z Z z z Z Z Z Z z z Z z z 00 ci Lf) N � m N r-I r-1 a-i ri m N N C O 0 0 0 0 0 O = O O O O ^ r O 0) 01 O) 0) 01 01 0 O) Cl)01 w it w w w oc Z W S W N 0 0 0 0 0 O a 0 0 0 0 j z z z c w w w w v m m m m m m n m m m m m O O w LU H N � DO = 0- �— w N O W H LLi O > > 0 J a V9 Q W N (� Q V) Z � V) z O mmC uj Ln C 0 G M G 2 J j U U O V U U - a J m u M v) n w Z Z U Z Z Z r1 U 0� V) W a) O W W Z Z m O Ln Z Z N N '0 m r14c-I V1 V1 d' W W 1- W W W c-I Cl)m O "0 O (14 r� r, M J _I V) J J J M m O M (p 0- -1 V) -zl- r1 W W N W W W a N I- 0. 1.0 E- a a J z O J a w 0 W J D cc V) W m _ cr U0 iG N J < Z LL Z Z i�o a Q w ]C O U w a w 0 > U 0 � J _ f!) O OG } V) J W Z Z H O Q w a 2 J Q a 1— a `nC W � w w ecr O Z= Z p Z O v w N o N o a N Co W oc W in Z z O� Q 0 o O Q °C a m W w= Ln = m � w U 0 0 0 U a z 0 U 0 Q F-m 0 0 m m> N F a W m W Z F-� z z LL L Ii a w S 2 2 2 2= O w w z 0= Ln 3 z w z w a m w w V) w Ln w U) w Ln w V) w Ln w m a w w 0 U m m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co u 0 Affidavit of Publication STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF DESCHUTES I, Tonya McKiernan, a citizen of the United State and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eigh- teen years, and not part to or 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 192.010 and ORS 192,020, that Acct Name: DESCHUTES COUNTY COMMUNITY DEV. PO Number: 247-19-000628-PA Legal Description: Legal Notice NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Deschutes County Hearings Officer will hold a public hearing on No- vember 12, 2019, at 6:00 p.m. in the Barnes and Sawyer Rooms of the De- schutes Services Center, 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, to consider the following req 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: 10/22/2019 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature Dated at Bend, Oregon, this 22nd day of October, 2019 AdName: 110469 State of Oregon, County of Deschutes „ rf r~, (1 t / UFFlHAVAL MP Subscribed and Sworn to before me this t/(/ day of [� l� , 20 j�-__` 1 by ALY>SHW VALDEZ NOTARY PUBLIGOREGON COMMISSION NO. NW14 COMMISSION EXPIRES OCTOBER 21, 2022 r- Notary Public r regon No. In the, Court of the STATE OF OREGON forthe COUNTY OF DESCHUTES AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Filed _..._ _....., .. _ BY .�. From the office of Attorney for 108 THE BULLETIN o TUESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2019 TO PLACE AN AD CALL CLASSIFIED • 541385-5809'' AKC Gorman S^od female pup 8wks F Itl .marlon SIVI.nolt d p humor. 541 306 9957 an simle Labretloodl pup 13weeks 54i2F fast 4 2F $450 ' S48 t151t51 Labr4docdle pupp i blac4 (.mare 1 bI cM 2 le 2 apncol ma. bro',vn males 9 v ks w Mom isb ck lab lather sapdcol t dpsotle$10001 503-108-0488, 503-201.1984.Thand Oulam.l.nd Matter. Standard S VO 1 d dSVO $2ao SS50 5415410 1242 nUhb heeleml0 glint, g t, M n cOld V /1 bl< -- had In h _",ad _ry Vjhscd.1 785 T799/.r415985314 G¢,mar Shapheeo ,Vrh. O T) 54128f-6829 The Btille iya s rs t , _._.::._C, �.,� n'�-' = •' Create or find Classifieds at wwyv.bendbulletin.coIn Fol 1 1no tom tom .I tom tm cmxe,J xfry ero . EmploymamDPPgda aaEPy .loppo nines,(,51u¢�elNd p_z te9atl�l�& 129 HoNdet& _ y LYgai�otjgpa ^ I ?.%�Art&ost In n)' Majohm, olio pochh' need -Are Wrv"011.1gg11 Se P 9Leg I Notice LEGAL NOTICE at,d 'U Ih N rth C Number 19- te�a118BCtiElhl Can ¢d for The Bulletin Jorn T/IM1e Bull lln NOTICE OF PUBLIC IN THE CIRCUIT lush,PL Sewer P1307274; Ali per Tne Bu leln rues ^tHEARING COURT OF THE Prole 1 p I- &1 g clelms key pcslion is I)•accuireC by EO Med:a;The Desch Coun- STATE OF OREGON flnt protect drat mill a9sinsl saltl estate �(.�i.-- % Ir¢sponsib'e !or min roup. a amity -owns ,a-„ (y Meanngs 0 1,Ir FOH THE COUNTY hale the Cityfofl Bend a gWred lA Ines, 9 1 "h.np and .eparting O - ,0 ny rm I h d p dic OF DESCHUTES met pfll d I the same to 11. 20i he a P I adl y 1 tlfoau,- •• ry g N PRORATE DE ve tl tls Personal Roproscm Ilu la+}!pd U 't pmpa II U tl to of lour pulomob'flahu(ks b t2 2019 t 600 PARTMENT in the For flddY M Info, I6%ve c/o Heather J. W nl lob yor Bentputlent Auto R/ trsny pa m r tho Bames MaN, o1 the Estate Mellon. contact tho TurWRya0 P Correa SNantetl S CPSM1 Paid f E piano eac foe Yo I h - kits ¢ 4V j and $a vier Poom6 I NAOA11 BELLE prgqact team at 541 lternll OS(I van %quote , fake, h Pai d ee etl tl ro I d I, 1 k gg f 0 f 1^e Des[huIs SMITH, Dec19,pa- 3B2 32_ LLP 805 SW Intlue- Iry fop $ pad Id• Itl 541 n3,at]5 Fa and 'n 1 b 1 1 Services Center Ca N .. ITPB - ldal Viay Su 1e 5, p du l typ q P t tl eq 1300 NW Wall St 04910 NOTICE Den tl OR 97702, 8 Slver blry C K, nl E.11;. ce vdn d 1 f Sfo 5entl to Ida TO INTERESTED Le al Nodce x{fnln lour moo h4 Honest Atl of Elaabeth 2y oleo matt nory rs I 1 p that,!lax ng rag 1 : PERSONS. i Notice. Ih THE CIRCUIT from :bo dale q 541-633.7006 Anneunr;xartidNE Pre}err¢A antl havmg g e+.lo our read ._ FILE NUMBER The C t Court COURT OF THE trsf publcallon of STATEOFOREGON tl in sk s rs a Wnus 247 1 000628 PA f the St le o' Om FOR THE COUNTY lh s nolico as sla'etl 20) BT Ju 110 ',,Us[k1ECT C m j g ( the County below or Ney may Typ 1 r - Tues iC I D Y 1 Y L R 0 O d .. pl n I D h las has OF DESCHUTES be barred, All per BOlidly Battaf - May the S? d H d y th aah t rd y t ) b t 0 b " 2003. 0+ p tl. 1 v4h pp0.ntetl ,he under PROBATE OE eons whose rights &Croft $hoxu 1 J d 9;y 1 401 C: q. V .11 le t C p' G 111 sgnetl es Persona PARTMENT in the ay be eXecletl by gI fed d d ph 'Es p k. 19 ph A J U t P C F ¢ d T p 1 'ive f Male• of the ESIat¢ h s PmCootl ng moy h ) b IaCI help d aglH 1 NAOMI BELLE S t II ! NAOMI BELLE ob:aln addltlonal In 441h Arnua Id f II r t 1 B by [ IA IF - 1 SMITH tleceaeeU, SMITH. Oeceasetl lormalion Irom me Snail ate BcuCq IS dY..i ;jo({( d g IIy 1 16 CA GB0. p I It g A persons heving Case No,19P0 Sol the wars Fr 11/1 1PM B M p y Is ST J. 411 J Tr 9 tl lab c E.4i to 1. ,. I both : gains 04910 NOTICE TO Sat 11/2 SAM 5PM worker o -. p aY as ih 1 - 1 se tl INTERESTED PER the Atlrc. nu rotor, or D -hotel C ly 1 h P hl y) _ _ - . s to and I 1 haw �ed $p!.$ Notice. The the etlorneys for Cue 1 5. - P do tl la AA y4 t A 3 tl I { 1Ule 6ema Adotlnulra'ar. Dei Fa Ir9. F P Y CI ult Count of the A S3 SD $ S 1 p 0 M1 p i d _ Ih C y I Be tl Or h p goer M S1 lc of O tl f l pub shed - f1 I hryry 'U.'vlh Bound. I Ih P . regon 0.1 b 22 2019. 1..... I d YP p ) d V ),. Ttl P B ,y 01 [rel lY bkl tl dlkNy u CAN40s/NERPPLI R ,, Con LLP ( I the County of N I p tl 1 aa pp D scIn las has ap '- F IyA notN <o k bV th It h, ICenlml 11 9- 5 I th 1 CHyy -B d ll IrG7 BY, Ch tl P nted the untle• Legal Notice 0"e C fy p TION' I. Sky. A Sun 204 9ned as Porsonel TI1p CrcuI Court of C Ique org ¢ _ p lu 1 Itl TV a full P .I R.tl B tl B.tl OFl 9]702 Rapresentalve I Iho State of Om9on d 1 .`, IYF IhP I T L 800 n ih I ..nine Ne NAUk1I BELLE for lire Ccunty of 1981 CM y L v SMITH deceased Deschutes Frotwlo �..• 2t•�,-rc-- h yy N d 1 C 6 13 p kd O., E, E( C ) T' M p 1] f e d le o! Iln;t Ill persons havingg Depmlmenl has Pets &SPPPIies tl 1:.'1 tirq k d . tl. 1139. AFF CON p 1 this N tsaltl Ppo nlatl Kathleen Waned F ]fA 9,. pe�cptl f1i.O m C C g ro h b b P Ic 62$06 TACT. V. 11 t ssow!Ih Y d may the ala,e urea required IJada Vefenll as I g a d d t h t g f C 4 T� 6 a8 PLa l b d A. t Prose tl the same, P R p son rk ''JJ C F Itl .. d q t 4 t gg 1 "55 Is y b 'l pin^er vo.rdt h- 1 thinBoard - 26118G6 ty T h g. h t - Iy e pl) 5413 04620 DOC C) p to tl,e Personal kf SharondL etl 5ng gads Ti pasty Itl UMFNTS- C b 9 al bl' -R prosanlfllrve t H dG ''dF Dk .5l p d( 11 C- ft Petl Tj v d tl tl Lyynndr Cooper LLP Ca 1. b 19 I q�_d Ca bl f 0Y 10. ttla 601 E d 1 I II`e co tls i567 "" Chandler PB 06691 All per fi41 274 "9.v law opt of s t .ere u l my P UIIk) 1 l - b "t . n, - ti n. the Band OR Sol!a 97 02 ace net sa d eslste 1k sam 11 q.,f D par antl nsumr o hllP 1 Personal Boo a 'red to Pres The R 1 Sell mo d I g S i,t ortl qtt FtM1.n tour months cu eM tl LO h d to mQ Co I tth st staff Y Ir Pe I inch In tl t 1 nt Iho sane to the on I�p )::Vy tlld o.:F xm. F 1. apPl' I R wa f t P L' 1 f Pescral RePresem r' el r Ihallied nit G Nether J. Vg,O 10y hl _..- 200t 111 I _T d d b Y 6 01 .dd Oct b P l- b Ih yy y I nkR) I Correa sta d 1 O AN OL CAR4 a by b h If f 2019 IFRSONAI b C d All P M ll OSuI1Nan A g"I) F 2uis _I, VJ `Faso tI IV =Ptl<e SS]50 aFp CT I J Its GEPRfendt ""'S's y b �hoe l 9byLLP 805y$S lnouS a b: t G h ton A h. s V d y8 dY OR 97702 aro9 " P d 2]1160 Ca:.S ]6.9 months pp 1 1 1 the B 0 Oil go 97]03at..... laths, f Pl g D ATTORNEY FOR f the date of F 'he m 1 thefirst P bl: of B- P d l Y t E( 1 I tl PERSONA PEP R t Optimal N tatod nick 404 pip) 4011k) R§. { 5'k : - C 1 d 1 2 RESENTATIVE L R "I", fh y Plan Hey Gra F¢ttl R.' GOtlk1 C t it uy < F .0' page. Th K M phY yOnSB fl PAtI h C b d. Ail Per d tl 1 tt /-l`�''� ss2:2Gv p frooI 'I' bl 7 C980q]00 LLP L1 P fi P p gg 68] Oa etl antlfrsl YC hq tl Y BS C 3 f $600 etl. g p.00m� I t j II y1 ` C G 1 11 d' SL Ch d A p C Bred Oc.aber th- nk Y h .. T malo - - t G 11 I I N h . g $ 204 B IT OR ] 20f0 PERBONgL CI d 30 T t '1-020-3325 �$ D 97702. Pub tl'. REPRESENTATIVE If I / ntl BULLETIN ~ -'' ! , P ¢ hie h 9 O rO0 C0� Gelve ,Xl,r Ig526 the b I me ntl. CLASSIFIEDS ." _.. i D C 201_. -- - oa„ie.. rn.Pre $ea l a0fy-;- . (�< udfl (RV f 1 11 JL� p eod . © . I L 5 tl4 ' ...�.;...�,_-. aeo mo r'�_ L� JheBujled rl B 01 .206Go 9696 ,CNN Empi y ^ Opp> - 3 ,,L.G.,Vduaa n Iy DI to 9M 9 IY ddaskllppdmarY I a`' fthc H ± int4as te r I b =.. fr JoinTh. e n( MAX, i T`! V DIMip 1t t ! Is lV p I F , mil P t lelgal bIW &., 4 )I'a 2^ nth K`- ..�... ;. l an foal PI . n 0 d u _. n0 m d,.. c U Pro tl 1h t _ hlabile dgmea Sam of 2625 ,E Butsr b ti,C 'st d kl -kei B.d Bend, b WII tl'oVs The C...Aattitude.b d 126tlP 26 M1 OR G9] CWMu finds ce K I B I L 700 q IL t : e L reg nd the_,n 55,$ t. obd -, g Pat,., (lec`n gP n 1 Id tl V h Hand' PP .. lorlc VroPesj`rl es T yA f� ro I c �P P I "!e2 th b tlz eY to u5mit'ed H Ip p, nex 1 din 3C days Irom 1 fb� e' tln.g9 Sk II who6 Ihy 'a'. a tl g tZ ca-the oV cfhPruJJecl . it be I ry n "- a h a 611_004 il KG baler-!.1 d 1 1 po III . a 1 9 d ew tl EBI C 11 ng, p tlfrom I 68] S is D'p `Y 2 t open back tle ai 9 Trull B.d.Ycl PA Y 28 h C.a . C sysl tvl ni t 17403 g Tyro I `a '. a h oom Ioo l t I I, P g ,bill,'. 'Phone of S I R 8l g N t bl il) O e 1802)57E 7030. t on d I b�0 be location .Se LEGAL!:OTICE I: 'n ten C 'I Pp�m9 SUhIMON$ 'T GTE p pe .ICy L : rc'r M 9tl P tl II N CIRCUIT COURT 2 mri'discy : OF THE STATE OF j d V Nd tll meta OREG01t FOR THE COUNTY OF DE- Buym'.uad hhb 4 ntl no NPsny cvs,_ SCHUTEe GHAT 4f0.19 g pp s ',$120.0D0. TA TSU 4IGUCHI a9 y 9t ._ .. 2se'sot VYsshers& I Dryers elecldc 5300 ,I. Idaytop S midpool L brands. 541279 193o u 1 i A Iq &Cdlecl bee. I Swag Conn. F P 975 5414603o10 B 1 pp C' 11Am - n s 1411, ry tl'attla '( 54140&2191 ; Pad T C P 0:, I tl s I : appDtlkl 'I sty Th Bu `a N Sf- to ry C l� e� P ll tl - ' state d. n that Afcmtlan Val Ces ': NSahn etl gt a I _ G d C toh., c 16FTCLACKA DRIFT pPb OfCRA e deg P 'T HGHFSIDE t eVBhp CeI BI1503.66171,= - = DOT Ch e M.rodundoe,Sfh-ell., Tr'ayel4aibra lea ti fah I duel p%a t s f P 91 ! ope to i - oc tlyy +Irk. 201822R81 Keyetone Ballot Rat 9 sl L haike ul 2 ',. . awl. trtckl , r Incht erlelene cit bad,.kt C OR K Ian ad s IM1 F 1 Alll rps lea a n- - t .,. Pripe. S21 500 _.l'u < <„ ,on lh _ -_ j Celt 40669 EA object roe Com pie nt f obleln pp PI Ina FBtldan s Properly 11 . "mE t"or Iseno 0 1 . T '6:epteme Roan- q IN TH'I: NAME OF THE STATE OF hang,OREGi. good ar hersov ,q tl to ,.billionPersonal FOP PERSONAL Reoresen- t III d I I s ''.. Leal Noll g CITY Or REND AN REPRESENIATIVE t vie Dared and first October UI HOUNCES NOTICE Lp. K. 1,4urpM1y OSB :9q I U Lynch pubs aM1od 22 20 9 b t P' OF CLOSURE TO N09TH.lINTG1A Corg LLP 1567 Hq ndkryyve-- C.d-»..: t To. PIe RO DS 97702 Publ' rSoonod: ber tOc,..l8' U se 'iFaU n Ind ila lot Via ACA 18174]4n .BEND C .-Th C y I Bond - tC Po 'ly g th 222019 L fl N U 1 a eN fi s8 cO,f O;E d too North Unit V Th C' t Po 1 f Ind$1 f o g AB Im)b> SI%rcl d Y< B' ten E YOUR CA i BREAST NCERI Ca 1 THalok R dq' L P b h 1 to 1 d Mac31 l In Po IY 1 1 D o t P ba D-Pal I h ! PPAtl �Bt BNi 1 help M some yRo Thl edmHstaglp brought to you by i.R5 p6'9 REE ViGNri� 1 h :P Ile h's doeur0 - esso t 1h E 1 t .e Rqr 6n.f. Cecwasetl. The lilletin Easy, flexible, and affordable ad packages are also available on our website. To place your Bulletin ad with a photo, visit www.bendbu€letin.com, click on 'Place an ad" and follow these easy steps' Choose a category, choose a classification, and then select your ad package Write your ad and upload your digital photo. *Create your account with any major credit card. All ads appear in both print and online. Please allow 24 hours for photo processing before your ad appears in print and online. GI rk ` d `h d I To place your photo ad, visit us online at Mho 30'tl I., v{tesl4°a�f.t.�,m�al� bml1sVn.(,am or call us with fPil i,u'na tg 9dhl-a l i questions LneTfly on of i ain (NC CO iGERLLP I Shenn McCabe. The Bulletin I' classifieds OSB P14812 A- nay to P nH 1567 SW Ch dl A lvwtv.11,rntilna11e1it1.1•o Silo_,..,.,,. goo 9770 ' tl 0 ..,,.5 Ashley Williams From: DLCD Plan Amendments <plan.amendments@state.or.us> Sent: Tuesday, October 8, 2019 8:44 AM To: Matt Martin Subject: Confirmation of PAPA Online submittal to DLCD [EXTERNAL EMAIL] Deschutes County Your notice of a proposed change to a comprehensive plan or land use regulation has been received by the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. Local File #: 247-19-000628-PA DLCD File #: 011-19 Proposal Received: 10/8/2019 First Evidentiary Hearing: 11/12/2019 Final Hearing Date: 11/12/2019 Submitted by: mmartin If you have any questions about this notice, please reply or send an email to plan. amen dments(a�state.or.us. PLAN/ZONE/TEXT AMENDMENT ZONE MAP AMENDMENT: PLAN MAP AMENDMENT:--V TEXT AMENDMENT:_ FEE: I FEE: $9,445.00 1 FEE: Applicant's Name (print): City of Bend Phone: (541) 388-5505 Mailing Address: PO Box 431 Property Owner's Name (if different): Mailing Address: City,/State/Zip: Bend, OR 97709 Phone: (__) City/State/Zip: Property Description: Township_ 17_ Range --I 1 Section 34 Tax Lot 800 Lot of Record? (state reason): Deed recorded 09-26-91 as document no. 91-28510, Book 245, Page 2780, per DCC 18.04.030 Current Zoning: RR10 Proposed Zoning:_ N/A Current Plan Designation: RREA Proposed Designation: N/A Applicable State Goals: Goal 11 _ Exception Proposed? X Yes —No Size of Affected Area: 9.59 Acres INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS APPLICATION: 1. Complete this application form including the appropriate signatures. If color exhibits are SLlUIl11LLCU, IJldtk al IU VVI Ille copies with l.apllVl IJ VI shading Vclil IcaUns Lille i.Vivr areas >i iail also be provided. 2. Include a detailed statement describing the proposal and how it meets all requirements of the appropriate State rules and statutes, and County codes and Comprehensive Plan policies. Text amendment applications must include the proposed language and the basis for the change. 3. If multiple properties are involved in this application, then identify each property on a separate page and follow with the property owners' signatures. 4. Submit the correct application fee. 5. Submit a copy of the current deed(s) for the property(ies). A PRE -APPLICATION APPOINTMENT IS REQUIRED FOR ALL AMENDMENTS Applicant's Signature: Date: g' 1 Property Owner's Signature (if different)*: Date: Agent's Name (if applicable): Paul Rheault Phone: (541) 317-3006 Mailing Address: PO Box 431 City/State/Zip: Bend, OR 97709 *If this application is not signed by the property owner, a letter authorizing signature by the applicant must be attached. By signing this application, the applicant understands and agrees that Deschutes County may require a deposit for hearings officers' fees prior to the application being deemed complete; and if the application is heard by a hearings officer, the applicant will be responsible for the actual costs of the hearings officer. 11 7 NVV Lafayerre Avenue_, Bend, Orcgon 97703 I P O Cox 6005, Bend, OR 97708-6005 (541) 388-6575 @ cdd(6)deschutes.org ® www.deschures.org/cd Rev 5/18 Application Required Documents Friday, August 2, 2019 1:18 PM f11. Plan Map Amendment Form C1a. Paul Rheault's signature required (8/6/2019) n2. Application Narrative document I13. Findings & Reasons document W4. OHA-DWS Waiver (EX.A) 1- 5. Email/Letter from OHA-DWS (EX.B) W6. Proposed plans 1/3 & 2/3, Buffer Zone Map 3/3 (EX.C) [ola. Outback Reservoirs and Well Site - Site Plan 1 /1(EX.C) 1 17. Bargain and Sale Deed (Volume 245, Page 2780) Ov a. Also includes 2013 Land Use Application / 2013 Application Narrative / etc.,... O8. Tuesday, August 6th @—2:30pm: Pick up $9,445.00 check at Utility Billing 9. Tuesday,August 13th: Transport fee check along with 9 p g Goal 11 Exception documents to Deschutes Co. CDD brag. Water Quality Page 1 APPLICATION NARRATIVE FOR GOAL 11 EXCEPTION TO ALLOW USE OF EXISTING PROCESS WATER LINE TO TRANSPORT SEWAGE FROM THE CITY OF BEND'S OUTBACK SITE TO THE CITY'S SEWAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM Background The City of Bend owns and operates a Water Treatment Plant, water reservoirs, water wells and related facilities on property it owns at 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend, Tax Lot No. 17111340000800 (the "Outback site"). The Outback site is outside the UGB. The Outback site contains restrooms, drinking fountains and floor drains. Currently the sewage is stored on -site in a holding tank and periodically trucked off -site and disposed of into the City's sewer system within the UGB. The City has been advised by the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) that the sewage holding tank is located too close to a drinking water well. Although the City has obtained a waiver for its location, OHA strongly recommends that the City seek an alternative to the holding tank, preferably disposal of the sewage waste through a line connecting to the City's sewer system. A process water line currently connects the Water Treatment Plant to the sewer system and is used to transport process water (not sewage) for disposal. That line could be used to transport both the process water and sewage. As noted above, the line would only provide wastewater disposal for the existing restrooms, drinking fountains, and flnnr rlrainc The lino has not hP.P.n sized to sunnort further develonment outside of the Outback facility. The City is therefore applying to the County for an exception to Goal 11 to allow the line to be used as a sewage line outside the UGB. This application narrative lists the applicable criteria and demonstrates how the criteria are satisfied. Applicable Criteria Exceptions are adopted into the Comprehensive Plan and therefore processed as Comprehensive Plan amendments. A Comprehensive Plan amendment must be consistent with applicable Statewide Land Use Planning Goals, state statutes and regulations, and unamended portions of the Comprehensive Plan. STATEWIDE LAND USE PLANNING GOALS Goal 1. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT. To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Response: The County has developed a citizen involvement program that provides for citizen involved in the planning process. This application will be considered by the Planning Commission, which is the County's Citizen Involvement Committee. All citizens will have the opportunity to provide input to both the Planning Commission and the County Board of Commissioners. The process complies with Goal 1. Goal 2. LAND USE PLANNING. PART I -- PLANNING To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. PART Il -- EXCEPTIONS A local government may adopt an exception to a goal when: (a) The land subject to the exception is physically developed to the extent that it is no longer available for uses allowed by the applicable goal; (b) The land subject to the exception is irrevocably committed to uses not allowed by the applicable goal because existing adjacent uses and other relevant factors make uses allowed by the applicable goal impracticable; or (c) The following standards are met. (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) The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences resulting from the use of the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site; and (4) The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. Response: The City is requesting a reasons exception under Part II, Section (c). No other area could reasonably accommodate the "use." The exception is sought to allow an existing line to serve an existing, lawfully established use at a specific location. The sinks, drains, water fountains, and toilets at the Outback site will continue to be used whether or not the exception is granted. The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences of allowing the sewer line extension are all positive rather than negative. The extension of the sewer line will not allow any new development outside the Outback site and the only development on the Outback site will be a re-routed sewer line, which will allow removal of a sewage holding tank. There are no long-term negative environmental consequences of connecting the sinks and toilets to an existing line, the environmental consequences are beneficial — the replacement of truck trips that use fuel and create emissions with non-polluting gravity flow through an existing pipe. There will be no negative economic impacts. The use of the line will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby uses economically or otherwise. The use of the line will result in more economic operation of the Outback site because the costs of trucking will be avoided. The line operates by gravity, so there are no pumping costs. There are no social impacts of the use of the line. The use of the line will result in energy savings because truck trips to and from the Outback site to transport the waste, which use energy, will be eliminated and replaced by gravity flow through the line, which does not consume energy. The reasons justifying the requested exception are set forth in more detail in the City's "Findings and Reasons" document, submitted with this application and incorporated by this reference. The requested exception is authorized by Goal 2. Goals 3 Agricultural Lands, 4 Forest Lands. Response: These Goals are not applicable because the Outback site is not in agricultural or forest lands. Its Comprehensive Plan designation is Rural Residential Exception and it is zoned RR-10. The exception will not reduce or impact any open space. Goal 5: Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas and Open Spaces Response: The proposed exception will satisfy Goal 5 because it will not impact any natural resources, scenic resources, historic areas, or open spaces. The City has reviewed the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and Combining Zone map to determine whether any Goal 5 resources have been identified on or around the subject property. The following Goal 5 resources are identified on the Combining Zone map: • The site is located within the Tumalo Deer Winter Range, a Goal 5 wildlife habitat resource. The proposed removal of the holding tank and use of an existing line for disposing of wastewater will not impact this resource or its use. • The site is located more than one quarter mile south and east of Tumalo Creek. The creek is protected with a Landscape Management Combining Zone. The proposal will not impact Tumalo Creek. There are no historic resources identified on the site or on adjoining properties. There are no Open Space resources that were identified other than the Tumalo Deer Winter Range. • There are no Goal 5 aggregate resources within one-half mile of the Outback site zoned Surface Mining (SM). The Outback site itself is not located within a Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA). Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resources Quality. To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state. Response: The only impact on air, water, or land resources quality if the exception is adopted will be a small positive impact on air quality from the elimination of truck trips to transport the sewage from Outback to the UGB. The proposal will satisfy Goal 6 because the use of an existing line to transport wastewater will protect water quality at the Outback site. There are no additional land resources affected by this proposal outside of the subject property. To the extent Goal 6 is applicable, the proposed exception is consistent with Goal 6. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards Response: The proposal will meet Goal 7 because it will not increase the risk of natural hazards on the site or on the adjoining properties. For this proposed exception, the natural hazard of greatest concern is wildfire. The site itself is not located within an area subject to landslides or within a mapped flood plain, and the County has not identified any other potential natural hazards beyond wildfire. The proposal involves a requested exception to Goal 11 to use an existing process water line to transport wastewater to the City's wastewater treatment facility. The proposed use has no characteristics that will increase the risk of wildfire. Goal 8: Recreational Needs Response: This goal is not applicable because the exception will not create any demand for recreational needs nor prevent the development or use of any recreational facility. The Outback site is not used or needed for recreation. Goal 9: Economic Development Response: This goal is not applicable because the exception will not have any impact on economic development and will not in any way limit economic development. The Outback site is not used or needed ivt eC:o11UIIIIC: 6eve10piiienL7 L)UL uiG VVC1MI Sei vice I provides and would continue to provide does provide a needed component, water, that is used in economic activities within the City. Goal 10: Housing Response: This goal is not applicable because the exception will not create any demand for housing nor prevent the development or use of housing. The Outback site is not used or needed for housing. GOAL 11: PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES. To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. Local Governments shall not allow the establishment or extension of sewer systems outside urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries, or allow extensions of sewer lines from within urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries to serve land outside those boundaries, except where the new or extended system is the only practicable alternative to mitigate a public health hazard and will not adversely affect farm or forest land. Local governments may allow residential uses located on certain rural residential lots or parcels inside existing sewer district or sanitary authority boundaries to connect to an existing sewer line under the terms and conditions specified by Commission rules. Local governments shall not rely upon the presence, establishment, or extension of a water or sewer system to allow residential development of land outside urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries at a density higher than authorized without service from such a system. Response: The City is seeking an exception to the provision in Goal 11 prohibiting extension of sewer lines outside urban growth boundaries. The extension of the line will not allow residential development outside the UGB because the line will be restricted to providing service to the Outback facility and will not be available for residential use. The proposed exception is consistent with Goal 11. Goal 12: TRANSPORTATION. To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Response. The exception is consistent with Goal 12 because its only effect on transportation will be to eliminate one periodic truck trip, which increases safety and convenience for other users of the transportation system. Goal 13: ENERGY CONSERVATION. To conserve energy. Response. The exception is consistent with Goal 13 because it will eliminate a periodic truck trip, which uses energy. GOAL 14 URBANIZATION Response. Goal 14 is not applicab!e because the exception does not change any use of the Outback property. The Outback property is not being urbanized because no use is changing and the City has not proposed urban levels of development that would be served through this exception. The proposed exception would not facilitate or contribute to urbanization. GOALS 15 — 19 Response: Goals 15 through 19 are not applicable because they relate to resources that do not exist in Central Oregon. STATUTE 197.732 Goal exceptions; criteria; rules; review. (1) As used in this section: (a) "Compatible" is not intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses. (b) "Exception" means a comprehensive plan provision, including an amendment to an acknowledged comprehensive plan, that. (A) Is applicable to specific properties or situations and does not establish a planning or zoning policy of general applicability; (B) Does not comply with some or all goal requirements applicable to the subject properties or situations; and (C) Complies with standards under subsection (2) of this section. Response: The City is asking the County to adopt an exception as a comprehensive plan amendment applicable only to the City's Outback site and its particular circumstances. The requested exception would not establish a planning or zoning policy of general applicability but would be limited to the Outback site. The Outback site is outside the City's urban growth boundary, and Goal 11 prohibits extension of sewer lines to serve areas outside the UGB. The Exception is sought to authorize the use of a line that takes process water from Outback site to a location within the UGB to also transport sewage. As demonstrated below, the standards of Subsection (2) are met. (2) A local government may adopt an exception to a goal if: (a) The land subject to the exception is physically developed to the extent that it is no longer available for uses allowed by the applicable goal; (b) The land subject to the exception is irrevocably committed as described by Land Conservation and Development Commission rule to uses not allowed by the applicable goal because existing adjacent uses and other relevant factors make uses allowed by the applicable goal impracticable; or (c) The following standards are met. (A) Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply; (B) Areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use; (C) The long term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site; and (D) The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. Response: The City is applying for an exemption under Subsection (2)(c), so subsections 2(a) and (2)(b) are not applicable. The state policy embodied in the applicable goal is a policy to not allow urban development on rural lands; the prohibition on sewer extensions outside the UGB is to prevent intensive residential or other development in rural areas. That policy is not applicable in this situation because the sewer line will serve only a public water treatment facility, which is a permitted use in the rural area; it is listed as a permissible use in the RR-10 zone, where the Property is located. In that regard, the state policy goals are not implicated by the proposal because the proposed exception will not contribute in any way to actual or potential urban development at the Outback site or elsewhere outside of the City's UGB. No other area could reasonably accommodate the "use." The exception is sought to allow an existing line to serve an existing, lawfully established use at a specific location. The sinks and toilets will be used at the Outback site will continue to be used whether or not the exception is granted. There is no possibility of constructing a different line to accommodate the use on property that would not be subject to an exception. The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences of allowing the sewer line extension are all positive rather than negative. The extension of the sewer line will not allow or support any new urban development outside the Outback site. The re-routed sewer line will allow for the removal of a sewage holding tank, and provide wastewater disposal for the existing facility. There are no long-term negative environmental consequences of connecting the sinks, drains, water fountains, and toilets to an existing line, the environmental impacts are beneficial — the replacement of truck trips that use fuel and have emissions with non-polluting gravity flow through an existing pipe. Truck trips past nearby property will be eliminated. There will be no negative economic impacts. The use of the line will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby uses economically or otherwise. The use of the line will result in more economic operation of the Outback site because the costs of trucking will be avoided. The line operates by gravity, so there are no pumping costs. There are no social impacts of the use of the line. The use of the line will result in energy savings because truck trips to and from Outback to transport the waste, which use energy, will be eliminated and replaced by gravity flow through the line, which does not consume energy. The proposed exception is consistent with the statute because there are no negative impacts or adverse consequences associated with the proposal. (3) The commission shall adopt rules establishing: (a) That an exception may be adopted to allow a use authorized by a statewide planning goal that cannot comply with the approval standards for that type of use; (b) Under what circumstances particular reasons may or may not be used to justify an exception under subsection (2)(c)(A) of this section; and (c) Which uses allowed by the applicable goal must be found impracticable under subsection (2) of this section. Response: The commission has adopted rules, and the proposed exception is consistent with those rules, as explained below. (4) A local government approving or denying a proposed exception shall set forth findings of fact and a statement of reasons that demonstrate that the standards of subsection (2) of this section have or have not been met. Response: The County will adopt finding and reasons demonstrating compliance with Subsection (2). This application narrative and other documentation submitted by the City can provide the basis for the County's findings of fact and statement of reasons. This section will be complied with. (5) Each notice of a public hearing on a proposed exception shall specifically note that a goal exception is proposed and shall summarize the issues in an understandable manner. Response: The City expects that the County will provide notice in compliance with all requirement. ORS 197.732(6) — (8) are not applicable at this stage of the proceeding. OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULES OAR 660-004-0000 Purpose (1) The purpose of this division is to interpret the requirements of Goal 2 and ORS 197.732 regarding exceptions. This division explains the three types of exceptions set forth in Goal 2 "Land Use Planning, Part 11, Exceptions." Rules in other divisions of OAR 660 provide substantive standards for some specific types of goal exceptions. Where this is the case, the specific substantive standards in the other divisions control over the more general standards of this division. However, the definitions, notice, and planning and zoning requirements of this division apply to all types of exceptions. The types of exceptions that are subject to specific standards in other divisions are: (a) Standards for a demonstration of reasons for sanitary sewer service to rural lands are provided in OAR 660-011-0060(9); (b) Standards for a demonstration of reasons for urban transportation Improvement.? on rural land are provided in OAR 660-v12`vv7ii- (c) Standards to determine irrevocably committed exceptions pertaining to urban development on rural land are provided in OAR 660-014-0030, and standards for demonstration of reasons for urban development on rural land are provided in OAR 660-014-0040. Response: This application narrative addresses and demonstrates compliance with OAR 660-011-0060(g) as well as OAR Chapter 660 Division 4, in compliance with this section. OAR 660-004-0020 Goal 2, Part II(c), Exception Requirements (1) if a jurisdiction determines there are reasons consistent with OAR 660-004- 0022 to use resource lands for uses not allowed by the applicable Goal or to allow public facilities or services not allowed by the applicable Goal, the justification shall be set forth in the comprehensive plan as an exception. As provided in OAR 660-004-0000(1), rules in other divisions may also apply. Response: The City is requesting an exception to be included in the County's comprehensive plan in compliance with this section. (2) The four standards in Goal 2 Part ll(c) required to be addressed when taking an exception to a goal aredescribed in subsections (a) through (d) of this section, including general requirements applicable to each of the factors: (a) "Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goals should not apply." The exception shall set forth the facts and assumptions used as the basis for determining that a state policy embodied in a goal should not apply to specific properties or situations, including the amount of land for the use being planned and why the use requires a location on resource land; Response: The policy embodied in Goal 11's prohibition on extending sewer lines outside the UGB is the policy to not allow urban development on rural lands. That , Anoe n.,t nnnw in this site is+inn hpnni Ica thPra will he no rhnnnp in the use of the Nvnvy.a..,.,.� 1— � Flvly ... ..�......,.�............. �..,..- ..--- -- ----------o- - -- -- - ---- -- -... Outback site or of any surrounding property associated with the proposal. The Outback site currently is developed with a water treatment system, wells, reservoirs, and related facilities. It has restrooms for employee use. With or without the exception, it will have the same facilities and restrooms. The exception will not allow any new use of the Outback site and will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby property. There will be no urban type or urban level development of the Outback site or any other property. There is no other possible location for a sewer line from the Outback site to the UGB that would not have significantly greater impact resulting from the need to install a new line rather than adding sewer to an existing line. The requested exception complies with this section. (b) "Areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use". The exception must meet the following requirements: (A) The exception shall indicate on a map or otherwise describe the location of possible alternative areas considered for the use that do not require a new exception. The area for which the exception is taken shall be identified; (B) To show why the particular site is justified, it is necessary to discuss why other areas that do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Economic factors may be considered along with other relevant factors in determining that the use cannot reasonably be accommodated in other areas. Under this test the following questions shall be addressed. (i) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on nonresource land that would not require an exception, including increasing the density of uses on nonresource land? If not, why not? (ii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated on resource land that is already irrevocably committed to nonresource uses not allowed by the applicable Goal, including resource land in existing unincorporated communities, or by increasing the density of uses on committed lands? If not, why not? (iii) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated inside an urban growth boundary? If not, why not? (iv) Can the proposed use be reasonably accommodated without the provision of a proposed public facility or service? If not, why not? Response: The City is requesting an exception so that an existing line could be used for sewage in addition to its current use as a process water line. The Outback site is an established facility. While a separate sewer line could be constructed, that line would necessarily go through areas that would also require an exception. A map of the existing facility and the line proposed to be used to transport sewage is included with the application. The map itself shows why other areas could not be used — all possible routes between the Outback site and the UGB involve constructing and extending a sewage line outside the UGB. Because the Outback facility is outside and a distance from the UGB, the line cannot be within the UGB. Given the need to at some point uecvmmi001 11 Uis vvastc sivragc� tank and the 1111-.iviiity of �WlIvtrU. Ling un vn= site septic system on a site that has so many municipal water wells, the proposed use of the line for sewage is necessary to accommodate the existing use. The requested exception complies with this section. (C) The "alternative areas" standard in paragraph B may be met by a broad review of similar types of areas rather than a review of specific alternative sites. Initially, a local government adopting an exception need assess only whether those similar types of areas in the vicinity could not reasonably accommodate the proposed use. Site specific comparisons are not required of a local government taking an exception unless another party to the local proceeding describes specific sites that can more reasonably accommodate the proposed use. A detailed evaluation of specific alternative sites is thus not required unless such sites are specifically described, with facts to support the assertion that the sites are more reasonable, by another party during the local exceptions proceeding. Response: The specific nature of the proposed exception and the factual circumstances limit the "alternative areas" analysis to an analysis of whether there is an alternative routing for the line; that analysis was provided in response to Paragraph B. The requested exception complies with this section. (c) "The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site," The exception shall describe: the characteristics of each alternative area considered by the jurisdiction in which an exception might be taken, the typical advantages and disadvantages of using the area for a use not allowed by the Goal, and the typical positive and negative consequences resulting from the use at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. A detailed evaluation of specific alternative sites is not required unless such sites are specifically described with facts to support the assertion that the sites have significantly fewer adverse impacts during the local exceptions proceeding. The exception shall include the reasons why the consequences of the use at the chosen site are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site. Such reasons shall include but are not limited to a description of: the facts used to determine which resource land is least productive, the ability to sustain resource uses near the proposed use, and the long-term economic impact on the general area caused by irreversible removal of the land from the resource base. Other possible impacts to be addressed include the effects of the proposed use on the water table, on the costs of improving roads and on the costs to special service districts; Response: Because the proposed exception is to allow an existing line to be used to transport sewage from an existing facility outside the UGB to the UGB, the alternative area analysis is necessarily limited to evaluation of alternative routes for the line. Given that any alternative would necessarily involve greater impacts than the use of an existing line, the use of the existing line is preferable to any alternatives. The proposed exception is consistent with this section. (d) "The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts." The exception shall describe how the proposed use will be rendered compatible with adjacent land uses. The exception shall demonstrate that the proposed use is situated in such a manner as to be compatible with surrounding natural resources and resource management or production practices. "Compatible" is not intended as an absolute term meaning no interference or adverse impacts of any type with adjacent uses. Response: The use of an existing underground line for sewage as well as for its current uses will have no impact on any adjacent uses or natural resources. The proposed exception is consistent with this section. (3) If the exception involves more than one area for which the reasons and circumstances are the same, the areas may be considered as a group. Each of the areas shall be identified on a map, or their location otherwise described, and keyed to the appropriate findings. Response: The proposed exception does not involve more than one area, so this provision is not applicable. 660-011-0060 Sewer Service to Rural Lands (1) As used in this rule, unless the context requires otherwise: (a) "Establishment of a sewer system" means the creation of a new sewage system, including systems provided by public or private entities; (b) "Extension of a Sewer System" means the extension of a pipe, conduit, pipeline, main, or other physical component from or to an existing sewer system in order to provide service to a use, regardless of whether the use is inside the service boundaries of the public or private service provider. The sewer service authorized in section (8) of this rule is not an extension of a sewer; (c) "No practicable alternative to a sewer system" means a determination by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) or the Oregon Health Division, pursuant to criteria in OAR chapter 340, division 71, and other applicable rules and laws, that an existing public health hazard cannot be adequately abated by the repair or maintenance of existing sewer systems or on -site systems or by the installation of new on -site systems as defined in OAR 340-071-0100; (d) "Public health hazard" means a condition whereby it is probable that the public is exposed to disease -caused physical suffering or illness due to the presence of inadequately treated sewage; (e) "Sewage" means the water -carried human, animal, vegetable, or industrial waste from residences, buildings, industrial establishments or other places, together with such ground water infiltration and surface water as may be present; (0 "Sewer system" means a system that serves more than one lot or parcel, or more than one condominium unit or more than one unit within a planned unit development, and includes pipelines or conduits, pump stations, force mains, and all other structures, devices, appurtenances and facilities used for treating or disposing of sewage or for collecting or conducting sewage to an ultimate point for treatment and disposal. The following are not considered a "sewer system" for purposes of this rule: (A) A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of storm water runoff, (B) A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of animal waste from a farm use as defined in ORS 215.303. Response: This section provides definitions rather than substantive criteria, and is included only to provide context for responses to the substantive sections of the rule. (2) Except as provided in sections (3), (4), (8), and (9) of this rule, and consistent with Goal 11, a local government shall not allow: (a) The establishment of new sewer systems outside urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries; (b) The extension of sewer lines from within urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries in order to serve uses on land outside those boundaries; (c) The extension of sewer systems that currently serve land outside urban growth boundaries and unincorporated community boundaries in order to serve uses that are outside such boundaries and are not served by the system on July 28, 1998. Response: The proposed use of the line for sewer would result in the extension of a sewer line from within the UGB to serve a use outside the UGB, so an exception is being requested. The exception is being sought under Section 9 of the rule, as authorized by this section. (9) A local government may allow the establishment of new sewer systems or the extension of sewer lines not otherwise provided for in section (4) of this rule, or allow a use to connect to an existing sewer line not otherwise provided for in section (8) of this rule, provided the standards for an exception to Goal 11 have been met, and provided the local government adopts land use regulations that prohibit the sewer system from serving any uses or areas other than those justified in the exception. Appropriate reasons and facts for an exception to Goal 11 include but are not limited to the following: (a) The new system, or extension of an existing system, is necessary to avoid an imminent and significant public health hazard that would otherwise result if the sewer service is not provided; and, there is no practicable alternative to the sewer system in order to avoid the imminent public health hazard, or (b) The extension of an existing sewer system will serve land that, by operation of federal law, is not subject to statewide planning Goal 11 and, if necessary, Goal 14. Response: The City is requesting and meets the standards for an exception to allow use of an existing line to take sewage from the Outback site to within the UGB and the line may be used only for the Outback site. While the rule lists two possible reasons for allowing an exception, the rule allows other reasons to justify the exception, and this application narrative and the Findings and Reasons document submitted with this application provide sufficient reasons to justify the exception, consistent with this section. In addition to the reasons set out in the Findings and Reasons document, there is ample evidence that the exception is needed to address an imminent and significant public health hazard pursuant to (9)(a), above. In April 2019, the City received written input from OHA Drinking Water Services (DWS) which stated, in part: DWS geologists reviewed the well construction and determined the well is constructed in a locally confined aquifer with moderate sensitivity. DWS considers this an alternate measure to protect public health such that we granted the waiver. However, DWS always recommends mitigating potential hazards that could contaminate a public drinking water supply. We are aware of the City's plans to work with Deschutes County on an exemption for the purpose of decommissioning a waste holding tank at the Outback facility that is within 50 feet of a public water well. DWS strongly supports these efforts, which will reduce the risk to the drinking water supply. Exhibit A, attached. DWS confirmed the ongoing nature of the public health hazard through its July 26, 2019 correspondence to the City, reiterating the assessment offered in April 2019. Exhibit B, attached, Therefore, an imminent and significant public health risk to the drinking water aquifer exists as long as any wastewater holding tanks are in use at the Outback site. Finally, there is no practicable alternative to the exception proposal. A recent buffer zone site plan analysis determined that there are no viable locations on the Outback property to relocate the holding tank. See attached Exhibit C. The map shows there are no possible sites on the property that could accommodate a holding tank and meet applicable setbacks. Further, even if there were, relocating the holding tank on site, or even on another property, would not effectively mitigate the risk of contamination to the local aquifer presented by a holding tank anywhere in the area. In these circumstances, the proposal to use the existing process water line for wastewater is the only practicable alternative to address the public health hazard. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Nothing in the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan is directly applicable to the substance of this exceptions request. To the extent that any provisions of the Comprehensive Plan repeat substance from the Statewide Land Use Planning Goals, the analysis of the statewide goals set forth above applies. The exception, if adopted by the County, will be included in Comprehensive Plan Section 5.10 Goal Exception Statements. The following Community Involvement Policies are applicable to the procedural aspects of this application. Section 1.2 Community Involvement Policies Goal and Policies Goal 1 Maintain an active and open community involvement program that is accessible to all members of the community and engages the community during development and implementation of land use policies and codes. Policy 1.2.1 This section serves as the Community Involvement Program. Policy 1.2.2 The Planning Commission will be the Committee for Community Involvement, with County support. Policy 1.2.3 Encourage community participation in planning through a variety of tools and techniques, including: a. Post all planning applications, decisions, projects and plans on the County website; b. Provide staff reports for comprehensive plan and zoning text amendments to the public in a timely manner; c. Write all County planning documents to be accessible and understandable to the general public, with acronyms spelled out and technical language explained; d. Hold area -specific comprehensive plan and zoning text amendment public hearings in locations and at times convenient to area residents, as appropriate; e. Require pre -application meetings for comprehensive plan and zoning text amendments; and for major or potentially contentious projects encourage the applicants to hold an informal community meeting before submitting an application. Policy 1.2.4 Reach out to the community to discuss and respond to land use concerns in a timely manner. Policy 1.2.6 Ensure effective, efficient planning procedures. Response: This application will have a public hearing by the Planning Commission and another public hearing before the Board of Commissioners. Notice will be provided of the hearings. The community will have an opportunity to be involved, in compliance with these policies. The process will ensure compliance with these policies. DESCHUTES COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 22.12 LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURES 22.12.010. Hearing Required. No legislative change shall be adopted without review by the Planning Commission and a public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. Public hearings before the Planning Commission shall be set at the discretion of the Planning Director, unless otherwise required by state law. Response. The Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners will each hold a public hearing on the proposed exception before a final decision on adoption, consistent with this section. 22.12.020. Notice. A. Published Notice. 1. Notice of a legislative change shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the county at least 10 days prior to each public hearing. 2. The notice shall state the time and place of the hearing and contain a statement describing the general subject matter of the ordinance under consideration. B. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted at the discretion of the Planning Director and where necessary to comply with ORS 203.045. C. Individual Notice. Individual notice to property owners, as defined in DCC 22.08.010(A), shall be provided at the discretion of the Planning Director, except as required by ORS 215.503. D. Media Notice. Copies of the notice of hearing shall be transmitted to other newspapers published in Deschutes County. Response. The required notices will be provided. 22.12.030. Initiation of Legislative Changes. A legislative change may be initiated by application of individuals upon payment of required fees as well as by the Board of Commissioners or the Planning Commission. Response: The City has applied for the exception, which is a comprehensive plan amendment and legislative change and has paid the applicable fees, as authorized by this section. 22.12.040. Hearings Body. A. The following shall serve as hearings or review body for legislative changes in this order. 1. The Planning Commission. 2. The Board of County Commissioners. B. Any legislative change initiated by the Board of County Commissioners shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to action being taken by the Board of Commissioners. Response: The request for an exception will be heard by the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners, in compliance with this section. 22.12.050. Final Decision. All legislative changes shall be adopted by ordinance. Response: The final decision will be by adoption of an ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan to adopt the exception in Section 5.10, in compliance with this section. CONCLUSION This application narrative and other documentation submitted by the City demonstrates compliance with all applicable standards and criteria. A reasons exception is justified, and the City of Bend requests that Deschutes County amend its Comprehensive Plan to adopt the requested exception and further requests that the County adopt Findings of Facts and Reasons supporting the exception. FINDINGS AND REASONS IN SUPPORT OF A GOAL 11 EXCEPTION TO ALLOW USE OF AN EXISTING PROCESS WATER LINE TO TRANSPORT SEWAGE FROM OUTSIDE THE UGB INTO THE UGB TO CONNECT TO A MUNICIPAL SEWAGE COLLECTION AND TREATMENT SYSTEM Findings 1. The City of Bend owns and operates a water treatment plant, municipal water wells, reservoirs and other municipal water system facilities at a location known as Outback outside the City limits to the west. See Exhibit A (Map and Site Plan). 2. The Outback site contains sinks, toilets, drinking fountains and floor drains. Currently, the wastewater from those sinks and toilets is routed to a holding tank, and then transported by truck into the City where it is introduced into the City's sewage collection system by which it is conveyed to a sewage treatment plant. 3. The City has been notified by the Oregon Health Authority that the holding tank is located too close to one of the municipal water wells on site. While the City has received a waiver to continue to operate the holding tank, the waiver highly recommends the City to seek an alternative to the holding tank, because of the proximity to the municipal well. 4. OAR 660-011-0060(9) authorizes an extension of sewer lines outside the UGB if there are appropriate reasons and facts for an exception to Goal 11 and measures are in pierce that prohibit the extended line from serving any areas other than the aa.rea justified in the exception. 5. OAR 660-011-0060(9) lists a few examples of reasons justifying an exception, but does not limit a reasons exception to the listed reasons. 6. The Outback site contains several municipal drinking water wells. An on -site septic system is therefore not a realistic option for the sewage generated at the water treatment plant because septic systems cannot be located in close proximity to drinking water wells. 7. The number of wells and the extent of development of the Outback site do not allow alternative locations for a holding tank at the Outback site. 8. The current system involves transporting sewage by truck from the holding tank at Outback to a location within the UGB where the sewage is transferred to the City's sewage collection system. 9. Each truck trip results in fuel usage and emissions discharge and has an impact on the transportation system. 10. The City owns and operates a process water discharge line that transports process water from the drinking system to the UGB, where it discharges into the City sewer system. 11. The process water line could be used to transport sewage as well as process water, with the use of appropriate back -flow protection. Because of the limited amount of sewage generated on -site, the process water line has capacity to handle both process water and sewage. Use of the process water line to transport sewage would result in its being considered to be a sewer line extended from within the UGB to a point outside the UGB. 12. Goal 11 prohibits the extension of a sewer line across a UGB boundary. The City of Bend is seeking an exception to Goal 11 to allow the process water line to be used to transport sewage from the Outback site to within the UGB. 13. Because the request is for a sewer line to serve an existing use in a fixed location, the analysis of alternative locations is limited to an analysis of the location of the sewer line. Given that the Outback site is a distance from the UGB, there is no alternative location or route that does not require an exception. While it is in an exception area, the exception does not authorize sewer system extensions. 14. The requested exception is to allow the use of an existing line. Any other location would involve a new line and therefore involve have a greater impact on the environment and surrounding properties. 15. As to alternatives to using the line, the possible alternatives include continued use of the holding tank, relocation of the holding tank, and use of a septic system. The Oregon Health Authority has indicated that use of the holding tank while acceptable in the short-term, is not an acceptable long-term option. Given the extent of aev—&opnnent of the Outback site and the number and location of drinking water wells on -site, other locations for the holding tank are not feasible and would have the same problems as the existing location. A septic system is similarly not advisable because of the number of drinking water wells on the Outback site. 16. The long-term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences of allowing the sewer line extension are all positive rather than negative. The extension of the sewer line will not allow any new development outside the Outback site and the only development on the Outback site will be a re-routed sewer line, which will allow removal of a sewage holding tank. There are no long-term negative environmental consequences of connecting the sinks and toilets to an existing line, the environmental consequences are beneficial — the replacement of truck trips that use fuel and create emissions with non-polluting gravity flow through an existing pipe. 17. There will be no negative economic impacts. The use of the line will not in any way affect any adjacent or nearby uses economically or otherwise. The use of the line will result in more economic operation of the Outback site because the costs of trucking will be avoided. The line operates by gravity, so there are no pumping costs. 18. There are no social impacts of the use of the line. Reasons The policy behind the prohibition on providing sewer service outside the UGB is to avoid urban -style and urban -level development outside the UGB. The use of the process water line to transport sewage will not result in any additional development of any type outside the UGB. The Outback site is already developed and the means of treating or transporting the sewage generated on -site will not in any way change the extent of development or the use of the site. The exception will be limited to use of the existing process water line to serve the Outback site. No other property or use outside the UGB will be allowed to connect to the line. The use of the line for sewage is not inconsistent with the purpose of the prohibition. The purpose was to prevent development, not to prevent appropriate sewage treatment that does not facilitate urban -style or urban -level development. The water treatment plant and other water facilities are legal rural uses, and the "extension" of a sewer line does not result in inappropriate urbanization of a rural area. The use of the line for sewage is consistent with other goals. While the positive effects on interests protected by other Statewide Planning Goals may be small, all the effects are positive; there are no negative impacts. The reduction of truck trips is beneficial for the transportation system and has a minor positive effect on energy consumption and air quality. I EKA Public Health Division — Drinking Water Services Kate Brown, Governor & Compliance niter Program Application for Waiver from Construction Standards for Public Water Systems As Provided under OAR 333-061-0055, The Department may grant waivers from the construction standards prescribed by these rules: (a) When it is demonstrated to the satisfaction oj'the Department that strict compliance with the rule would be highly burdensome or impractical due to special conditions or causes; and (b) When the public or private interest in the granting of the waiver is found by the Department to clearly outweigh the interest of the application of uniform rules; and (c): Wdien alternate measures are provided which, in the opinion of the .Department, will provide adequate protection to the health and safety of the public including the ability to produce water which does.not exceed the maximum contaminant levels listed in rule 333-061--0030. n accordance with the above, the City ofRend water system, PWS ID #41 00100 hereby requests the Oregon Health Authority to waive the construction standard OAR 333-061-0050 333-06.1-0050(2) (a) (E) Potential Swi tarn Hazards. The construction standard requested to be waived is for the following project: Outback #5 Well. This waiver is necessary for the following reasons: The City of Bend's Water Filtration Facilities waste holding tank does not have a 50-foot setback from, the Outback #5 Well. Proposed alternate measures to protect the health and welfare of the public in lieu of complying with the construction standards OAR 333-061-0050 will consist of. Applying for this waiver from the Construction Standards and worl€ing collaboratively with Deschutes County to create an exemption of disconnecting the existing wastewater sewer lateral line that flows into the waste holding tank aiad connecting it to the existing Gravity Main Sewer Line that is connected to Bend's Wastewater Collections System. Signa .e Date Rod n�xrs Name 62.975 Bovd Acres Rd. Bend Or. 97701 Address 941-693-2180 Telephone Number Attach plans ofpfoposed waiver request or additional supporting information: and inail to: Oregon Health Authority Drinking Water Services #640 PO Box 14450 Portland, OR 9729370450 ❑ Plan review coordinator's notes on justificationlmitigation: [] Comments: N Attachments Oregon ,Health Authority Action After due consideration, the above requested waiver from the construction standards of OAR, 333-061-0050 is hereby: Approved El Denied Drinl<ing Water Regional Manager Signature Oregon Health Authority ype Phone Number Here Date Att#1 - 065 Facility Plans Att#2 - OB5 Well Log Att#3 - WFF' General Overall Site Plan Att#4 - WFF Process Manhole and Waste Holding Tank Plan Att#5 - Waste Holding Tank Data Att#6 - Sanitary Waste Holding Tank Operations & Maintenance 2 Steve Prazak EX.B From: Salis Karyl L<KARYL.L.SALIS@dhsoha.state.or.us5 Sent: Friday, April 26, 2019 11:45 AM To: Steve Prazak Cc: Byrd Michelle P Subject: Bend construction waiver Steve, I am writing regarding the waiver of the construction standard requiring that waste holding tanks and gravity sewer lines be at least 50 feet from a public water supply well. DWS geologists reviewed the well construction and determined the well is constructed in a locally confined aquifer with moderate sensitivity. DWS considers this an alternate measure to protect public health such that we granted the waiver. However, DWS always recommends mitigating potential hazards that could contaminate a public drinking water supply. We are aware of the City's plans to work with Deschutes County on an exemption for the purpose of decommissioning a waste holding tank at the Outback facility that is within 50 feet of a public water well. DWS strongly supports these efforts, which will reduce the risk to the drinking water supply. Please feel free to contact me if you'd like to discuss this further. Ka ri Kari Salis, PE Technical Manager OHA Drinking Water Services Ph. 971-673-0423 EX.B (11`1-�IwI6—) PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION �`�'�Center for Health Protection, Drinking Water Services Kate Brown, Governor �1_111lori1N. July 26, 2018 Steve Prazak City of Bend 62975 Boyd Acres Rd. Bend, OR. 97701 Re: Outback facility waste holding tank decommission Bend. Water Department, PWS ID OR41-00100 Dear Steve, 800 NE Oregon Street, Suite #640 Portland, OR 97232-2162 (971) 673-0405 (971) 673-0694 -- FAX http://healthoregon.org/dwR I am writing regarding the waiver of the construction standard requiring that waste holding tanks and gravity sewer lines be at least 50 feet from a public water supply well. Drinking Water Services (DWS) geologists reviewed the well construction and determined the well is constructed in a locally confined aquifer with moderate sensitivity. DWS considers this an alternate measure to protect public health such that we granted the waiver. However, DWS always recommends mitigating potential hazards that could contaminate a public drinking water supply. We are aware of the City's plans to work with Deschutes County on an exemption for the purpose of decommissioning a waste holding tank at the Outback facility that is within 50 feet of a public water well. DWS strongly supports these efforts, which will reduce the risk to the drinking water supply. Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this fitrther. Sincerely, Kari Salis, PE , Technical Manager OHA Drinking Water Services Cc: OHA-DWS file — NO83NO ')dNn(,o S310K S30 .._.._.__. m U, 6 t , S o — z> p op NV]d d1IS i-MJC------------- iD]Mo ld SNINCISSI✓ O"O YNV! ONIMOH =1SVN :snciswa O U F _.. a z ¢ } -.. ........ -..._. Ozn O}w��wX?O .. _..... _....._. `� ... - ... Z_-Op... W Q0 a- } ¢ Z W � U - - J Und z , -¢ v yj I -.....0-WZ _ 0_-�NZ... oz _� J O¢w _.... aWZ Z- F WO Z ,... DOz._.z15o .. OaW 03 aUg0 J O zIL O ; o > X W wW _ _' 31SVM °JNIlSIX g _ _ \ 20 . X�O \.. Y� t� w Z � s Q UO F U kt O ( a. a W m Z E- s ` J _ Z W � Z d I Z ¢ � ¢ O7 > Z W Nosia0 'A1Nnoo SWHOS30 m 6 G £Z L — M N g 311JONd V NVId 1dV8(l 103rOdd ONINOISSIP40030 ANVl ONIQIOH 31SVM 3 w c� o z z� Q Ya -xw Fz wz zo z w[[ w0 Q > O > O w F O , J Z 2 Z U z WO W Q (7Q ¢ ¢ ~ z 2 c r \ ¢ C 0 F \zz,\ } W W G 0.O Q W w z W z !3 O c7w I dm o O=Z I a a -`: P:w ' (D Ql w F- z O oaO_ l W Z. i °Wo 0 Cf) LLJ Lu ' ooN�� H(n az�w ��a[o H W U� :.:::.:... w �- F W x w U 2 W W U) 0 cr W tw d � 0 ♦♦�4°+�i oyp4O°♦O°°i _ i ° �♦ gzrP Rio 's `.a' a;'. .�4ti.W. 715, i�ela ♦ � 4� tr a a°e ho ' °i ° ,;+Yo ♦° V � °°i SVa°oo-. °v �:: e°o°o o °oV♦i°i�i°i°00%4° - C � ♦ ♦ R °ca°i 4e:� iJO��'4�°j0 � � a p m� � �. °..., � k i♦Wie � a o° cy°a p �� IN IF ✓ems." 'ka` -� a°s ''os"e°Fii � �:-..L 4` t`°�-'�+}o°.a' ,- -t - x a+a Aa °' 1i`iia♦`W�° oPo� .Sx Eo ♦ °de, O♦°♦ ..!a. °'voo�a a ,. Al 15,4v N FA cfi t x �x 91 WtD3UWAIMOO sanpos30 L NV-IcJ 31lS -gmmm-nm gilS 113M V HIOAH3SgHNovaino ti 1. ( 91-285Ad BARGAIN AND SALE DEED 246 iO 2780 WILLIAM E. MILItER, Grantor, conveys to the CITY OF BEND, an Oregon municipal corporation, Grantee, the following real property: A parcel of land situated in the South one-half of Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 11 East, Willamette Meridian being further described as follows: Beginning at a point on the south line of said Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 11 East, Willamette Meridian, said point bears South 89*57123" West, 163.61 feet from a 3 inch by 30 inch iron pipe with 3 inch brass cap marking the South one -quarter corner of said Section 34; thence North 42158'14" East, 615.78 feet; thence North 34*49103" East, 357.11 feet; thence North 1014315011 East, 113.59 feet; thence South B1008'56" West, 622.64 feet; thence South 34°26'56" West, 921.52 feet to a point on the south line of said Section 34; thence along said south line North 89057123" East, 491.73 feet to the point of beginning. Said parcel containing 10.59 acres more or less. Said parcel being subject to all prior easements of record. Grantor also conveys a temporary access easement as outlined by attached letter and map marked Exhibit "A." For the term of the temporary easement, Grantee agrees to hold Grantor harmless from any liability arising out of use of said temporary easement by Grantee, its employees and contractorsand to indemnify Grantor for any loss incurred by Grantor as a result of Grantee's use of said temporary easement. This instrument will not allow use of the property described in this instrument in violation of applicable land use laws and regulations. Before signing or accepting this instrument, the. person acquiring fee title to the property should check with the appropriate city or county planning department to verify approved uses. The true consideration for this conveyance is the execution of the attached agreement, marked Exhibit "B." This property shall revert to Grantor if the property is not used, within 10 years of the date of this deed for the intended purpose specified in Section 3 of Exhibit "B" or in the event that use of the property for its intended purpose is permanently abandoned by Grantee. Grantee shall be given an opportunity and a reasonable E,and Tiiie Company P.9. i .f 2 Willi- B. Mill- 0/29/91 245 2781 time to remove any of the facilities it has constructed on the deeded property. ln�''0� DATED this day of YJ24)4Q.M 124,_ 1991. GRANTOR _' b — W7 E. f. LER STATE bF OREGON ) )ss County of Deschutes ) Personally appeared the above named and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be / voluntary act before me this A day of r�sr Gam.. 1991 �f1��1� ��2 ��1"iC�iA✓J+'J , NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: 4,/,-/,g H q\devaox\agrnemte.91\ni]aec.wa :0 "^rv.nnnztr,. Pegg : o[ 2 H131iam E. Mlllor 6/E9191 a EXHIBIT "B" A G R E E M E N T THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between WILLIA14 E. MILLER, hereinafter referred to as FIRST PARTY, and CITY OF BEND, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as SECOND PARTY. WITNESSETH: FIRST PARTY is deeding approximately twelve (12) acres of real property located in Section 34, T17S, 1111E, Deschutes County, Oregon, together with required access and underground utility easements, as referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6, below. The intent of said donation is to provide a site for the initial phases of a major upgrade and installation of EPA required water facilities of SECOND PARTY. The parties herein further agree to the following provisions: 1. FIRST PARTY will retain the right to merchantable timber on said property for a period of twenty (20) years. The intent of this provision is to allow FIRST PARTY to conduct an ongoing commercial thinning and fire protection program, as long as said program does not interfere with SECOND PARTY's operation of its water system facilities. 2. SECOND PARTY agrees to provide and complete a development plan which includes reasonable vegetation screening of all proposed facilities. The color of facilities constructed must blend in with the natural vegetation and surroundings. SECOND PARTY agrees to provide complete plans for proposed construction toFIRST PARTY and FIRST PARTY will have the right of plan approval (a) Any structure with a top elevation in excess of 40251; and that (b) Any structure with a top elevation less than4025' .. exceeds 40' above ogorthehat i located at the rim of the property atotherwisesignficantly impacts sight lines from other areas of SECOND PARTY'S property; and (c) Removal of any tree within 50 feet of SECOND PARTY's property line; and (d) Cyclone fence specifications and fence location; and Y�1 44 t 1 l 24s a 2783 (e) Noise levels, if any proposed facilities generate noise levels that may impact adjacent FIRST PARTY'S development, excepting required emergency or safety devices; and (f) The reasonable method of buffering or screening for constructed facilities; and (g) Any permanent outside storage of supplies or equipment: FIRST PARTY'S plan review of said items must take place within a reasonable time after receipt of SECOND PARTY'S plans. FIRST PARTY agrees to cooperate with SECOND PARTY and agrees not to withhold approval for reasonable site components. 3. The intended purpose of acquisition of said real property by SECOND PARTY is to construct all or some of the following water facilities: Chlorine contact chambers; chlorine injection facilities, including storage, wells, reservoirs, water lines, security fencing and any other facilities directly related to the operations these stated facilities. 4. SECOND PARTY agrees to assist FIRST PARTY within the framework of CITY policies and requirements, and prior agreements between FIRST and SECOND PARTY, to the greatest extent possible, in providing domestic water supplies for lands owned by FIRST PARTY. Such assistance shall include, but not be limited to, over -sizing of reservoirs and proposed water lines to accommodate proposed development on property of FIRST PARTY, with appropriate compensation from FIRST PARTY for over -sizing. 5. Both FIRST and SECOND PARTIES may require access or utility easements which cannot be identified at this time, it is agreed both parties will negotiate in good faith all easement needs, locations, and conditions. If agreement between the parties cannot be reached, an impartial third party arbitrator, such as a civil engineering consultant, will be retained by both parties to review easement needs and issue a decision. The arbitrator's decision will prevail. 6. All access and utility easements shall be located to be Gv,Tipati.ble with future developments lane by both FIRST and. SECOND PARTY. Upon the request of FIRST PARTY, the SECOND PARTY will restrict its access to SECOND PARTY facilities to SECOND PARTY right-of-way easements or public streets, provided access is available by such ways. 7. SECOND PARTY will pursue additional land acquisitions from others, if necessary, to accommodate future reservoirs serving Pressure Level 3, additional wells, and other necessary major facilities. SECOND PARTY anticipates a storage reservoir Page 2. Agreement - Miller/City of Bend -41 245 2784 will be constructed on the 12-acre tract of FIRST PARTY to serve pressure Level 3. DATED this ID day of 1991. FIRST PARTY: % 10,AE44i Biller DATED this day of 1991. SECOND PARTY: CITY OF BEND: BY.- att pManager Patterson, City au nce atte n Z' Page 3. Agreement miller/City of Bend 0 PACIFIC �. - --- - 155 N.E. Revere 246 a0 2785 Bend, Oregon 97701 ��~ a August 20, 1991 Mr. William Miller Miller Lumber 1. N.E. Greenwood Bend, OR 97701 Re: City of Bend Chlorination Facility Site 567.0303 Dear Bill: Because of the steep grados along the existing waterline and access casement, the City of Bend respectfully requests a temporary construction access casement to provide contractors with an alternative access to the chlorination facility. The proposed alternate constmchon access follows die existing cinder, pumice, and din haul roads. (Sec attached figure.) The alternate construction access would be in use through February of 1992, when construction is anticipated to by completed. Unless flits temporary casement IS extended by mutual agreement, It shall automatically terminate on March 1, 1992. Specifications within the City of Bend contract documents, require the contractor to maintain existing roads, and apply water to control dust. The specifications also require the contractor to restore the construction access to its original condition. With your approval, die City of Bend will utilize the construction access to provide contractors with an alternate access to insure competitive bids. If these conditions are acceptable, please designate your approval by signing on the line provided below. Thank you again for your assistance with the completion of this City of Bend project, oursAdded by Sill Miller: S'u�[C;iclj' y, Please caution city vehicles and equipment along with contractor W & H Pacific vehicles and equipment to proceed with utmost caution. Ile frequently have slow moving vehicles, trucks, and equipment 4 �maving on these roads and som * parked in roadway. We are �J a#erting our personnels Ben F I1"rlliams Project Designer P. S. Please keep working William E. Miller on securing access from USPS. AyPP y`i r (503)388-4255Fax (503)388.4229 Planning • Engineering- Surveying • Landscape Architecture- Environmental Services �1 r •�11 '.t s�.1z .t4zw. v �v7. dt � fT y VO rrr 1 i v v L01 nr'v> R r ;•t �. _.. i i n ' o N Ovu M m MILWA �mj MUL "PW 1.5 MG BAFFLED ST.EEL.RESEHVUlH IV BY! C-0 STATE OF OREOON ) SS COUNTY OF DESCHUTES ) 1, MARY SUE PENNOILOW, COUNTY CLERK AND RECOROER Of CONVEYANCES, IN AND FOR SAID COUNTY, DO HfRERY CERTIFY THAT THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT WAS RECORDED THIS DAY: ;,, — of AM If! ILA 71 JCI'cu rni" --- RiANCOUNTY CLERKQI' RY. DEPUTY 31 2510 E 3— ND. FE DESCHUTES COUNTY OFFICIAL RECORDS CDD COVER SHEET FOR SLB 12/13/2013 14:14:58 1 PAGES I�R��IQIaUIIdIINI��I�IUI�I�I�WRY��II�QY�OY��IYIII��A9MAll�l FILE ID 1711000006202PL20131213141458 rnxnaa 1711000006202 SERIAL 180709 DIVISION SITUS HOUSE# STREET CONTENT RECORD ID LOCATED IN ra 18600 SKYLINERS RD 18600 SKYLINERS SP1320 App SP1320 DATE FILE Cover Sheet Identifier AHJKMTWX Materials ,�- Community Development Department Planning Division Building Safety Division Environmental Soils Division P.O. Box 6005 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, Oregon 97708-6005 - (541)388-6575 FAX (541)385-1764 http://www.co.deschutes.or.us/cdd/ LAND USE APPLICATION INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED 1. Complete the application form and provide appropriate original signatures. 2. Include a copy of the current deed showing the property owners. 3. Attach correct fee. 4. Include a plot plan that shows all property lines and existing and proposed structures, parking, landscaping, lighting, etc. 5. If this application includes oversized plans a single, reduced -size plan no larger than 11" x 17" with graphic scale shall also be included. If color exhibits are submitted, black and white copies with captions or shading delineating the color areas shall also be provided. 6. All applicable standards and criteria must be addressed in writing prior to acceptance of the application. Detailed descriptions, maps and other relevant information must be attached to the application. TYPE OF APPLICATION (check one): FEE: $5855.10 Conditional Use (CU) _ Temporary Use (TU) _ Setback Exception (SE) Partition (MP) _ Site Plan (SP) Other Subdivision (TP) _ Variance (V) _ Applicant's Name (print): City of Bend, Attention: Heidi Lansdowne, PE phone: 5( 41) 388-5538 Mailing Address: 57.5 N.E. 15th Street City/State/zip: Bend, OR 97701 Applicant's Email address: hlansdowne@bendoregon.gov Property, /l..,r...dn K,--- / fAW � �,*. City of Bend Phnne• / 1 rwNciiy vvvnc� a eny Mailing Address:701 NW Wall Street City/State/zip: Bend, OR 97701 1, Property Description: Township 17 Range 11 Section 00 Tax Lot6202 and 6202AI 2. Property Zone(s): RR-10, WA, LM Property Size (acres or sq. ft.):10.59 Acres 3. Lot of Record? (State reason): 4. Property Address:18600 Skyliners Road 5. Present use of Property. Municipal Utility - Water Treatment Plant 6. Existing Structures . Four water reservoirs, chlorine storage building, well buildings, cellular tower, accessory structures 7. Request: Site Plan Approval for a water filtration building and miscellaneous associated site improvements. 8. Property will be served by: Sewer N/A Onsite Disposal System Storage Tank 9. Domestic Water Source: 9ity of Bend Applicant's Signature: a/i3/s Property Owner's Signature (if different)*: Date: Agents Name (if applicable); HDR Engineering, Inc., Attn: Bryan Black, PE Phone: ( 541) 323-2331, x4002 Mailing Address:805 SW Industrial Way, Suite 4 City/State/zip: Bend, OR 97702 Agent's Email Address: bryan.black@hdrinc.com "If this application is not signed by the property owner, a letter authorizing signature by the applicant must be attached. By signing this application, the applicant understands and agrees that Deschutes County may require a deposit for hearings officers' fees prior to the application being deemed complete; and if the application is heard by a hearings officer, the applicant will be responsible for the actual costs of the hearings officer. 3/13 S7>- 13 a0 REVISED APPLICATION NARRATIVE City of Bend Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements December 13, 2013 APPLICANT/ City of Bend OWNER: Attention: Heidi Lansdowne, PE 575 N.E. 15th Street Bend, Oregon 97701 ENGINEER: HDR Engineering, Inc. 805 SW Industrial Way, Suite 4 Bend, Oregon 97702 Attention: Bryan Black, PE REQUEST: Site Plan approval from Deschutes County to construct the following additions to the existing City of Bend water storage: a new 2-story water membrane filtration facility (approximately 15,312 square foot ground floor), stormwater facilities, and miscellaneous site grading and pavement improvements. I, APPLICABLE CRITERIA AND STANDARDS L CHAPTER 18.124 —SITE PLAN REVIEW • 18.124.060. Approval Criteria • 18.124.070. Required Minimum Standards ii. CHAPTER 18.60 — RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE (RR-10) • 18.60.020. Uses Permitted Outright • 18.60.040. Yard and Setback Requirements • 18.60.060. Dimensional Standards III. CHAPTER 18.84— LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT COMBINING ZONE (LM) • 18.84.020. Application of Provisions • 18.84.030. Uses Permitted Outright iv. CHAPTER 18.88 - WILDLIFE AREA COMBINING ZONE (WA) • 18.88,030. Uses Permitted Outright • 18.88.060. Siting Standards • 18.88.070. Fence Standards v. 18.116. SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS • 18.116.030.Off-street Parking and Loading vi. OAR 660-011-0060(2) — SEWER SERVICE TO RURAL LANDS Application Narrative City of Bend 1 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements 11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: a. INTRODUCTION: The City of Bend receives approximately half its current annual drinking water supply from an intake facility located on Bridge Creek, which is located approximately 11 miles west of Bend's city limits at the end of Skyliners Road and United States Forest Service (USFS) Road 4603. Municipal water for the City of Bend is supplied by a dual -source system water system that includes surface water that flows by gravity and ground water that is pumped from the Deschutes Aquifer. Surface water from Bridge Creek is delivered to the City through a gravity -fed system that includes a diversion structure, an intake facility, two 10-mile-long water pipelines built in the 1920s and 1950s, and water storage and disinfection facilities located on the City -owned portion of the property known as the Outback site. The intake facility and nearly the entire water pipeline are located on USFS lands. The water storage and treatment is located on property known as the Outback site. It consists of two parcels. One is owned by the City, and the second is USFS property that the City is allowed to use through an existing Special Use Permit. The City of Bend Surface Water Improvement project will update and improve the surface water component of the City's dual -source system, allowing flow control to minimize environmental impacts, and providing residents continued access to a reliable high -quality drinking water supply. The surface water source Is the primary source for the City's water supply system, provides approximately 50% of the City's annual water supply, and is also needed for the City to meet future projected demands. The project will bring the City's water supply system into compliance with current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water regulations and provide an energy efficient and cost-effective water system that is critically important for meeting the City's long-term water supply needs and supporting future economic development. To date, fire prevention activities (such as thinning and clearing dead timber) have not been allowed in the City's watershed because these activities could lead to turbid water that the City's existing system could not filter. The new water filtration facility will be able to process turbid water, allowing fire prevention measures to routinely occur in the watershed, greatly reducing risk of fire. In the event of a fire in the watershed, the new water membrane filtration facility would filter the surface water allowing for continued use of surface water for municipal drinking water. In addition, the proposed Improvements will include flow control that will enable the City to divert only the water needed for municipal use, leaving more water in Bridge Creek and upper reaches of Tumalo Creek. The City's existing system lacks Application Narrative City of Bend Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements flow control and has for the last 85 years diverted water at a constant rate, even when actual City use is lower than the diversion rate. With the existing system, unused water is returned to Tumalo Creek about 10 miles downstream, near the City's Outback site. The City is currently undertaking a separate project to upgrade the City's intake facility on Bridge Creek and construct a single water pipeline to replace the two aging water pipelines that carry water to City storage tanks. This project will construct a new water membrane filtration facility to meet current federal EPA infrastructure requirements for surface water and a process water line. This site plan application specifically addresses the proposed water filtration treatment building, process water line, and associated site improvements at the Outback site that are necessary to connect the new upgraded water transmission main to the City's existing storage and distribution system and to meet EPA mandated drinking water rules. b. LOCATION: The address for the subject property is 18600 Skyliners Road, Bend, Oregon. The property is located a little more than %-mile north of Skyliners Road at the north end of US Forest Service (USFS) spur Road 4606-100. The property is identified on Deschutes County Tax Assessor's Map 17-11-00 as tax lots 6202 and 6202A1 with a total area of 10.59 acres. A vicinity map included with this application shows the location of the property relative to the surrounding area. The process water line will be locate in an existing.,Ity of Bend water uuc easement ..n privately owned tax lot 6205 on Tax Assessor's Map 171100 for approximately 4,200 feet and then is located under Skyliners Road and NW Crossing Drive for approximately 4,300 feet. c. ZONING: The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR-10) with a Wildlife Area Combining zone (WA) overlay. A portion of the property also falls within the Landscape Management (LM) combining zone associated with Skyliners Road. The entire property is located within the Deer Winter Range (WA) combining zone shown on the County's Combining Zone Map included in their Comprehensive Plan. The existing easement that will contain the process water line is located in the RR-10 zone. d. SITE DESCRIPTION: The property proposed for Improvements is an irregular shaped parcel that is approximately 10.59 acres. The property is currently developed as the City of Bend Outback Reservoir Facility. Facilities on the property include three water storage reservoirs, a chlorine contact reservoir, a camouflaged cellular tower on land leased to U.S. Cellular, seven drinking water wells that supply water to the City of Bend, exterior lighting, and multiple and miscellaneous accessory structures Application Narrative City of Bend Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements used for operating and maintaining the utility facility. Existing overhead power lines cross through the property in an existing easement. The subject property is surrounded on all sides by forested land. The property is screened from surrounding properties by forested buffer that is approximately 50 feet wide. Inside the 50 foot buffer, the property is surrounded by a wire mesh fence approximately 8 feet tall that provides security for the City's drinking water supply. With the exception of an existing cell tower, structures on the property are not visible from Skyliners Road. The property is not currently served by City water or sewer service. Access to the property is by special use permit from USFS. Existing water transmission pipelines enter the property from an easement across private tax lot 17110006205. The Outback site is currently staffed part time by City of Bend employees who operate and maintain the water supply system. The property is also frequented by delivery trucks that deliver materials to and remove waste from the site monthly. e. PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to construct a new water filtration building, process water line, exterior lighting, stormwater facilities, revisions to site circulation, and miscellaneous grading, paving and landscaping. This site plan application is for the treatment facility and associated components only. f, SURROUNDING LAND USE: Along the southern boundary, the property abuts land owned by the US Government, zoned Forest Use 1(F-1). The property abutting the southern boundary is also located within two Wildlife Area (WA) combining zones — Elk Habitat and Deer Winter Range. In addition, the property abutting the southern boundary of the subject property is partially located within the landscape Management combining zone surrounding Skyliners Road. The parcel immediately to the south of the subject property has been leased to the City by USFS for uses associated with the City's adjacent utility. The remainder of the property is surrounded by a single privately owned parcel identified on Deschutes County Assessor's map 171100 as tax lot 6205 and zoned RR-10. The process water line will be located in an existing easement that crosses this property. This adjacent property is also located within the Wildlife Area (WA) combining zones for Deer Winter Range and the Landscape Management combining zone surrounding Skyliners Road. g. PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS: Bend Fire Department: The project has been discussed with the City of Bend Fire Department and a site plan/access solution has been developed that is compliant to meet the needs of the fire apparatus access requirements of being placed within 150 feet of all first floor exterior walls. Application Narrative City of Bend 4 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements Ill. APPLICATION OF THE CRITERIA CHAPTER 28.124. SITE PLAN REVIEW. 18.124.060. Approval Criteria. A. The proposed development shall relate harmoniously to the natural environment and existing development, minimizing visual impacts and preserving natural features including views and topographical features. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The proposed building will relate harmoniously to the existing development on the site. The building will be earth tone in color and will be screened from surrounding properties by an existing forested buffer that is approximately 50 feet wide. The forested buffer is protected by a deed restriction that was created when the property was deeded to the City in 1991 and is in place for the purpose of minimizing visual impacts on surrounding properties. The building height of approximately 29± feet will also be lower than existing water reservoirs on the site. The highest elevation of the existing reservoirs is 4025 feet, which is approximately 12 feet higher than the proposed water membrane filtration facility. With the exception of an existing cell tower, existing structures on the property are not visible from Skyliners Road. B. The landscape and existing topography shall be preserved to the greatest extent possible, considering development constraints and suitahility of the IandscanP and topographv. Preserved trees and shrubs shall be protected. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: To the extent practical, existing vegetation and topography will be preserved. The project has been designed to fit into the existing development within the site using existing access roads and pavement where practical. The existing Outback site was previously graded to accommodate future development. This project will be constructed on previously graded areas, preserving existing topography and landscaping to the extent possible. The project will also install new landscaping around the new buildings and other improvements. The proposed building and associated facilities will require minor revisions to the existing topography to accommodate access, parking and stormwater. However, proposed improvements will fit into the previously graded areas. Within the fence line at the southern end of the site, grading will be required to accommodate a surface water storage and infiltration pond. The property is screened from surrounding properties by forested buffer that is approximately 50 feet wide. This project does not propose any improvements within the forested buffer. Application Narrative City of Bend 5 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements Trees in the existing buffer that surrounds the facility will be maintained. The proposed building will displace some existing landscaped vegetation within the fenced area. In addition, the proposed circulation plan will require removal of approximately seven trees. However, the remaining landscaping far exceeds the minimum requirements of DCC 18.124.070.B.1.a. During construction inside the fence line, plastic fencing will be used to protect preserved trees and shrubs during construction. C. The site plan shall be designed to provide a safe environment, while offering appropriate opportunities for privacy and transition from public to private spaces. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The site plan is designed to provide a safe environment. The City's municipal water supply and treatment facility is closed to public access. Existing facilities are located inside a perimeter security fence with locked gates designed to prevent public access to the site. The proposed building and associated improvements will be located inside the existing fenced facility. In order to provide a safe working environment for city staff and others working at the site, the proposed building is being designed according to current building codes and industry standards for municipal water membrane filtration facilities. D. When appropriate, the site plan shall provide for the special needs of disabled persons, such as ramps for wheelchairs and Braille signs. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The proposed facilities will meet requirements of the current version of the Oregon Structural Specialties Code and the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Proposed facilities will include ADA parking stalls, accessible walkways, ramps, and signage. The required portions of the building will be designed to meet accessibility requirements. E. The location and number of points of access to the site, interior circulation patterns, separations between pedestrians and moving and parked vehicles, and the arrangement of parking areas in relation to buildings and structures shall be harmonious with proposed and neighboring buildings and structures. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The property is currently developed as the City of Bend Outback Reservoir Facility. The proposed building is intended for employee access only. The building and site improvements are being designed to accommodate City employees and contractors working at the facility. The location and number of points of access to the site are harmonious with proposed and neighboring buildings and structures because access to the site is located at the end of USFS Road 4606-100, which is a very low -volume forest road. Public access to the site is restricted by a security fence that surrounds the property. Site access from USFS Road 4606-100 is being designed to accommodate delivery vehicles and fire apparatus access. Interior circulation patterns, separation between pedestrians and moving and parked vehicles, and the arrangement of parking areas in relation to buildings and structures are harmonious Application Narrative City of Bend 6 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements with proposed and neighboring buildings and structures for the following reasons. Interior circulation is designed to facilitate movement and access throughout the site by City personnel. Fire apparatus access roads are being designed to meet current Fire Code criteria. Parking for employees will be provided near the proposed facilities. Also, the location and number of points of access to the site, interior circulation patterns, separations between pedestrians and moving and parked vehicles, and the arrangement of parking areas in relation to buildings and structures are harmonious with proposed and neighboring buildings and structures because the project is surrounded on all sides by a forested buffer that is approximately 50 feet wide, so parking and interior circulation will be screened from surrounding properties. The forested buffer is protected by a deed restriction that was created when the property was deeded to the City in 1991 and is in place for the purpose of minimizing visual impacts on surrounding properties. In addition, the nearest current development is approximately 3/4 miles from the Outback site. F. Surface drainage systems shall be designed to prevent adverse impacts on neighboring properties, streets, or surface and subsurface water quality. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The project is designed to contain on -site all surface water runoff from a 25-year storm event (as recommended by the Central Oregon Stormwater Manual) to prevent adverse impacts on neighboring property, streets or subsurface water quality. The proposed site grading and drainage facility is shown on the attached grading and drainage plan. Because stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces on site will be routed �_ •t_ ding ♦o natural „one+� a areas and a stormwater storage/infiltration LnrUugfl SItC grading w ita�aara. va.6.......t d d "�' --- facility, the project will not have adverse impacts on neighboring properties, streets or surface and subsurface water quality. Where catch basins are used to collect runoff, stormwater will be piped to a surface pond for infiltration and evaporation. In addition, the natural landscape buffer around the site will attenuate large flows, with runoff infiltrating into the generally undisturbed native ground before it can leave the property. Rooftop runoff from new buildings will be conveyed to swales that will be located adjacent to the buildings. G. Areas, structures and facilities for storage, machinery and equipment, services (mail, refuse, utility wires, and the like), loading and parking and similar accessory areas and structures shall be designed, located and buffered or screened to minimize adverse impacts on the site and neighboring properties. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Proposed structures and facilities include a water filtration building, meter vault, wet well basin, and standby engine generator enclosure. Adverse impacts on the site and neighboring properties are minimized by a 50 foot wide mature forested landscape buffer that surrounds the entire project site and screens the project from surrounding properties. Adverse impacts will also minimized by the architectural design of the filtration building. The filtration building height of approximately 29t feet will be lower than existing water reservoirs on the site. The other proposed accessory Application Narrative City of Bend Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements structures, including a meter vault and wet well, and standby engine generator, will not extend higher than 20 feet above grade. The standby engine generator will include a sound attenuating walk-in enclosure and permanent remote mounted load bank. The highest elevation of the existing reservoirs is 4025 feet, which is approximately 12 feet higher than the proposed water membrane filtration facility. With the exception of an existing cell tower, existing structures on the property are not visible from Skylines Road. All of these measures will minimize the adverse impacts on the site and neighboring properties. H. All above -ground utility installations shall be located to minimize adverse visual impacts on the site and neighboring properties. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: New utilities serving the building will be located below ground, so they will not have adverse visual impacts on surrounding properties. 1. Specific criteria are outlined for each zone and shall be a required part of the site plan (e.g. lot setbacks, etc.). APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The proposed building meets requirements for RR-10, WA and I.M. The specific requirements of those sections are addressed in Section IV Other Applicable Standards in this Application Narrative. J. All exterior lighting shall be shielded so that direct light does not project off -site. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Exterior security lighting is proposed for the building and the site. All exterior lighting will be shielded and directed downward to meet requirements of this section. Cut sheets for proposed exterior light fixtures are attached to this application. K. Transportation access to the site shall be adequate for the use. -1. Where applicable, Issues including, but not limited to, sight distance, turn and acceleration/deceleration lanes, right-of-way, roadway surfacing and widening, and bicycle and pedestrian connections, shall be identified. 2. Mitigation for transportation -related impacts shall be required. 3. Mitigation shall meet applicable County standards in DCC 17.16 and DCC 17.48, applicable Oregon Department of Transportation .(ODOT) mobility and access standards, and applicable American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Transportation access to the site is adequate for the use because the proposed building will not significantly increase staffing at the facility or traffic on Skyliners Road. The project area is closed to public access by a gated security fence that surrounds the property. The water membrane filtration facility housed in the building will require staffing by four employees working staggered shifts. It is anticipated that the facility will be staffed during normal business hours. After hours and on weekends, operators will be on call and will typically visit the facility if a problem exists that needs intervention. Application Narrative City of Bend Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements In addition to regular operational staffing, the proposed Outback facilities will generate regular traffic due to deliveries and load outs. Deliveries will include daily US mail and overnight deliveries. Deliveries will also include chemicals that will be delivered approximately once each week on semi -trucks (low -boys or tankers). Chemicals / liquids may also need to be removed from the site on a daily basis using smaller tanker trucks ("vactor" trucks). Sewage waste will continue to be routed to an onsite holding tank where it will be collected and removed from the site by a sewage pump truck monthly. Periodic maintenance may require that additional personnel and vehicles access the site. Maintenance may require about four additional vehicles on -site, one of which might be a larger truck for lifting and hauling of equipment. Significant maintenance activities are anticipated to occur no more frequently than once each week. 18.124.070. Required Minimum Standards. B. Required Landscaped Areas. 1. The following landscape requirements are established for multi -family, commercial and industrial developments, subject to site plan approval: a. A minimum of 1S percent of the lot area shall be landscaped. b. All areas subject to the final site plan and not otherwise improved shall be landscaped. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: This criterion does not apply. The proposed building and site improvements do not meet County definitions (DCC 18.04.30) for multi -use, commercial or industrial developments. However, the project will include landscaping as shown in attached landscape plan. The project is also surrounded by a forested buffer between the perimeter fence and the property boundary, which is protected by a deed restriction that was created when the property was deeded to the City in 1991 and is in place for the purpose of minimizing visual impacts on surrounding properties. Total landscaped area, 3.9 acres, is approximately 37% of the property area. 2. in addition to the requirement of DCC 18.124.070(13)(1)(a), the following landscape requirements shall apply to parking and loading areas: a. A parking or loading area shall be required to be improved with defined landscaped areas totaling no less than 25 square feet per parking space. b. in addition to the landscaping required by DCC 18.124.070(B)(2)(a), a parking or loading area shall be separated from any lot line adjacent to a roadway by a landscaped strip at least 10 feet in width, and from any other lot line by a landscaped strip at least five feet in width. c. A landscaped strip separating a parking or loading area from a street shall contain: 1) Trees spaced as appropriate to the species, not to exceed 35 feet apart on the average. Application Narrative City of Bend Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility improvements 2) Low shrubs not to reach a height greater than three feet zero Inches, spaced no more than eight feet apart on the average. 3) Vegetative ground cover. d. Landscaping in a parking or loading -area shall be located In defined landscaped areas which are uniformly distributed throughout the parking or loading area. e. The landscaping in a parking area shall have a width of not less than five feet. f. Provision shall be made for watering planting areas where such care is required. g. Required landscaping shall be continuously maintained and kept alive and attractive. h. Maximum height of tree species shall be considered when planting under overhead utility lines. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Two off-street parking spaces will be provided for employees working at the water membrane filtration facility and one loading space will be provided to accommodate regular deliveries. Therefore, a minimum of 50 square feet of landscaping is required in the parking and loading area. As shown on Sheet L-01, approximately 2,475 square feet of landscaping is located along the southwest and southeast sides of the building, within the parking area, meeting (a), (d) and (e), above. An additional 1,755 square feet of landscaping is proposed along the north side of the building. The proposed landscaping is native to the region and will be watered during construction and the plant establishment period however, no artificial irrigation is reauired to sustain the plantings. The landscaping will be continuously maintained and kept alive post construction and the plant establishment period. Because the parking and loading areas are not located adjacent to any lot line next to a roadway or another lot, (b) and (c) do not apply. Since no overhead utility lines are proposed for the building, (h) does not apply. C. Nonmotorized Access. 1. Bicycle Parking. The development shall provide the number and type of bicycle parking facilities as required in DCC 18.116.031 and 18.116.035. The location and design of bicycle parking facilities shall be indicated on the site plan. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant requests an exception from the bicycle parking requirement as allowed for in DCC 18.116,031. The proposed project is not located in an unincorporated community, a destination resort or a rural commercial zone. The proposed location is in a location accessed by a gravel surfaced forest road and bicycle use by employees is unlikely. In addition, the project will generate less than 50 vehicle trips per day and a work force significantly smaller than 25 people. The daily workforce is expected to be four people working staggered shifts. Application Narrative City of Bend 1t) Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements 2. Pedestrian Access and Circulation: a. Internal pedestrian circulation shall be provided In new commercial, office and multi -family residential developments through the clustering of buildings, construction of hard surface pedestrian walkways, and similar techniques. b. Pedestrian walkways shall connect building entrances to one another and from building entrances to public streets and existing or planned transit facilities. On - site walkways shall connect with walkways, sidewalks, bikeways, and other pedestrian or bicycle connections on adjacent properties planned or used for commercial, multi -family, public or park use. c. Walkways shall be at least five feet in paved unobstructed width. Walkways which border parking spaces shall be at least seven feet wide unless concrete bumpers or curbing and landscaping or other similar improvements are provided which prevent parked vehicles from obstructing the walkway. Walkways shall be as direct as possible. d. Driveway crossings by walkways shall be minimized. Where the walkway system crosses driveways, parking areas and loading areas, the walkway must be clearly Identifiable through the use of elevation changes, speed bumps, a different paving material or other similar method. e. To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the primary building entrance and any walkway that connects a transit stop to building entrances shall have a maximum slope of five percent. Walkways up to eight percent slope are permitted, but are treated as ramps with special standards for railings and landings. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Criterion (a), (b) and (d) do not apply as the proposed building and site improvements do not meet County definitions (DCC 18.04.30) for new commercial, office and multi -family residential developments. Proposed walkways on the site will be five feet wide with walkways adjacent to parking spaces protected with concrete bumpers. All improvements will comply with ADA and the Oregon State Structural Specialties Code to provide equal access to the primary building entrance and walkways from parking to the entrance. IV. OTHER APPLICABLE STANDARDS CHAPTER 18.60 - RURAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE 18.60.020. Uses Permitted Outright. B. Utility facilities necessary to serve the area including energy facilities, water supply and treatment, and sewage disposal and treatment. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The proposed facilities are allowed uses in the RR-10 zone. The proposed facilities are necessary to provide filtration for the City of Bend's municipal Application Narrative City of Bend 11 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements surface water supply and to facilitate operation of the City's facility. The project proposes a new water membrane filtration facility and associated site improvements within the existing City of Bend water reservoir and well site. The new building will house equipment for filtering and treating drinking water. 18.60.040. Yard and Setback Requirements. In an RR-10 Zone, the following yard and setbacks shall be maintained. A. The front setback shall be a minimum of 20 feet from a property line fronting on a local street right of way, 30 feet from a property line fronting on a collector right of way and 50 feet from an arterial right of way. B. There shall be a minimum side yard of 10 feet for all uses, except on the street side of a corner lot the side yard shall be 20 feet. C. The minimum rear yard shall be 20 feet. D. The setback from the north lot line shall meet the solar setback requirements in DCC 18.116.180. E. In addition to the setbacks set forth herein, any greater setbacks required by applicable building or structural codes adopted by the State of Oregon and/or the County under DCC 15.04 shall be met. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The proposed project meets the minimum yard and setback requirements for the RR-10 zone. The project site is not located adjacent to street rights of way. In addition, the property is surrounded by a 50 foot wide buffer inside the fence line, which separates existing and nronowd improvements from surrounding properties. The -p- -- proposed building is located approximately 132 feet from the nearest property line. As shown on the included site plan drawing, proposed aboveground improvements are located well outside the setback requirements. The project meets solar setback requirements of DCC 18.116.180. The building is located as far south on the lot as practical or feasible. The building is located approximately 735 feet from the north property line. In addition, the facility is surrounded by a buffer that is approximately 50 feet wide, which effectively eliminates shading on adjacent lots. 18.60.060. Dimensional Standards. in an RR-10 Zone, the following dimensional standards shall apply: A. Lot Coverage. The main building and accessory buildings located on any building site or lot shall not cover in excess of 30 percent of the total lot area. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Proposed and existing buildings, accessory buildings, and other structures on the property will cover approximately 71,402 square feet, which equals approximately 15.5% of the total lot area (10.59 acres). Therefore, the proposed and existing buildings added together meet lot coverage requirements. Application Narrative City of Bend 12 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements B. Building Height. No building or structure shall be erected or enlarged to exceed 30 feet in height, except as allowed under DCC 18.120.040. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The maximum height of the water membrane filtration facility and associated improvements will be approximately 29-feet +/-. The facility height will not exceed 30 feet. Therefore, the proposed facility and associated site improvements do not exceed the maximum allowed building height. C. Minimum lot size shall be 10 acres, except planned and cluster developments shall be allowed an equivalent density of one unit per 7.5 acres. Planned and cluster developments within one mile of an acknowledged urban growth boundary shall be allowed a five -acre minimum lot size or equivalent density. For parcels separated by new arterial rights of way, an exemption shall be granted pursuant to DCC 18.120.020. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The existing lot is approximately 10.59 acres, which exceeds the minimum lot size requirements for RR-10. CHAPTER 18.84. LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT COMBINING ZONE - LM 18.84.020. Application of Provisions. The provisions of DCC 18.84 shall apply to all areas within one-fourth mile of roads identified as landscape management corridors in the Comprehensive Plan and the County Zoning Map. The provisions of DCC 18.84 shall also apply to all areas within the boundaries of a State scenic waterway or Federal wild and scenic river corridor and all areas within 660 feet of rivers and streams otherwise identified as landscape management corridors in the comprehensive plan and the County Zoning Map. The distance specified above shall be measured horizontally from the centerline of designated landscape management roadways or from the nearest ordinary high water mark of a designated landscape management river or stream. The limitations in DCC 18.84.020 shall not unduly restrict accepted agricultural practices. (Ord. 92-034 §2,1992) APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: These criteria do not apply to the improvements proposed for this project. All proposed project improvements are located more than mile from the centerline of Skyliners Road and outside the LM combining zone. A small portion of the southeast corner of the subject property is included in the Landscape Management (LM) combining zone associated with Skyliners Road. No improvements are planned for that area of the property. 18.84.030. Uses Permitted Outright. Uses permitted in the underlying zone with which the LM Zone is combined shall be permitted in the LM Zone, subject to the provisions in DCC 18.84. (Ord. 92-034 §2,1992) Application Narrative City of Bend 13 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: As described Applicant's Responses for 18.60, the uses proposed for the water membrane filtration facility and site improvements are allowed uses in the underlying RR-10 zone. Therefore, they are permitted in the LM zone. CHAPTER 18.88. WILDLIFE AREA COMBINING ZONE - WA APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The subject property is located entirely within the Wildlife Area (WA) combining zone for Deer Winter Range. The property is outside the Wildlife Area combining zone for Elk Habitat. 18.88.030. Uses Permitted Outright. In a zone with which the WA Zone is combined, the uses permitted outright shall be those permitted outright by the underlying zone. (Ord. 92-042 §1,1992; Ord. 91-020 $1,1991) APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: As described Applicant's Responses for 18.60, the uses proposed for the water membrane filtration facility and site improvements are allowed uses in the underlying RR-10 zone. Therefore, they are permitted in the WA zone. 18.88.060. Siting Standards. A. Setbacks shall be those described in the underlying zone with which the WA Zone is combined. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: As described in Applicant's Response for 18.60.040, the setbacks proposed for the water filtration building and site improvements meet requirements of the underlying RR-10 zone. Therefore, the setbacks meet requirements of the WA zone. 18.88.070. Fence Standards. The following fencing provisions shall apply as a condition of approval for any new fences constructed as a part of development of a property in conjunction with a conditional use permit or site plan review. A. New fences in the Wildlife Area Combining Zone shall .be designed to permit wildlife passage. The following standards and guidelines shall apply unless an alternative fence design which provides equivalent wildlife passage is approved by the County after consultation with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife: 1. The distance between the ground and the bottom strand or board of the fence shall be at least 15 inches. 2. The height of the fence shall not exceed 48 inches above ground level. 3. Smooth wire and wooden fences that allow passage of wildlife are preferred. Woven wire fences are discouraged. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The applicant has received approval for revisions to the existing security fence from ODFW, confirming that the proposed revisions to the fence "would not alter the effectiveness of the previous [2005] application and approval of the fence". The existing fence that was approved by ODFW and the County in 2005 provides equivalent Application Narrative City of Bend 14 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements wildlife passage. The existing chain link fence is needed to secure the project site and limit access by the public. The site fencing surrounds the facility and separates the facility from the surrounding undeveloped forested buffer. In 2005, ODFW approved design of the security fence and an adjacent "gap in fencing to provide deer with an avenue to move through the area". 18.116. SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS 18.116.030.Off-street Parking and Loading. A. Compliance. No building or other permit shall be issued until plans and evidence are presented to show how the off-street parking and loading requirements are to be met and that property is and will be available for exclusive use as off-street parking and loading. The subsequent use of the property for which the permit is issued shall be conditional upon the unqualified continuance and availability of the amount of parking and loading space required by DCC Title 18. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Two off-street parking spaces will be provided for employees working at the water membrane filtration facility and one loading space will be provided to accommodate regular deliveries. The parking and loading spaces will be available as long as the water membrane filtration facility is operated. The water membrane filtration facility housed in the building will require staffing by four en' ployePs working staggered shifts. It is anticipated that the facility will be staffed during normal business hours. After hours and on weekends, operators will be on call and will typically visit the facility only if a problem exists that needs intervention. In addition to regular operational staffing, the proposed Outback facilities will generate regular traffic due to deliveries and load outs. Deliveries will include daily US mail and overnight deliveries. Deliveries will also include chemicals that will be delivered approximately once each week on semi -trucks (low -boys or tankers). Chemicals / liquids may also need to be removed from the site on a daily basis using smaller tanker trucks ("vactor" trucks). Periodic maintenance may require that additional personnel and vehicles access the site. Maintenance may require about four additional vehicles on -site, one of which might be a larger truck for lifting and hauling of equipment. Significant maintenance activities are anticipated to occur no more frequently than once each week. Maintenance vehicles will not require designated parking stalls. Maintenance vehicles may park on paved or gravel - surfaced areas near the location that requires maintenance. B. Off -Street Loading. Every use for which a building is erected or structurally altered to the extent of increasing the floor area to equal a minimum floor area required to provide loading space and which will require the receipt or distribution of materials or Application Narrative City of Bend 15 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements merchandise by truck or similar vehicle, shall provide off-street loading space on the basis of minimum requirements as follows: 1. Commercial, industrial and public utility uses which have a gross floor area of 5,000 square feet or more shall provide truck loading or unloading berths subject to the following table: Sq. Ft. of Floor Area No. of Berths Required Less than 5,000 0 5,000-30,000 1 30,000-100,000 2 100,000 and Over 3 2. A loading berth shall contain space 10 feet wide, 35 feet long and have a height clearance of 14 feet. Where the vehicles generally used for loading exceed these dimensions, the required length of these berths shall be increased. 3. if loading space has been provided in connection with an existing use or is added to an existing use, the loading space shall not be eliminated if elimination would result in less space than is required to adequately handle the needs of the particular use. 4. Off-street parking areas used to fulfill the requirements of DCC Title 18 shall not be used for loading and unloading operations except during periods of the day when not required to take care of parking needs: APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The water membrane filtration facility will be approximately 15,312 square feet, which is between 5,000 and 30,000 square feet, so one loading space will be provided. The loading space, which is shown on the site plan (sheet C-02, south side of the building), will be 10 feet wide by 35 feet long with an overhead clearance greater than 14 feet. The loading space will be separate from the provided off street parking and shall not be eliminated. C. Off -Street Parking. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided and maintained as set forth in DCC 18.116.030 for all uses in all zoning districts. Such off-street parking spaces shall be provided at the time a new building is hereafter erected or enlarged or the use of a building existing on the effective date of DCC Title 18 is changed. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Two off-street parking spaces will be provided and maintained for the water membrane filtration facility. Periodic maintenance may require that additional personnel and vehicles access the site. Maintenance may require about four additional vehicles on -site, one of which might be a larger truck for lifting and hauling of equipment. Significant maintenance activities are anticipated to occur no more frequently than once each week. Maintenance vehicles will not require designated parking stalls. Maintenance vehicles may park•on paved or gravel surfaced areas near the location that requires maintenance. Where is ample space on the site to park occasional additional vehicles on paved or gravel surfaces, which are screened from surrounding properties by a 50 foot forested buffer that surrounds the site. Application Narrative City of Bend 16 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements D. Number of Spaces Required. Off-street parking shall be provided as follows: 9. Other uses not specifically listed [in 18.116.030D] shall be provided with adequate parking as required by the Planning Director or Hearings Body. The list [in 18.116.030D] shall be used as a guide for determining requirements for said other uses. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: This project will be provided with adequate parking spaces. The list of required parking spaces included in DCC 18.116.030.D does not include parking space requirements for public utility facilities or water membrane filtration facilities. Of the uses listed in DCC 18.116.030.D, the closest use to the water membrane filtration facility is Manufacturing establishment. DCC 18.116.030.D.7 requires one space per employee on the largest working shift. Two parking spaces will be provided for use by employees working at the water membrane filtration facility. For regular operations, only one employee will be required at the water membrane filtration. facility. For some shifts, there may be two or more employees at the water membrane filtration facility, especially if maintenance is needed. E. General Provisions. Off -Street Parking. 2. Joint Use of Facilities. The off-street parking requirements of two or more uses, structures or parcels of land may be satisfied by the same parking or loading space used jointly to the extent that it can be shown by the owners or operators of the uses, structures or parcels that their operations and parking needs do not overlap at any point of time. If the uses, structures or parcels are under separate ownership, the right 4. • a f she parking space r must be evidence h-y A deed, lease, contractor other W jiiin� use o� a.�a ..p m.d_ , _ - lease, written document to establish the joint use. 4. Use of Parking Facilities. Required parking space shall be available for the parking of operable passenger automobiles of residents, customers, patrons and employees only and shall not be used for the storage of vehicles or materials or for the parking of trucks used in conducting the business or used in conducting the business or use. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Off-street parking provided for the water membrane filtration facility will be used by employees working at the water membrane filtration facility. The site is closed to public access by a security fence that surrounds the property. Employees will be working at other areas on the facility as well as operating the water membrane filtration facility. Parking at the water membrane filtration facility will be available for employees operating the water filtration and water supply system. Parking will not be used for storage of vehicles or materials. Trucks conducting business at the water membrane filtration facility will not use the parking spaces. A truck loading area will be available for truck use. F. Development and Maintenance Standards for Off -Street Parking Areas. Every parcel of land hereafter used as a public or private parking area, including commercial parking lots, shall be developed as follows: Application Narrative City of Bend 17 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements 2. Any lighting used to illuminate off-street parking areas shall be so arranged that it will not project light rays directly upon any adjoining property in a residential zone. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Exterior security lighting is proposed for the building and the site including off-street parking. All exterior lighting will be shielded and directed downward so that it will not project light rays directly upon any adjoining property in the RR-10 zone. Cut sheets for proposed exterior light fixtures are attached to this application. 3. Groups of more than two parking spaces shall be located and designed to prevent the need to back vehicles into a street or right of way other than an alley. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The off-street parking spaces are located and designed to prevent the need to back onto a street or right of way. The spaces are located at the interior of the site far away from any streets or rights of way. 4. Areas used for standing and maneuvering of vehicles shall be paved surfaces adequately maintained for all weather use and so drained as to contain any flow of -water on the site. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Areas to be used for standing and maneuvering vehicles will be paved with all weather surfacing. Stormwater will be drained to existing and new stormwater facilities and will not be allowed to flow off site. S. Access aisles shall be of sufficient width for all vehicular turning and maneuvering. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Access aisles are designed to accommodate turning and maneuvering of passenger vehicles, delivery vehicles and fire apparatus equipment. Circulation road widths and geometry have been designed to accommodate all anticipated vehicles on the site. 6. Service drives to off-street parking areas shall be designed and constructed to facilitate the flow of traffic, provide maximum safety of traffic access and egress and maximum safety of pedestrians and vehicular traffic on the site. The number of service drives shall be limited to the minimum that will accommodate and serve the traffic anticipated. Service drives shall be clearly and permanently marked and defined through the use of rails, fences, walls or other barriers or markers. Service drives to drive in establishments shall be designed to avoid backing movements or other maneuvering within a street other than an alley. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Service drives to off street parking have been designed to facilitate the flow of traffic from employees and delivery vehicles. The site is closed to public access by a security fence that surrounds the property. Pedestrian access will be limited to employees working at the site. One service drive will be provided. Proposed service drives will be clearly delineated with road surfacing, landscaping and markers where appropriate. Application Narrative City of Bend 18 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements Circulation is designed to allow vehicles to loop through the site to avoid backing movements. 7. Service drives shall have a minimum vision clearance area formed by the intersection of the driveway centerline, the street right of way line and a straight line joining said lines through points 30 feet from their Intersection. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: This section does not apply. The service drives are a continuation of USFS Road 4606-100 and they do not intersect the roadway, so vision clearance areas are not required as they would be at a perpendicular intersection between two roads. The road profile allows for adequate sight distance along the roadway. S. Parking spaces along the outer boundaries of a parking area shall be contained by a curb or bumper rail placed to prevent a motor vehicle from extending over an adjacent property line or a street right of way. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: This section does not apply because no parking spaces are located near adjacent property or street rights of way. G. Off -Street Parking Lot Design. All off-street parking lots shall be designed subject to County standards for stalls and aisles as set forth in the following drawings and Table 1 at end of Chapter 18.116. 1. For one row of stalls use "C" + "D" as minimum bay width. 2. Public alley width maybe included as part of dimension "D," but all parking stalls must be on private property, off the public right of way. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: Off street parking is designed according to County standards for stalls and aisles asset forth in DCC 18.116.030 —Table 1. Two 10 feet x 20 feet parking stalls will be provided with a 24 foot aisle behind the stalls as allowed in 18.116.030.E - Table 1. OAR 660-011-0060(2). Sewer Service to Rural Lands. (1) As used in this rule, unless the context requires otherwise: (a) "Establishment of a sewer system" means the creation of a new sewage system, including systems provided by public or private entities; (b) "Extension of a Sewer System means the extension of a pipe, conduit, pipeline, main, or other physical component from or to an existing sewer system in order to provide service to a use, regardless of whether the use is inside the service boundaries of the public or private service provider. The sewer service authorized in section (8) of this rule Is not an extension of a sewer, (c) "No practicable alternative to a sewer system" means a determination by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) or the Oregon Health Division, pursuant to criteria in OAR chapter 340, division 71, and other applicable rules and laws, that an existing public health hazard cannot be adequately abated by the repair or maintenance of existing sewer systems Application Narrative City of Bend 19 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements or on -site systems or by the installation of new on -site systems as defined in OAR 340-071- 0100; (d) "Public health hazard" means a condition whereby it is probable that the public is exposed to disease -caused physical suffering or illness due to the presence of inadequately treated sewage; (e) "Sewage" means the water -carried human, animal, vegetable, or industrial waste from residences, buildings, industrial establishments or other places, together with such ground water infiltration and surface water as may be present; (f) "Sewer system" means a system that serves more than one lot or parcel, or more than one condominium unit or more than one unit within a planned unit development, and includes pipelines or conduits, pump stations, force mains, and all other structures, devices, appurtenances and facilities used for treating or disposing of sewage or for collecting or conducting sewage to an ultimate point for treatment and disposal. The following are not considered a "sewer system" for purposes of this rule: (A) A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of storm water runoff, (13) A system provided solely for the collection, transfer and/or disposal of animal waste from a farm use as defined in ORS 215.303. (2) Except as provided in sections (3), (4), (8), and (9) of this rule, and consistent with Goal 11, a local government shall not allow: (a) The establishment of new sewer systems outside urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries; (b) The extension of sewer lines from within urban growth boundaries or unincorporated community boundaries in order to serve uses on land outside those boundaries; (c) The extension of sewer systems that currently serve land outside urban growth boundaries and unincorporated community boundaries in order to serve uses that are outside such boundaries and are not served by the system on July 28, 1998. Applicant's Response. The relevant portion of this rule is the prohibition on extending sewer service outside of an urban growth boundary to serve uses on land outside the UGB. OAR 660- 011-0060(2)(b). The process water line taking water from the water filtration process off -site does not violate the rule because the process water line does not carry sewage as that term is defined and used in OAR 660-011-0060. OAR 660-011-0060(1)(c) provides: "Sewagb" means the water -carried human, animal, vegetable, or industrial waste from residences, buildings, industrial establishments, or other places, together with such ground water infiltration and surface water as may be present. Therefore, to constitute sewage, the material being transported in a line must be human, animal, vegetable, or industrial waste. The only thing carried in the process water line will be process water from the municipal water membrane filtration facility. Process water is water Application Narrative City of Bend 20 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements from the water filtration process that contains natural sediments that have been filtered from the water supply and residue chemicals from the filter cleaning process. Process water results from backwashing/cleaning the membrane filters. Process waste includes: • Strainer backwash waste o Water with natural larger sediments removed from the raw water that are then back flushed from the strainer • Membrane filter backwash waste o Water with natural smaller sediments removed from the raw water that are then back flushed from the membrane filter Membrane filter cleaning waste o Small volume of water produced during cleaning of the membrane filters including sodium, chloride, chlorine, aluminum, citrate, and natural organics • Floor drains in piping gallery o General wash down water All toilets and sinks onsite will be part of a totally separate septic system that will not be connected in any way to the process water system. The totally separate septic system is the same that is in use today at the Outback site — a holding tank for evacuation by vactor truck and haul off site to the wastewater treatment plant. Any human wastes at the site will be disposed of through the separate on -site septic system and will not be piped off -site. Similarly, any animal or vegetable waste (from food preparation or washing off lunch dishes) will also be _ fthrou h the 'gate on -site septic cvctam_ All bathroom; kitchen, and lab drains in UISpUJCU ofthrough Vugu u�c separate -,---..._ the facility will be connected to the separate septic system. Sanitary wastes discharging to the separate septic system include: • Bathroom wastes • Lab sinks • Break room • Locker / shower • Mechanical room / platform drains The process water is also not industrial waste. For waste to be "industrial," it must be generated by an industrial use. A municipal water membrane filtration facility is a public facility, not an industrial use. See OAR 660-011-0005(5), OAR 660-009-0005(3). OAR 660-011-0005(5) defines "public facility" as including water facilities: (5) "Public Facility": A public facility includes water, sewer and transportation facilities, but does not include buildings, structures or equipment incidental to the direct operation of those facilities. Application Narrative City of Bend 21 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements The process water is generated by a water facility and is therefore generated by a public facility, not by an industrial use. Furthermore, the process water line is itself a necessary and direct component of the water membrane filtration facility, not an incidental piece of equipment and is therefore itself a portion of a water public facility. Until the point the process water line connects to a sewer facility in the UGB, it is part of the water membrane filtration facility, not part of the sewer utility. These underground pipes are color -coded, and the process water line will be a brown pipe, not a green sewer pipe. OAR 660-009-0005(3) defines "industrial use as follows: (3) "Industrial Use" means employment activities generating income from the production, handling or distribution of goods. Industrial uses include, but are not limited to: manufacturing; assembly; fabrication; processing; storage; logistics; warehousing; importation; distribution and transshipment; and research and development. Industrial uses may have unique land, infrastructure, energy, and transportation requirements. Industrial uses may have external impacts on surrounding uses and may cluster In traditional or new industrial areas where they are segregated from other non -industrial activities. A water membrane filtration facility is not an employment activity generating income, but rather part of a public facility that is an integral part of the public infrastructure. The water in the process water line is not industrial waste. The Deschutes County Code similarly describes a municipal water system as something other than an industrial use. The definition is: "Municipal water supply system" means a domestic water supply source and distribution system owned and operated by a city, county, special district or other public corporation which has independent tax -levying powers to support the system and which supplies water to a total of 1,000 or more households." DCC 28.04.030 The water membrane filtration facility, including the process water line, is part of the municipal water supply system. The water membrane filtration facility is not an industrial use, so the line does not carry industrial waste. The line does not carry human, animal, vegetable, or industrial wastes, and therefore is not a sewage line and installation of the process water line is not an extension of sewer service. The limitation in the definition of sewer to "human, animal, vegetable, and industrial wastes" is consistent with the purpose of the Goal 11 restriction on extending sewer service outside UG&. The purpose is to prevent development that is inappropriate in rural areas, including residential, commercial and industrial development. However, the rules recognize that some Application Narrative City of Bend 22 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements public facilities, even those that serve urban areas, must be located outside UGBs, and the rule is intended to allow those public facilities to operate. The process water line is part of the water system. It is not extending water service outside the UGB, but rather is part of the filtration facility, which may be sited outside the UGB. See OAR 660.011.0065(1)(b) (defines "extension of a water system" as "providing service to a use.") IV. CONCLUSION The applicant has demonstrated compliance with the applicable standards and criteria. The applicant respectfully requests that the County approve the proposed site plan. Application Narrative City of Bend 23 Outback Water Membrane Filtration Facility Improvements SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ovex SITE PLAN REVIEW G OVERALL SITE LAYQU17— 0 Ju VICINRY-MAP, ANDSHEET UST 0 o DESCHLrTES COUNTY, OREGON 2 0 NO93210 'A WOO SRWHOS30 .'° cfau%arra»a" �� -- gaz F. x �d4S N o vwwnvnmw NOUVooitjNIQ71f4m wmtUVN4 NV1d 3115 p�JtlViN3 NVId MJS LL LL a a r t V 3 a wwu MHIA3W *^'� m � m xs�o Q z z 103f Oad 1N3W3A02ldWl 2131dM 30dA21ns <+ � sauznu n N b.j see t q R-- I 1 c, � a o1�5"PrtWP+�% xavn5-% na;.at-'Atd of 5'•as✓e % SflYa wool � LfVt <v =^p �31r0 cwn�-Yrn Eaa I6•J\Of9C09W�xw<\d:�tm�w%\.� :y/n zo � RN z a o N09380 %UNflo) 53.LnHOS30 �....q 3 SS300V aNV ONICI"0 aNOd MO-UMMO MaJA3M NVId RAS 103rO8d 1N3W3AO8dWl d31VM 3OVj2lns a xxvuo PRO J� 5 -m� a- owc: c:�r.•wl�H{W+\.tMelBfo\c-Af�.a it>c s: ffp.e o c! m a 4�. U \ y f i r f i XV rn cn s m Ty d ® ® 4 n z A m c m 8 cl m a g omvf6 of _....^ nivTrOus- z a 8 gggo p..,. l ,+�..+��a� vr� SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT z°za oa1wH a J�� SITE PLAN REVIEW p J -` wMc�c,.,,�,e SNtAftGED 91TE PLAN - � d ZW aDESCHUTES COUNTY, ORECON A 'atl 4 <s t Y�2 talitl r '.his 1 r� 11it . r; er l� !•tt 'l �r y)]�'��r�}��. yt'.�7I � e�b�� 4 W If��t.4c 1 Yi .-�� 1 � 9,� ; c r ; � ! 3 tS S � } Zl 1 5 S .rf t e n � t �" �,` � t•� ''� 't 1 � - ..� tt! l� Ott 1�((�� i t� i•t} � t �'r ° r" � r �t ' Ytyy 7 r;�a. � qq.°, tip }i�r { t ti. i fi) t�t�tts�t�} }�,�� i}}ft >.�Sn y Il rj• i �ia� t !'Z �„s tb! � � ., Y �it�� j' s, °t t' 4 ` tV tt,, h' � ti '� � S• �t 1 t -- 1 "i 1 ((tltttllt� a e t ��*'� �r� q•Ll{�`�t . t,,i't t rr �Sr r x Cti (+ �1 � j� k IN k. ✓- � tit I ��,. t ,5 � Y N I t_' 71i}.4.1� I�4�F1 iyti�� U f,N M it +^"..,�1,, � �1. �' v{ "� r• t ,4�''t ,ti ['-oa �t34E} '? IJ, � •Jet:{��,yrjttty�" t• ,ie ^— "`• fe• \ � �! tl a '\"L? L-� � t r..�tt'tki.�'+.t:. �ft th ' �,r3..,�, ��^` fit; I v 21, r 1 X s yY''i C f'7 p (4003UD l�"AO'Ji S3InH3S30 --. _. IwlO ilNMNMDZAQ i = ua cs,ns>.� up. .� a o a Ntl'id 3d 3SONV'7 � ,�� O J o , o °v M31A3M NVid "S �� AA ¢ G1 x o LORONd iN3VQAO 1dNil 831VM 33V-4N()s �� µnv-- niaus t � —"�UEWT mU � w � 90 w 3 N W w rl )a o c� € S ¢ a $ F o is .. X �t 6 O O o o v• O g gGo a= < � 4W `io Mrc: c1a�.=++ro Naq dosaTeio-a�.cy usrn: srwv d.T[; 0« ), i0r. :19am NTTS� %.Baasr_4sa.RrR_P�r. O fT N > d z ILI i � I 4 f7 ti P 1� L7 L u O CS m = p oCtc Au ttT: kL�u»a: h y o ,ga ?uow�«sx yEN SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SITE PLAN REVIEW co O c'uc� WATER FILTRATION FACILITY A c •" OVERALL FLOOR PLAN �....� 0 DESCHUTES C(Mrf, OREGON z IT. M r 0 'u a. I Adl6SK_ R IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SURFACE WATER ol.— an SITE PLAN REVIEW IDR 73 WATER FI LT RA-n 0 _=NFACILITY =— o ko Q to MECHANICAL PLATFORM DESCHUMES COUNTY. OREOON P i pe V; P3 0 z 0 z z— -Zgz�io SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT rn SrrE PLAN REVIEW 0 0 to 9;0 —f 0 G) 0 . ..... DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON 2 pAO: C\n...n'µµ\ \eD44J81[M •01 a.� Vi[M aw,�m OAR•. Oec IJ, i9�la 9.ltem 1(f$. •_90:dw•51e_PanJhWa bl:AGK4 fJf: MM,iN:/xgp s „nc...�� tagb SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT m Ll.. \ zz p I FSITE PLAN REVIEW o o -�'i O WATE�FILTRATION FACILITY • 4 A o ELEVATIONS (SOUTH B WEsn o v _....__.... .mamas OESCHUfES COUNTf, OREGGN Z - CA—,�. u— ,,, oN , I J�l lqEFS: K, 0 'g. 0 0 vT z rn vil mm�4 A:WAl RA vv, is rr ii tli SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT rn zza SITE PLAN REVIEW 0 -4 > ap coo 6 WATER FILTRATION FACIL11Y - 0 Ff DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON z Loan kv:r ICON: I II Nil. It DM� W, SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT DR- 0 "a DR SITE PLAN REVIEW 41 h - MM PLUMBING PLAN - MAIN FLOOR a c - z DESCHUTES MtJN7f. OREGON Ott: C��q t�t.+g ua�¢OSO2k10\i-O�.a,p 215Efl: ewt.+�t 2f- 2UI� !i. Mn %NErS: x_Barror_S�ir_F'be gw4r % PrvPotm_S'it 1LSo� O C7 ZD A I � I , III --F��IP I � -;o I I w I I I I I it I i ! i I ! I I S I I I I I i i N I J I I ( I i i Q p 9 � < OCSCHED er: accian en a SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT SITE PLAN REVIEW RESIDUALS HANDLING It �Zp o o y D C o n gB ons """"'01 i. DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON Lf z owxnewmu UL/CUL LISTED MAX AMBIENT: 40'C MAX WEIGHT: 501bs (23kg) EPA. 2'05 5q. fl. DROP GLASS 1 .23 (387mm) 00' 22. (569mm) ® 45' 6.7 (424mm) 50URCE AND WATTAGE 100HP 100W HPS 15MP 150W HPS 200HP 20OW HPS 250HP 250W HPS 25LHP 250W HPS 400HP 40OW HPS 40LHP 40OW HPS 175MH 175W MH * 175PM 175W PM 25OMH 250W MH * 40OMH 40OW MH * 4OLMH 40OW MH * 25OPM 250W PM 40OPM 40OW PM 9 MONGOOSE`S FLAT GLASS 11.52 (293mm) ® W TILT 22.4 (569mm) O 45 TILT CATALOG NUMBER SEE SHEET 2 FOR MOUNTINGS NEMA TWIST —LOCK PHOTOCONTROL RECEPTACLE 36.8 (935mm) `— STAINLESS STEEL LATCHES MAX VOLTAGE TILT RMR.E 12 120V L .LOW .TILT, 0'-IS' 20 208V H HIGH TILT, 27-46 24 240V 27 277V 48 480V 34 347V MT MULTIVOLT 120,208,240,277V MA MULTIVOLT PRE -WIRED 120V MB MULTIVOLT PRE —WIRED 208V MC MULTNOLT PRE —WIRED 240 MD MULTIVOLT PRE —WIRED 277V VT MULTIVOLT 120, 277, 347V ( NOR VA LPM ) 20OW HPS 401LPM 40OW LPM * NOT AVAILAIBLE FOR SHIPMENT IN �S4L �5W THE US AFTER 12-31=08 DUE TO �>tND� L'COi� EISA 2007 LEGISLATION M WING A ARCHITECTURAL H HORIZONTAL V VERTICAL FINISH G GRAY K BLACK N GREEN W WHITE Z BRONZE A A OPTICS DC MEDIUM ROADWAY, CLEAR DROP GLASS DR MEDIUM ROADWAY, GLASS REFRACTOR FC FORWARD THROW, CLEAR DROP GLASS FF FORWARD THROW, FLAT GLASS NC NARROW ROADWAY, CLEAR DROP GLASS NO NARROW FLOOD NF NARROW ROADWAY, FLAT GLASS NR NARROW ROADWAY, GLASS REFRACTOR SC SQUARE, CLEAR DROP GLASS SF SQUARE, FLAT GLASS WC WIDE ROADWAY, CLEAR DROP GLASS WD WIDE FLOOD WF WIDE ROADWAY FIAT GLASS WR WIDE ROADWAY, GLASS REFRACTOR OPT ONS B TERMINAL BLOCK do NEMA DECAL C NEMA DECAL P PROTECTED STARTER R NEMA TWIST —LOCK PHOTOCONTROL RECEPTACLE T SPADE TERMINATION FOR BALLAST LEADS 3 3" TO 2" TENON ADAPTER 8 6' PIGTAIL ACCESSORIES F2 DOUBLE�FUSING((208,240, 240 & 48&0V) LAMP ®KT-5—G GALVANIZED WOOD POLE BRACKET BR-1091—)DC 3" TO 2" TENON ADAPTER ORDER NO: TYPE: DRAVANG NO. CAD MODEL: DATE: OPTIC T RANGE UC IGH D GH AWR L w HI ALL LOW HIGH ALL 4z:: W MOUNTING ATTACHES TO A SQUARE POLE OR TENON ADAPTOR USING PATTERN BELOW i • . MONGOOSE FF LOW NO HIGH NF LOW SF LOW WD HIGH WF LOW -"Iql 6 I= � I �Tft V MOUNTING ATTACHES TO A 2" HORIZONTAL TENON 2.25(57mm) 1.125(29mm) 1 -4- 5.25(133mm) 01.50(38mm) 2.625(67mm) I 3X 0.39(10mm) "A" MOUNTING PATTERN ORDER NO: TYPE: %P MOUNTING ATTACHES TO A 2" VERTICAL TENON DRAWING NO. CAD MODEL: DATE: IIAXIM(1M WEIGHT - 85 L•ISS. 218mm 284MI 110.40 5mm 2.13 PRMsmwmWH CPOPT mT . WMINAWMTOPVIEW BOTH SIDES 0 PR of 89mm (3.511 1"80mm 17.1�0'7 398mm (15.STJ SHOWN WITH &N �34?mm MSTOUNTINGWL& (13.081 REFLECTOR I-UM►NNRE �75mm �7 78"j7114 ON MOUNT mm I*� 23CDIA .287-f MOUNTING HOLES CEMOUNT I.NPT-„ 74mm 124mm BOTH SIDES42X OIA .358 iMOUNTING 50 WLMOUNT HOlE6 PWM = PETROLUX III MEDIUM. WET LOCATION St@0 2: ATTA E 042 - 42W 050 = 50W 055 - 55W 057=57W 070-7OW ,085=BSW 100 a 100W 150 -15OW 2 175 -175W Ste03• SOURCE MH a METAL HALIDE PM - PULSE METAL HALIDE HP - HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM CF - COMPACT FLUORESCENT OL=INDUCTION PM C GB StNp 4: BA _ LLAST TYPE P- HPF -_HIGH REACTANCE AUTOTRANSFORMER C - CWA - CONSTANT WATTAGE AUTOTRANSFORMER I - CM - CONSTANT WATTAGE ISOLATED SECONDARY E = ELECTRONIC DB =MEDIUM BASE SOCKET 08 = MOGUL BASE SOCKET PC a INDUCTION SOCKET 4P = CFL SOCKET 20 a 2D9V 24 - 240V 27 = 277V 34 = 347V 48 = 480V MA= MULTI -TAP WIREO FOR 120V MB - MULTI -TAP WIRED FOR 208V MC - MULTI -TAP WIRED FOR 240V MD = MULTFTAP WIRED FOR 2TIV MT - MULTMTAP 12D; 208. 240, 277V VA = VARIABLE TAP WIRED FOR 120V VD =VARIABLE -TAP WIRED FOR 277V VF a VARIABLE -TAP WIRED FOR 347V VT - VARIABLE TAP 120, 27T, 347V AV - VOLTAGE SENSING (120 THRU 277V) QV = VOLTAGE SENSING (200 THRU 277V) SHOWN UNIVERSAL MOUNTARM 390mm (13.35 j k"209mm (82n I 5K t 1tr NFT �- m8q ST MOUNT © z-3t4' NPT UN MOUNT BOTH ems WLMOUNT GP Fl �SEE Stop 9• CORD AND PLUG LENGTH 03 a 3FT 00 = SFT 10 = LOFT KA-NO CORD Str0II: MwNTING CE - CEILING GH - GASKETED HOOK PD = PENDANT ST=STANCHION UN -UNIVERSAL FOR WALLISTANCHION CAPABILITY, MUST ORDER P3US (UNIVERSAL. MOUNT ARM) ACCESSORY WL= WALL 30C = 8530 ENCLOSED REFLECTOR 46F a 4545 REFRACTOR WITH FORWARD THROW` REFLECTOR 541=4541 LONG AND NARROW REFRACTOR 545 a 460 SYMMETRIC REFRACTOR FDZ- FDZ ENCLOSED POLYMERIC REFLECTOR w a 0 0 Z OPTIONS CP a EXTERNAL CAPACITBR MODULE EG = INGRESSIEGRESS MARKER DECAL EM a STANDBY UGHT1NG ER=EMERGENCYLIGHTING F1 -SINGLE FUSING F2 = DOUBLE FUSING OD - OPTIC GUARD PR a SWIVEL PHOTOCONTROL OPTION PS = PROTECTED STARTER SP a SAMPLE PACK FOR GROUND TRANSPORT NE - NEMADECAL Acset=ss01"" LAMP a SHIP APPROPRIATE LAMP Ft- SINGLE FUSE F2 = DOUBLE FUSE CDCW4b-163 =120V CORD a WATERTIGHT CONNECTOR ASSEAMY CDCW4L846.3 a 208 a 240V CORD A WATERTIGHT CONNECTOR ASSEMBLY CDCW-0-164 277V CORD 3 WATERTIGHT CONNECTORASSENISLY 541A-REPL a REPLACEMENT LONG 6 NARROW REFRACTOR SM-REM = REPLACEMENT SYMMETRIC OR FORWARD THROW REFRACTOR FDZ-RE PL m REPLACEMENT FDZ REFLECTOR 30CREPL i* REPLACEMENT 30C REFLECTOR PWMGA=OPTIC GUARD FOR REFRACTORS PWMGC . OPTIC GUARD FOR REFLECTORS PS-M = REPLACEMENT PROTECTED STARTER 09189•X=SAFETY CHAIN KIT PSUS - UNIVERSAL MOUNT ARM. COMPATIBLE WITH UN (UNIVERSAL) MOUNTING ONLY STANDARD FIXTURE COLOR IS WHITE 175W PULSE MH AND 150W ELECTRONIC PULSE MH BALLASTS ARE EISA 2007 COMPW WT E� Specifications GENERAL DESCRIPTION UL 1598 Listed for Wet Locations NEMA Type 4X IP66 Ingress Protection UL1598 Maximum Ambient Temperature 65. 86W OL 42, 57, 70W CFL 60. 70. 1001 160W HPS vn inn 4K„KAH - .__..__..w ... 150W MH Electronic 175W PMH With BAor ER Option Without CP Optbn With CP Option 40•C 50'C 551C 55'C 4WC 40'0 borwftutEMoj ER Option Wlih EM or ER option Wilhoul EIM1 or ER option 55*C 65'C 60*0 OPTICS The optical assembly, when secured to the electrical housing, shall provide a totally enclosed and gasketed luminalre. HOUSING All castings shall be low copper aluminum alloy and painted With polyester powder paint. The top cover shall be secured to the ballast housing with stainless steel hardware including a stainless steel inserL MOUNTING Luminaire shall provide single mounting option which allows for Pendant, Wall & Stanchion mountings when used In conjunction with universal arm accessory. to INDUCTION - WALL PACK -14" Full Cut -Off - Fixtures 100o000 Hrs Life The Next Generation of Lighting eg zf L 14.0" !-- 12.(r Rectangular induction Lamp imide Specification: -BallastType Electronic -Start Method instantON - Hot Re -start InstantON Unrversatinput Line vokage 120.277W -input UneFrequency 50/60Hz -Lamp/Ballast System Life 100AWHre. -Lumen maintenance 07S,000Hrs >7WA -ColorTemperature S000°K -color Rendering Index (CRp 83 - Minimum Starting Temperature -20°F -Maximum operating Temperature 16(rF Lamp Operating Frequency 250 kFit - Power Factor > 098 -Total Harmonic Distortion <10% -inrush Current Peak < 10 Amp -FCC Lompuante 0,.10 eubP.0 Applications, Features, and Benefits - Full Cut -Off type go Degree wall pack - Heat and impact resistant tempered glass lens -Aluminum cast housing with electrocoathronze paint - Ballast made of long Ilfe components - InstantON(TM) flicker -free Cold Start and Hot Re -Start - Correlated Color Temperature ofWWK for greater visiWll kv - High Power factor, Low THD RepiaceaWe Ballast - Concealed continuous gasket seats against hamtfuidust dirt, moisture and insects -Advanced phosphors for high Lumen Maintenance and high lumen output -Aluminum Anodized reflecterforsuperiorlongterm performance - Up to 20 years Maintenance freeoperation -Ideal replacements for HIPS and HID waR-packs up to 250 Watts Ordering information (sAMPLENUMBER. 21040FCT-UW-iD ) eWall E4=0- ge Type Voltage fLD ptionsiAccessorki Pack 40W FCT=FuIICutUff90Degree UNV=Universaii2o-277V —llghtsensarDeuxtor/Photocell NEPTUN Light,lnc. Questions and Comments: servicefneptunlight com Toll-Free:1-888-735-8330 0 CopyriUN Lighght2009 L I G H T NEP7t, Inc Spec Rev. 4114/11 INDUCTION - WALL PACK - Full Cut Off - 90 Degree Fixture 100,000 IHrs Life 5pecitication: -BailastType - Start Method - Hot Restart - U nlversel Input Line Voltage -Input Line Frequency -Lamp/Ballast System Life -Lumen Maintenance i875,000Hrs -ColorTemperature Color Rendering index (CRO Minimum Starting Temperature -Ma)imum Operating Temperature - Lamp Operating Frequency Power Factor -Total Harmonic Distortion Inrush Current Peak - FCC Corn pNanre Electronic InstantON InstantON 12o•277 VAC 50160 Hz I00,000 Hrs. >70% WWK 83 -2o'F 160'F 250 kHz > 0.98 <10% < 10 Amp part18,Subp.0 ordering information (SAMPLE NUMBER : 21 0WFCrAMV4.D) The Next Generation of Lighting 18.2s"= lgular induction lamp Inside Applications, Features, and Benefits - Full cut -Off type go Degreewan pack Heat and impact resistant tempered glass lens Aluminum east housing with dectrocoat bronze paint - Ballast made of long life components ImtantONCIM) flicker -free cold Start and Hot Re -Start Correlated Color Temperature of SWKfor greater visibility -High Ptnver Factor, Low TWO Replawabie Ballast Concealed continuous gasket seals against harmful dust dirt, moisture and insects Advanced phosphors for high Lumen Maintenance and high lumen output - Aluminum Anodised reflector for superior long term performance -Up to 20years Maintenance hee operation Ideal replacements for HPS and HIDwall-packsup to 250 Watts Series F,!,50E000.i 1iF,-.-v.=.,- NEPTUNOptions&Accessories 21=Wa11Pack 0W FOT=FuNCutUIf900egree niversal120.277VLt!=LightSenzodDetettor/Photocell o0rN80V xtlwow Light, Inc. Questions and Comments, t® service@neptunlightcom Toll-Free;1-888-735-8330 C CoWght2009 �--� —+b L I G H T NEPIVN Light Inc 5pec.Ftev. 31ZB/l I A AmenTitle Part ofshe JEW-WEN Family HDR ENGINEERING, INC. 805 SW INDUSTRIAL WAY, SUITE 4 BEND, OR 97701 Attn: JEFF FUCHS Property Address: 18600 Skyliuers Rd, Bend, OR 97701 Policy or Policies to be issued: REPORT 15 OREGON AVE PO BOX 875 BEND, OR 97709 (541) 389-7711 * Fax (541) 389-0506 September 15, 2011 Report #1 Title Number : 135018 Title Officer: RICK BAIRD PREUMMARY TITLE REPORT Liability Premium $200.00 We are prepared to issue ALTA (06/17/2006) title insurance policy(ies) of CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, in the usual form insuring the title to the land described as follows: See Attached Exhibit "A" and dated as of September 6, 2011 at 7:00 am., title is vested in: Vestee: CITY OF BEND, AN OREGON MUNICIPAL CORPORATION The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is: Fee Simple Order No. 135018 Page 2 Schedule B of the policy(ies) to be issued will contain the following general and special exceptions unless removed prior to issuance: GENERAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 2. Facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the Public Records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 3. Easements, or claims of easement, not shown by the Public Records; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 4: Any encroachment (of existing improvements located on the subject Land onto adjoining Land or of existing improvements located on adjoining Land onto the subject Land) encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the subject land. 5. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, material, equipment rental or workers compensation hetetofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the Public Records. 6. Unpatented mining claims whether or not shown by the Public Records. EXCEPTIONS 1,THROUGH 6 ABOVE APPLY TO STANDARD COVERAGE POLICIES AND MAY BE MODIFIED OR ELIMINATED ON AN EXTENDED COVERAGE POLICY. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: Tax Information Taxes assessed under Code No. 2-006 Map and Tax Lot Number 17 1100 00 06202AI Account No. 257780 NOTE: The 2010-2011 Taxes: $688.77, paid in full. Taxes assessed under Code No. 2-006 Map and Tax Lot Number 17 1100 00 06202 Account No. 180789 NOTE: The 2010-2011 Taxes: No Tax Roll Record. 7. The 2011-2012 Taxes: A lien not yet due or payable. 8. Easement, including the terms and provisions thereof, affecting the portion of said premises and for the purposes stated therein As granted to: City of Bend Recorded: October 5, 1926 Instrument No.. 42-476, Deed Records 9. Easement, including the terms and provisions thereof, affecting the portion of said premises and for the purposes stated therein As granted to: City of Bend Recorded: March 9,1956 Instrument No.: 112-557, Deed Records Order No. 135018 Page 3 10. Easement, including the terms and provisions thereof, affecting the portion of said premises and for the purposes stated therein As granted to: Pacific Power & Light Company, a corporation Recorded: December 22,1964 Instrument No.: 141-603, Deed Records 11. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, Including the terms and provisions thereof, recorded September 26, 1991, Instrument No. 245-2780, Deschutes County Records. 12. Development Agreement, including the terms and provisions thereof, between Deschutes County and the City of Bend, recorded January 8, 1992, Instrument. No. 25440073, Deschutes County Records. 13. Easement, including the terms and provisions thereof, affecting the portion of said premises and for the purposes stated therein As granted to: PacifrCorp, an Oregon corporation, its successors and assigns Recorded: October 8, 2001 Instrument No.: 2001-49178, Deschutes County Records NOTE: Any map or sketch enclosed as an attachment herewith is furnished for information purposes only to assist in property location with reference to streets and other parcels. No representation is made as to accuracy and the company assumes no liability for any loss occurring by reason of reliance thereon. NOTE: The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of insurance is less than the amount, if any, set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. This report is preliminary to the issuance of a policy of title insurance and shall become null and void unless a policy is issued and the full premium paid. RB:cl "Superior Service with Commitment and Respect far Customers and Employees" Order No, 135018 Page 4 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION A parcel of land situated in the South one-half (S 1/2) of Section Thirty-four (34), Township Seventeen (17) South, Range Eleven (11), East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, being further described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 11, East of the Willamette Meridian, said point bears South 89°5723" West,163.61 feet from a 3 inch by 30 inch iron pipe with 3 inch brass cap marking the South one -quarter corner of said Section 34; thence North 42°58'14" East, 615.78 feet; thence North 34°49'03" East, 357.11 feet; thence North 10"43'50" East, 113.59 feet; thence South 81°08'56" West, 622.64 feet; thence South 34°26'56" West, 921.52 feet to a point on the South line of said Section 34; thence along said South line North 89°57'23" East, 491.73 feet to the point of beginning. This # tcb is lowiisfieff for Information puCPQxe-9 on(yt rnssi`st in praporry !Pcoll.Rn, with reference to 51re'elf bird -other parcels. N Itpreseptalibn is mAde # to accuracy end the. Gdmpenv ass",Omes no linbifty for arty f6sg fllft?r1y by reason Of rgiilinct3 ito,4reon. 16 OWT OF RIGHT ,OF WAY bt;L � �Fi ,k•,;��: 4 L THIS INDWTORU, made this ,? 3 +' day Of7c6t-0,j 1956. by and between. Willian S. and Constance Miller, husband and wife, parties of the first part, and the CITY OF SEND (a municipal Corporation or the State of Oregon) party or the isoond part. WITNBSSETa, That t'he parties of the first part, for and in consideration of the ooyenaats and agreements herein after contained to be kept and performed by the party of the second part, does hereby grant, and convey unto said party of the second part, the right to construct, lay, operate, maintain a line Of pips with alineo*ssary appw:�- tenances thereto for the conveyance of water and for all purposes connected there- with of the party of the second part, it successors and assigns, over, under, Across and upon the lands awned by the parties of the first part in Deschutes County, Ore- gon described as follows, to Witt A strip of land twenty (2D.0) ft. wide, being tea► (10.0) ft. on each aide of the center line, said strip of land being located in the S. half of the $ E of $notion 34 and in the Sj of the S* of SeotioM 35 & 36 of T. 17 S. of Range 11 S.W,X, and said center line being described as follows, Beginning at a point on the south boundary of Sections 34A T. 11. s.R.il, R.W.L. said point being 90.0 ft., more or leas, east of the southwest corner of said Section 341 thence N 710 38' N a distance of 1276.9 fit ,sore or lees, thence N 770 38' 8 a distance of 1213.30 ft more or less) thence N 730 99' 'disteno* of 528.15 ft., swore or loss; thence, N 880 M3399*.E a distance of 807.93 ft., more or Isar; thence N WO 47' R a distance -75 ft., more or lean, theusoe 8 090 181 9 a distance of 2260.05 ft., Amore or legal' thence due *aunt a distance of 1300.25 Pt.,, more or less thence N $80 24' 'R a distance of 5400.21 ft., more, or less, thence N 620 34' 9 a distance of gh2.08 ft., more or loses thence on An 80oursre to the left whose intersection angle is 180 10' a distance of 227.08 ft., thonoe N Flo 24' N a distance of 377.85 ft.t thence, on a UP curve to thib right whose intorcectidn �uafle is 4lo3ot a distance of JA5.00.ft.l thence 8 74D 06' E a distance of 533-90 ft-; thence on a 50 curve to the right . wbose intersection angle is 210 00' a distance of 383.63 ft. to a point on the east line of the SEJ of S* Section 36 T. 17 S.R.11, S.W.W.,caid point boing•247.93 ft• south of the NE corner of said SO. SO, Section 36 T. 17, S.R.11. N.W.M., said new pipe line shall approximately parallel fit'teen feet (151) canter to center to th* south an esdsting pipeline of seodn¢ party except in south half of 04'of Section 36. T. 17 Lc ocnaideration for the granising of this esaement`the party of the second part covenants and agrees, upon written request of the party of the first part, their suoceseorx or assigns, to install one connection in said pipe not to exceed 2 inches In dissseter at any point along the line designated by the party of the first part and perpetually to furnish avatar for dnmestia or industrial purposes or both on twelve swath of the year basis to the party of the first part or to Chair assi pia Va 112 W558 or successors at the same rate as the sold party of the second part charges or re- quires for the sale and delivery of water for like purposes to patrons or users outside the city limits of Sand, which rate shall be reasonably based upon the rate charged within the city limits. As further consideration for the granting of the aforesaid easement, the party of the second part covenants and agrees to submit to the party of the first part, their asaigna or suocessors, within a reasonable time after the oompleticn of the ditoh- ing on the party of the first part*s premises a complete log of all earth, rock and volcanic material, formations encountered while excavating on the aforesaid property. Upon receipt of any request by the party of the first part for the sforesaid can- nectioln, the party of the second part will within a reasonable time oonneot its pipe line with the water line of the party of the first part at a point upon the premises as the partly of the first part requesta, but said connection shall be made at the cost and expense of the party of the First part, which charges shall be the awe as the charge for Bice service within the City of tend. As further consideration for the granting of the a far esaid easement, the party of the second part covenants and agrees.that it will be responsible for and par to the party of'the first part any damages occasioned to it by the party of the second part or its agents, in laying, repairing, renewing, or removing said line of pipe or by reason of said pipe -line leaking, breaking, or bursting, or that may result, for any reason or cause, to said party. of the first part, or to said premises. The party of bhs second part, through its agents, shall have the rights to enter upon said land for the purpose of constructing, building, laying, patrolling and maintaining thereon a pipe line fort he conveyance of water, including aua renewalso repairs, replacement, or removals as may from time to time be required, doing no unnecessary damage to said premises and restoring the surface thereof whenever opened up as soon'&* possibiel nor interfering with the operations of the party of the first part, his successors or assigns. slid right small be perpetual so long as the party of the second part shall operate a pipe for oarrying water across said lands, but.should tha purty of the second part, its suooessdr or aasigne, cease to use said pipeline, than all rights 'and privileges conveyed by such easemoat shall lapse and all rights and title tharoto shall revert.to the parties of the first part, its suooeoevre or assigns. • said. pipe line shall be laid so that the top thereat shall be buried at least eighteen (le) inched below the natural surfaee'of the ground, except at low spots r OPUOB Jo PTO og4 P" r xo4awaP str} Pr+ivxB i�lO tM 4s Pus Mv!aatTR "4xu!d. Q/ So noTgvaodzoo r `AitvtlsoD u0T4vaTuoto0 uss"*A +4 1209*04 sy4 aloN�aK ' t '� SogA4o0 pe4vp Aaouogslxo uT simt quvigoaro u-cr4aPa 64% goo=zfr.AMu ea AT gtrgs•qaotrosw .ai�li ?009 Oad PTro 30 own **"an* 6% %C+Tv oaoJaa4uT o4 4ott er os puttea8 aopan autaa X* vat Q j�1Mzo3r v4T Awl o4 Pm ��So "�� 'iO 4.ttemsera pTva. 04 4uoovppv soeTmsad oy4 So ppT4.rzod6 P" sa% OW N47M o�d�4u'i 4o�q ss'zo sm" o4r48 zo 1044 B tt�! g4Ti►.ATdrpo 04 4a*j4biit+a 04 sr oa ptty 9uoT;rttt� . ptsaoz`� otl4 oaoq+s cooT4rssts ur qv esuTt auot{do�o4 P" 'asilod '4q'%Tt•oT- 4ost4 043 a'ir4aT'w pue 4o9zo oq soa t8v pug. e4avu"oo aog4.24 4srd p90069 044 So And OR& •gaomsaae pogTzoaap 0w0q*uVD,2aq•'sq+ So soWano So T044uoo ttnS 17aTejaaoXa taozj ;zed 4ea73 G44 ,3o J44avd atA 4aoeszd TTvgv poaTr4000 uSsxuq 2vTgg0xf pus 'ps3nooxo ueoq Wu pvK soaislCewaoo aTtr} 3T sv A[Tn3 sv 'sP� uTa.nrq 4aea9 0x oq 400ggnv 'at@Tsar ptm vzoeosoano s4T `azrd gozF3 ago So AF�*ti'd pia UT' aTM&.t p1m eq o4 oar. eaeTwaad pTveslol" 00 So oan pus UOTaasaaod eq4 4rtl4. P •pquo"ovtdoa puw szTVd9J 'uoT400SU o4 •aT4vtoa 4zvd puooao oq4 3o A4zeii oq4 SO s4Tt�Tz alp oa. ATuo saTTddv 4urwasro pTry RQT pA 04 Part otl4 So asn ttRT o�rq Ttrtiv '0v9Tosw -go ■JoeeaoonY a4T `4.tod 4oaT3 aq4 �e'seT4avd oK4 ja4dtrOalOtT4 4� puv 'atgTaood yr 'VWW"u a e�[TinvoDtaoAa Pnr g400ae ov a-; pogTaoasp oaotpr dT=i * 4003 (QS) A4'pox4 oti4 ttodn owe wt�4 aoatd ow r4T Aq A'C' "40dmo4 poTdnRoo part eq4 urotS alooz so As -to 02aara9 ar yona etvTa94vm 040sr za Mode sqq seoesoa Ttgtly pu+i 'sprsa uoT4wavoxo Aug area pojiT3'og o4 pano22 ago asnvo -[Tugs 4ard puooas sttq So A4aad oq4 *sera OR% So JTvdaa Jo abT! oOW42 r -a000z 4uauboogns Aids Jo OoatT adTd pTvm So uoTgon.24eaoo Sa uo pe%dttoo ttoda •a.toosaaone ao 8u2Tvev aTu '4avd 4azT3 -q4 Sa Aamd sti. auaT4vaade Am* VATS Asr AiW aT vsoSsa4aT aaa 'agaetaeaozdatT A0z48sP ao DJMOaT 4oa t-E-pLAouvdn000 gong PDVWAd •4023 (SZ) oaT3..A4us tq 3o seve4sTP v 'Atar-So-4g@Ta So dTs4a pagp000p oeogv ago So OPTS tpvo uo pug o4 4ua0vppv part So diS4* Teao F;;pp$ t� •4aotrdTnbs zo trTa04iauc aoS4ottt4s -no* u4TM Adn000 04. sxcadea ae 4nomootitdea `uoT4on.t4saoo BaTstrp 920_11aTad puv 4_42,a T@to pTppv aqq oA*q tT"v 4avd puooes oR4 3e -%avd OR& •aaeodaod a9140 AtiO aeS Ao 'so-CoTq" 6!4004s 3o SUTvveao sq4 s03 o3ge oq � ag poaeaoo oo eq TTTA► puv 'oxmba gooS ('it) moil arty aog.tvt OR 40u TLTS Siqusdo dons 4 pspTAoad 'poaTnbga eq Avu gr suTt adTd etj 04 wssuva410 gano p>ino.>9 otl4 So D_Sjne et{{. 4r PTTnq 04 t--ggW ago "m l Ttege %and pu000a 0q4 30 And WU •4asd js. -jj aR4.3o 9614- id sii4 ao pusT aq4 30 san pattunuoo ago 'q4'f► raeS.X"U-; 4ou 'a -me 4T 1PRPT40a 'oPToop TT'ot[a 4=Vff pu0000 oq4 3o fi}ard *Vt or.auoT4rivi9 Roan 40 aq X"qv WTd eM4 3e do4 on,+ equTod %pTgAL %V •paC9e.:a azr a014&T'4tno aT 4oa on2noto .to QvuTxvJ saot[r q I V i�lp� do��Ore�iea of D�schutea Deng, �e�� c�sx�aatad �e �aa� �esorded it W of D iA 19 pp Wb Dwhatse .. Comm $ Ore n OkYs mo w the end predves with ter appurtefaoea mte the ON. Of lovdd, its suoosusors.ed assigua, for t udas Arid purposas berme antloud, 4coustaos 911sr, hubad WAN do 6 raby cowaett to W tb Olty of 804 it's 1100e110ra W oieipa, that they are ths o ar s is tee ' aigla at said prodsm, tbat the ON ears tree trcm all bo*rMassq . a. mmOram, x1110 w c�itaas iher, maad gd its, tie r piorl abort mx4 but owsid Wai presage +4 be aneated ea the der gad year 1 �� of se part, STATE OF OREGON ) ) $'.3 COUNTY OF DRSCIWTES ) , 0-4 the ��day of � 1956, before me the undersigned, a notary publlzs"in atld f6f ai►id' County eaali tai;e, personally appeared Wi).liam FI. and Constance Miller, known to as to be the'persons who executed the foregoing instru- zwnt and tHey acknowledged to me that they executed the same freely and voluntarily without duresa and for the purposes therein contained. t*r +'N B Y1 EREOF, I have hereunto affixed my signature and official seal, �t ol,,d/�d year last above written. �,� Not Fu`Fi c`3`nr a B*Mte ororegon My Commission Expires STATE OF OREGON ) so COUNTY QF, DESCIiUTES ) , on the egg =day of 1956, before me the undersigned, a notary public in and for said County, as tate, personally appeared W. T. Thompson known to me to be the City Manager of the City of Bend, Oregon, who acknowledged to me that his signature harean was authorised by the City Cdr=igsi,on of the City of Bend and that he executed the same 'freely and voluntarily for. the purposes therein contained. IN WITNESS W.HtMMOF, I have here" affixed stiy signature 8""'�3oiai seal on`thh ,,'tsy and year last above written.-- ~ aq?•�., �,... teary Fu o f or t n r x.�- .. ;�`' • p MY Comml.e ExpiresL / ........... ' STATE or L(i ORON ) :. ss COUNTY OF PXICHUTP:.4 } Z, Julia +s. Johnson,: Recordex of the City of Bond, Crof"cn, h••+:4; urrt�•fy q " iski tlic foregoing document was Approved by tha City Oomm'i sai tin r : :.1•r t'i J•," �dt o,P, i , and the cignatuxe of' the City M.annger was rnt�ificd at .; i . • uM :; � ..i nit t'V3%City Commission on t I'V401; 7, 3,9�i6, whinh Pscts are, Ig4l:1 mbeting noia on file in nay orrice. +' >;•�'•. ,C .�•.' 1956.j . Re" -der o.0 'hn Gi 1;�• .P i+rio�'.. t31•t•1•oi1. ►I�it March 8, r VOL II May A- (f ; QUIT - CLAIM DIM TI}ia indenture made this _; t 1-r/v_ Jay Of by and between the School District Number One, noachutes County, Oregon, hereinafter called the Grantor, and the City of Bend, a munlcipal corporatiot: of Deschutes County, State.of Oregon, hereinafter. called the Grantee. WXTNCSSETH, that for anti in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10-.00)- and• other good 'and valnable conattleratfon, receipt af'which is hereby acknowledged, the said Crantor does hereby remise, release, and forever quitclaim unto said grantee, its successors and assigns, all of the said Grantor's right, title and interest in and to the following described parcel of real proporty situated in the City of Rend, County of Deschutes, State of Oregon, more particularly described as follows-. Lot Twelve, Block Eleven, Northwest Townsite Company's. First Addition to Bond, and Lot Eight, Rlook Lievcn, Northwest Townsite Company's First Addition To Bend, except the oast Fifty (501) Feet of l.ot Eight, Block Eleven,.Wthwedt Townsite Company's 'First Addition to M Rend, Oregon, as shown on the official plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of aeschutes County, Oregon. Together with all and singular the tenements, hereditaments, appurtenances, etc., thereunto belonging; or in auy wise appertaining thereof, and also ail the estate, fright, title and interest of, the Grantor in and to said real property. TO HAVE AND TO IiOLA the same, together with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belongii% or In any wise apportaining to the said Cranxeo and its successors hnd assigns forever in fee simple absolute. IN WXTNL-793 WHFAEOF,. the aaid Grantor herein, through its hoard of Directors, has caused these presents -to be executed this '.s°7 day of 3Cit90L DISTRICT NUMBER ONE, Ap.+5` HUTFS COU, Y, ORRI-Oh. S. r` x ✓ ' -� _ _ � . CillAirtttatt t EGI:'@ES Clork" Pew!. i , . Qua C aidt..tieed STATZ 01P ORRICOs } } as. C4u y OF' I16SCItUT ES } On this _2ZtFebruaryh _ JAY. of _ .. �. 1,95G, Lefo.ro me, -.Gray - - — - ` y ` - — ^ r r ^ ^ _ — ^ -, the undersigned, a Notary Publ _c in and for said Ccunty and State, persocally appeared the within nawd hoard o" iirectors of School District Number One, Deschutes Couu•ty, Ore;an, to -wit: W. k. C• Zardon#icltay, Aertft{ageni Charles%Corkett and Allen ilourg, and they ackwaled�ed to me that they executed t1le' foregoink; instrtment in behalf of the School. "Istric:. Niviber One, Oeschutes County, Oregon, for the uses and purposes therein set !°or_'., x'k:at said Board of Directors are persorally knoim to ire to be the irdividuais 'ACA1VA3c DJ. -IIiI•LItJ'C are ?UA jl%i'10 U l__.e TN WTTTNPSS tMMOF I have hereunto set my hand and notarial seal. ,.he •,R .. w •'; P; �:`d QUA year last above writtcr. to Pub i1c or Ore,ah M 1 N I� kfr�' .: .. rj V ti olclock v. ay 7epu� i� YGL 141 ow,, G0 RZGRf OF WAY VA3Mr FOR VA= =Mr=D the undersigned Grantors, WII.TSM S. M MUM and (iMWTAXtX C. MMM, husband and wife, do hereby grant to PACIFIC POWER & LIM 006 MM9 a corporation, its successors and assign , the Grantee, an easement or right of way for single pole electrical distribution line of one or more wires and all necessary or desirable appurtenances including poles, props, guys and other supports at or near the location and along the general course now located and staked out by the Grantee over, across and upon the folloWing described real property in Deschutes County, State of Oregon, to wit: Land in Sections 34, 35 end 36, Township 17 south, Range 11 E., W.M. Line to be located approxiaately 10 ft.. southerly of the southern City of Hand water line. Grantee, at its own expense, will remove or relocate said line within 90 days after written request by the Grantors. In the event of such a request by the Grantors, Grantors will grant to the Grantee a similar right of way over tbo� above-de-sari6ed laaae or over such other ].ands as the Grantors may select. Grantee agrees to quitclaim and release to the Grantors asy unused or abandoned rights of way over the above described property and other lands owned by the Grantors. Grantee shall furnish to the Grantors at any point or points along the above -described distribution line, either single or three phase service without requiring Grantors to pay any charges except the then effective tariff rates for electricity furnished, as established by appropriate regu- latory body for customers similarly situated. Tn the event that Grantors shall desire electrical service at any point or points off of the electrical distribution line herein provided for, no part of the casts of this dietri- bution line shall be charged to the Grantors, nor shall any part of such construction costs be considered in the cost calculations for such additional eenstruction, and Grantors shall be entitled to either single or three phase 4 service at the than effective tariff rates far eleatricity furnished, as established by appropriate regulatory body for customer* mars aistile tly situated. drantee shell be" the riakt of ingreea and egress oar the adjacent lands or the Grantors for the purpose of constructing, reconstraatum, striven g new wires on, iwaftUdutnig and removing such Ilse and appur- teaauaes, and esoerclaing other rights hereby granted. The .Grantee shall psy to thq Grentora reasonable eespensation for MAY damage caused by Grantee, or its agents, to acgr property or crops (graving or to *be grown) an the above described real property, arising out of the construction, reconstruction, opmration or maintenance od said trspaniesion and distribution line. All such rightshereunder shall cease it and when such line shall have been abandoned. AL Dated the t---' day of Dec:amber, 19640 WLUIM E. Miller ConAtance C.-MIler STATE OF CRhWN )) )sa ; COUMY OF MSCMIS ) On this day or December, 1964, personal],r appeared before me, a Notary Public.M —end for said State, the within named WnIX M E. MIh;LF.Et and WNSTANC6 C. YMZM, husband and wife, to me known to be the identical persons described thteirein and who executed thu foregoing instrunent, and acknowledged to me that they 1-w,cute;d the same .freely and voluntarily for the uses and purposes therein mentioned - IN WUMS WHhsMP, Z have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year above written. ' Notary DLIC !or Oregon` xy comai"ion expires- `7; -2- Return to: Pacific Power Atta, Linda Peacock 328 NE Webster Bead OR 97701 CC: 11216 WO: 01889878 NAME: City of Bead, Oregon OEiCi1tlTQi C(iWYtY OirPiC:pL i1i6C01lOs t�� lMIR1► iil! •qM, CCtBt'i'Y p.11llt iiWW Non 0-08 onto: am" Sol li�s ill / 00109:17:4 N1 SIG-00 •11.00.30.00 ".00 For value received. City of Bend Oregon, ("Grantor"), hereby grants to PacifiCorp. on Oregon corporation, its successors and assigns. ("Grantee"), an easement for a right of way 20 feet is width and 395 feet in length, more or less. for the construction, recons"etion, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, enlargement. and removal of electric power distribution and communication lines and all necessary or desirable accessories and appurtenances thereto, including without limitation: supporting towers, poles. prep, guys and anchor, including guys and anchors outside of the night of way; wires, fibers, cables and other conductors and conduits therefor; and pads, transtbrmers. switches. vaults and cabinets, along the general course now located by Grantee on, over or under the surface of the real property of Grantor in Deschutes County. State of Oregon, as more particularly described and/or shown on Exhibit(s) "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof. - Located in the S Ye of the S % of Section 34. T. 17 S.. R 11 E.. WM Assessor's Map No. 17-11 Tax Parcel No. 6202 Together with the right of access to the right of way from sAaeent lands of Grantor for all activities in connection with the purposes for which this easement has been granted; and together with the present and (without payment therefor) the future right to keep the right of way =0 adjacent lands'clear of all brush, trees, timber, structures, buildings and other hazards which might endanger Grantee's facilities or impede Grantee's activities. At no time shalt Grantor place, use or permit any equipment or material of any kind that exceeds twelve (12) feet in height. light any fires, place or store any flammable materials (other than agricultural crops), on or within the boundaries of the right of way. Subject to the foregoing limitations, the surface of the right of way may be used for agricultural crops and other purposes not inconsistent, as determined by Grantee, with the purposes for which this easement has been granted. The rights and obligations of the parties hereto shall be binding upon and shall benefit their respective heirs. successors and assigns. DATED this �=-� day of '3 .20_. Sri -f j1 }anaa'" City oTbenli.Oregon MY001fioer Name, Title REPRESENTATIVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF n ©_ } County of Ct h This instrument was acknowledged before me on this L 4 "day of • 2 tD 1 , by o tstf-C) t,,.. Notary Public- My commission expires: Yq ,;./ .. '31-A W(d 0 x •� ..• r)op �iMdwo'? aW' _.� dW+I9 dhM 9L,$bS8 1 CWCJP 176 ,., *too DAIS CFP OM -0 V� AJ' � >a wo }SYY 01 t oS + � ! O itit1L1 i-11 � -�S rp �, 'r" � _ I y4c 10% pi� 0019w Zolgkf 1019PIr 0. a,,LL itLL— QC 14Q� � Of N V rr m�' AI---� w do�� W __ J "O t p too _v W Co .zlt� W Q -: 9 10 21 ,.1 � o tr * 10 'O, ¢ L m m1-0-rnnM 0 � O Ool9*.fi' x w a Z 111 an �tiL 1 1� LO N EN .� CDI p "' a► W r oc o 00 toc L-61 Ln y� 0 Pki ,— O 1— W zLO ►00CN rr �- C) LLJ CD Z00 N� uO Cl � - CV < I--C13 < m oo1£`i►£' 91-28530 BARGAIN AND SALE DEED 245 i° 2780 WILLIAM E. MILLER, Grantor, conveys to the CITY OF BEND, an Oregon municipal corporation, Grantee, the following real property: A parcel of land situated in the South one-half of Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 11 East, Willamette Meridian being further described as follows: Beginning at a point on the south line of said Section 34, Township 17 South, Range 11 East, Willamette Meridian, said point bears South 89057123" West, 163.61 feet from a 3 inch by 30 inch iron pipe with 3 inch brass cap marking the South one -quarter corner of said Section 34; thence North 42958114" East, 615.78 feet; theanice North 34049'03" East, 357.11 feet; thence North 101143'50" East, 113.59 feet; thence South 81008156" West, 622.64 feet; thence South 34026*56" West, 921.52 feet to a point on the south line of said Section 34; thence along said south line North 89057123" East, 491.73 feet to the point of beginning. Said parcel containing 10.59 acres more or less. Said parcel being subject to all prior easements of record. Grantor also conveys a temporary access easement as outlined by attached letter and map marked Exhibit "A." For the term.of the temporary easement, Grantee agrees to hold Grantor harmless from any liability arising out of use of said temporary easement by Grantee, its employees and contractors and to indemnify Grantor for any loss incurred by Grantor as a result of Grantee's use of said temporary easement. This instrument will not allow use of the property described in this instrument in violation of applicable land use laws and regulations. Before signing or accepting this instrument, the person acquiring fees title to the property should check with the appropriate city or county planning department to verify approved uses. The true consideration for this conveyance is the execution of the attached agreement, marked Exhibit "B." This property shall revert to Grantor if the property is not used, within 10 years of the date of this deed for the intended purpose specified in Section 3 of Exhibit "B" or in the event that use of the property for its intended purpose is permanently abandoned by Grantee. Grantee shall be given an opportunity and a reasonable Band Title Cos•, =y PA" 1 of 2 wlllim B. Mills e/29/91 4 } `j 9 245 2781 f time to remove any of the facilities it has constructed on the deeded property. DATED this �3r day of 5D06(22-- , 1991. GRANTOR .. ZLLTAM E. ALLER STATE OF OREGON ) )ss County of Deschutes ) personally appeared the above named j�GL��"7•� and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be hfs voluntary act before me this day of.•L�� lg.}L—• �e4 ? NOTARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON My Commission Expires: G+Jr422 2 e. q=\mwar\agraato. 91\mil1or. Wd Page 2 of 2 W11 IM B- M111sr 8/29/91 ", i �4.'-`'.;f;Ka`.e+�•^s§aa:'Yi?sr•�:Y..r<.+ik,<,a.: �...ilS tfi ., r;.:':.,,.�.:.... w• . _•r�:.. -. _ _ L.ilr>„ � Y t Sty n��w v¢�,.�.. ,+. f Y•L '' "in..� 4 ��. ?.` �.��F.�.el�arr:: ✓�,:.., .. .,p,,, .� _.�,.> ... .. �. >h:far.r.••. ...,.�y ., ':... •.n ..: ..-..f. ±.,- .,. .. ,.. .�, .. ._.., a.. .. ..., u_,. .... h � 245 -2782 EXHIBIT "B" A G R E E M E N T THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into by and between WILLIAM E. MILLER, hereinafter referred to as FIRST PARTY, and CITY OF BEND, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as SECOND PARTY. WITNESSETH: FIRST PARTY is deeding approximately twelve (12) acres of d in Section 34, T17S, R11E, Deschutes real property locate County, Oregon, together with required access and underground the utility easements, as referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6, below. to provideThe intent of said donation andsinstallationaofite EPAfor requirednwater phases °f a major upgrade facilities of SECOND PARTY. The parties herein further agree to the following provisions; 7 4 1. FIRST PARTY will retain the right to years.timb conduct an ongoing t1 on said prop of this provision for a period of twenty (20i ' is to allow FIRST PARTY to t 'long as as commercial thinning and fire protection program, eration of its does not interfere with Program SECOND PARTX s op a water system facilities. R i 2, SECOND PARTY agrees to provide and complete a development plan which includes reasonable vegetation screening f' ez used facilities. The color Of facilities Constructed .� of all p P must blend in with the natural vegetation and surroundings. p M SECOND PARTY agrees to provide PARTYnwillrhavePthe' right rrrr'= construction to FIRST FAicxx a�t� FIRST of plan approval of the following items: �Any structure with a top elevation in excess of 4025'; (a) ,t ,, >� and ture with a top elevation less than 4025, that (b) Any struc exceeds •40' above nugoruthand t otherwisehsignificantly V.�i:". at the rim of the property impacts sight lines from other areas of SECOND PARTY'S + property; and } {. (c) Removal of any tree within 5Q feet of SECOND PARTY's property line; and :1 r.; (d) ions and fence location; and Cyclone fence specificat 4%:':j"r,s.:.a.vstr<•n „,n.,et�:;�da?ux.<:':a•..r .,k,...s w'. c a .z- � _ r . c 4 ,. .K 7 245 • 2783 , Qi�,; (e) Noise levels, if any proposed. facilit Les generate noise levels that may impact adjacent FIRST PARTY'S development; excepting required emergency or safety devices; and t (f) The reasonable method of buffering or screening for constructed facilities; and i (g) Any permanent outside storage of supplies or equipment. FIRST PARTY'S plan review of said items must take place within a stcoND PARTY'S plans. FIRST reasonable time after receipt of MY and not to to ofor rreasonable ate with EsOite componentsagrees wiitthholdrapproval ees 3. The intended'purposeof acquisition of said real of the property by SECOND PARTY is to construct all or some t following water facilities! Chlorine contact chambers) chlorine. injection facilities, lines, security including storage, wells, reservoirs, water other facilities directly related to the fencing and any operations these stated facilities. ✓,� »K '' ,.,-•,i, 4. SECOND PARTY agrees to assist FIRST PARTY within the and agreements framework of CITY policies and requirements+ prior SECOND PARTY, to the greatest extent possible, toss; between FIRST and in domestic water supplies for lands owned by FIRST •.,-, providing PARTY. Such assistance shall include, but not be limited to, water lines to accommodate over -sizing of reservoirs and proposed development on property of FIRST PARTY, with appropriate :i'` { W�LV,A4 proposed compensation from FIRST PARTY for over -sizing. r..,..i #>:,} 5. Hoch FIRST and SECOND PARTIES may require access Or identified at this time, it is 0 `F' utility easements which cannot be agreed both artier will negotiate in good faith all easement P needs, locations, and conditions. If agreement between the - _�i , thir,� party arbitrator, " parties cannot be reached, an imNu�.�aa a civil engineering consultant, will be retained by both r such as parties to review easement needs and issue a decision. The arbitrator's decision will prevail. y^: ; All access and utility easements shall be located to be both FIRST and compatible with future developments plans by the request of FIRST PARTY, the SECOND PARTY SECOND PARTY. Capon restrict its access to' SECONI2 PARTY facilities to SECOND will PARTY right-of-way easements or public streets, provided access `•'':- is available by such ways. :i 7. SECOND PARTY will pursue additional land acquisitions from others, if necessary, to accommodate future reservoirs wells, and other necessary serving Pressure Level 3, additional facilities. SECOND PARTY anticipates a storage reservoir major page 2. Agreement - Miller/City or sena 245 - 2784 ;. will be constructed on the 12-acre tract of FIRST PARTY to serve pressure Level 3. DATED this day of FIRST PARTY: lliam E. iller DATED this =- - day Of . 1991. SECOND PARTY' CITY OF IS t aw nce Patterson. City Manager i tA:\S.egai\a9xee�mSlles.apr F. ,. �. rnyad 9130l91 I r• z x k . t 4t J• v j? page 3. Agreement - Miller/City of Send a s T� �,tts;;,,;,s:rc.i.•:r.+.�+::rxa.:...ars�';.4�..2i£>3t:K € � e•s�•+�7i••rl,..a.t»r-a t r .S s.�..tti �.+t. ...!a v ...s . r.ralw- s, H L.vs�• 4 �q �i t.v�$.�`'.•Jr•3,ys. +%,i �.. ,r w..1.L ..i K,. l:.n.. r..)ir'd'F ie a,..;, C,.�nir r •i,-. .. r �. ... .. r ... � .. r .U-. • (PACIFIC 245 - 2785 155 N.E. Revere,,v�a; t Bend, Oregon 97701 August 20, 1991 Mr. VPrlliam Miller Miller Lumber 1. N.E. Greenwood Bend. OR 97701 Re: City of Bend Chlorination Facility Site 567-0303 Dear Bill: Because of the steep grades along the existing waterline and access casement, the City of Rend respectfully requests a temporary construction access casement to provide contractors with an alternative access to the chlorination facility. The proposed alternate construction access follows the existing cinder. pumice, and dirt haul roads. (See attached figure.) The alternate construction across would be in use through February of 1992, when construction is anticipated to by completed. Unless this temporary casement is extended by mutual agreement, it shall automatically terminate on March 1, 1992. Specifications within the City of Bend contract documents, require the contractor to maintain existing roads, and apply water to control dust. The specifications also require the contractor to restore the construction access to its original condition. With your approval, itre r_ty of Bend will utilize the construction access to provide contractors with an alternate access to insure competitive bids. If these conditions are acceptable, please designate your approval by sighing on the line provided below. Thank you again for your assistance with the completion of this City of Bend project. Sincerely yours, Added by Bill Miller. Please caution city vehicles and equipment along with contractor VV & ii Pacific vehicles and equipment to proceed with utmost caution. We frequently have slow moving vehicles. trucks, and equipment / � moving on these reads'and som parked in roadway. We are ting our personnel. r Ben V-Wams p. S. Please keep working William E. Miller Pmjea Designer on securing access from USFS. B ti (ti t (503) 388-4755 Fax (503) 388-4229 Planning • Engineering • Surveying • Landscape Architecture -Environmental Services w,s ` 140i 0 :C4.1if 60 A.10 0 V.; 24s 2787 CITY OF BEND ' �,n-�•, cs rr 1�. � � KENO '• a Sal ,6oi�s t'.........r!i 1905 1.5 MG BAFFLED STEEL ; RESERVOIR s; w r,, f �a'w Z Vu � Yx" art • + i f �_� y � \\ M O'�V�._. n�. M1..IwtK' ...r� +.• �. � \ xra•`ts t; 9r,i► �fX. . r5YLSNE'K ..�. . R �..._ jsp,�fzo'VED By Dili• .:.. _: +� ! .t.�• r.y✓. 1. .i..tv .:.;s �. �' t.a L;�s4%-�e.' .... r .. ...-,. rL� yi.....,(. N�1� •..r ^:..:. .. . .. .., ..._... . . ... .. c:x a • i" , - L , 245 - 2788 STATE Of OREGON ) m COUNTY' Of De"um) ) ..WARY Sits siwriviu0W, OD"Ut CLUM AND MEMDER Of GDNVETAWO, IN AND EDR SMV MUMIY. D® ftnt Y asm TMAT THE WISMME It MAUMT WAS RS OMM TH S BAT: 91 SEP 26 AM 11= 46 h1A COUNTY C ERK 0$: BY, Day 2� _�_ NO. 91—X851 6 713 MMUM COIAEET DFF ,U ncnm 4 y � '12+''n -tjtK .t ... ir��-''. ."°�" .i 4.+.z> !'a.. Ii..�+ L i.. e�•� 4 r' P, �,...;"1...• t'E.�... .t ....�G . ';ih .i .1..4. ,'� : �; �n �;r. 'u ... '.�"'i.: ty � % 'NSA � _,�•, (/' +...e. .',e v'Y Y:w.,t.�{:i � fie. RECEIVEp �.. • ' DEC 2 4 WI REC£t;7LCOUNSEt DEC 19 ' 254 - 0073 92-00535 DEVW-OPMERT gGRMNEOT THIS AC;ggT, made and entered into by and between Deschutes the State o orBe, county, a political subdivision of to as $'County"), and THE CM OF A (hereinafter referred (hereinafter referred to as"Developer"). W I T N E s SET H 's wnlamhs Developer is owner of certain real property as evidenced dated September 19Bo and and Sale Deed by the BargainOf cou recorded in Volume 245, Page 278t]" Deschutesattached Sher to k and a + Records, described in Exhibit A , incorporated herein. (hereinafter the Real Property). ;• 4 tis t; 142 W�E�IS county has granted approval of hereinafter the mit sland~use ;s .. �.,` for the above -described real property ( that Developer construct and maintain . permits) upon the condition certain requirements as specified therein; now therefore, b and between the parties, for and in IT Is HEREBY AGVyM3 Y as a covenants and agreements her consideration of the mutual granting of final approval or precedent to the g 5 #'_?• =: condition occupancy, as follows: �f pAent-This Agreement shall cover those of of S,nE _ _ _ tr-ac,23 as A condition improvements required to be cvne,41.+... -referenced land use Permits- Nothing in r approval of the above this Agreement shall require Developer to Construct any but if Developer r improvements under the land use permits, of buildings, structures, or the *" undertakes the construction division of real property under the land use permits, Developer improvements,as shall be required to complote and maintainall with applicable County Ordinances defined herein, in accordance approvals. and land use application 3; T.msMWrtre�n__ent As used herein, "improvement" means bike nPfin?tioa of any private or public facility or service such as roadways, lands, a areas, sewage p -' pedestrian walkways, paths, accessways, p ghting s stems and disposal systemsc�Gulationtareaslioutdoor storage r.7..>,'^ .?V collection parking lots, cable utilities, outdoor recreation areas, areas, service and delivery areas, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT � 1 .., .. '14 ;�.:...- ,..�.-.t:3�.d<,.. �:df..:nt+i�•r'i+Fdr:jifi:.M,. '='..';' .. ,.. .Sxs,. . ,::. ... .. ... .. _.. .. .. ... .. ... .... .a ..a .,: �-a .- ._ ..r .". s r ...< ...:, . ..,�a. ......... �_ .,.,vru :"r..:nz.ro ..-w-.v-. �v .. a...+.K.-"�uiy++x^�w......••�ec�rn�rr:T'f7:Yyr S1}•�'x'S: 254 - o074 'Y a retaining walls, signs and graphics, cut -and -fill areas, ;~? buffering and screening measures, street furniture, drainage facilities, or other similar improvements as approved and required in the land use permit. pefinition of Permanent Nalltenance. As used herein, "permanent maintenance" generally means maintenance of the structures, improvements, and landscaping that are the subject of this Agreement in a manner that will keep such structures, improvements, and landscaping in good repair or good condition and in a condition that is not a hazard to public safety. With respect to landscaping, Developer's obligations shall include, without limitation, continued irrigation of landscaping and, where applicable, pruning of landscaping to guarantee required sight distances and to otherwise protect against hazardous conditions. With respect to drainage facilities, Developerrs obligations shall include, without limitation, periodic cleaning of drainage ponds, drywells, or other drainage facilities or obstructions or silt that would limit the performance or ".# effectiveness of drainage facilities. With respect to improvements, such as pavement and sidewalks, Developer"s obligations shall include, without limitation, maintenance of the impervious nature of impervious surfaces, maintenance of evenness of surfaces so that such surfaces are not hazardous to the operation of vehicles or use by pedestrians. Cgnstruation and anent maintenance If Developer is required under the land use permits to construct improvements of any kind 5� or to install landscaping or plantings and Developer elects to proceed with development under the permit, Developer agrees: (1) to undertake the construction and landscaping required under the land use permits, as more specifically set forth in the �+ conditions set out herein and in the land use permits; and, (2) in the event that this Agreement and the land use permits do not expire as set forth herein, to the permanent maintenance of required landscaping and improvements. This Agreement shall be enforceable against any person bound by this Agreement in possession of or having fee { title to the property. if any party bound by this Agreement defaults•on the obligations set forth herein, the county shall be ='_'r.• entitled to enforce this Agreement in equity. The prevailing party at trial or on appeal in any enforcement action shall be ;F entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs. This provision shall not limit Countyfs rights to use other means provided by law, 'including but not limited to issuing a civil citation, to enforce the conditions of the land use permit. hutAQrJty of Signatories. By their signatures, all signatories to this Agreement signing in a representative capacity certify that they are authorized to sign on behalf of and bind their respective principals. motion._ This Agreement and the above -referenced land use •r permits shall expire upon expiration of the land use permits or by the revocation of the land use permits or by the explicit DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 2 �•i sS j is a.�'�]'a'�,IACJir'f.'.`^r.:.^.z1h�T•^:.ri?%b.f.Yci!��.,��".�� ..r .... ... .. ,. '.. - ... ..y .. .. .. .. . release e—Co 254 0075 by--th u�--from this Agreement granted as part of an approval for a change of use of the Real Property. ' no Partgers'hiR. County is not, by virtue of this Agreement, a partner or joint venturer of Developer in connection with t` activities carried on under this Agreement, and shall have no r obligation with respect to Developerfs debts or any other liabilities of each and every nature, and is not a guarantor of t the Developer, the project, or the work to be performed. Xjjg tAtions. Should this Agreement violate any constitutional or statutory provision, it shall be void. A A Persons Bound by . The original of this Agreement shall be recorded with the Deschutes County Clerk and shall run with the land. It is the intent of the parties that the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their successors, heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, or any other party deriving any right, title or interest or use in or to the Real Property, including any person who holds such interests as security for the payment on any ' obligation, including the Mortgagee or other secured party in actual possession of the Real. Property by foreclosure or otherwise or any person taking title from such security holder. go IdItions of Final AppgMl. The following are the required conditions of final approval for SP-91--142: 1. The Developer shall submit written verification of the exterior materials and colors for all structures on the treatment site prior to issuance of any building permit. 2. The Developer shall preserve the existing natural vegetation located on the so -toot strap shown as the landscape and tree preservation area on the Site Plan. I I 3. The Developer shall work with the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife for the protection of wildlife, specifically as it relates to the proposed fence. If other' alternatives to fencing are allowed, the City shall use these alternatives before fencing. 4. The Developer shall use the existing roads in the area for access to the site. No new roads leading to the .site shall be established. S. The use of the site after construction shall be. limited , to maintenance of 'the water treatment facility. 6. The Developer shall meet all requirements of the Deschutes County Environmental Health and Building Safety Divisions. 7. All utilities for the new buildings shall be placed underground. 'i DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 3 i a •"•'^.,'r`.aYk.G,?3a'4`Sc:i«`f.?ir";'.�.:Sd_z.::',�':,.ti t 254 0076 8. The Developer shall sign and enter into a Development Agreement with Deschutes county to ensure that all elements of the Site Plan shall be installed and maintained as approved. 'This Development Agreement shall be approved and recorded with the Deschutes County clerk prior to issuance of any building permit. 9. The Site Plan approval shall be granted for a 3-year time period and will include all aspects of the site, including water reservoirs. If the water reservoirs are not constructed within this time frame, the Developer shall be required to submit a new Site Plan application. A: Al DATED this _a2-�day of 1991. 254 - 0077 BOARD OF COUNTY CMMUSOXONERS OF DESCRUTES COUNTY, OREGON TOK timwPj commissioner NANCY POPE SCMEANGIN, Commissioner Tecording's4crery— HAUDIaN, c6a-irman STATE OF OREGON, County of Deschutes: ss. Before me, a Notary Public personally appeared TOM THROOP, NANCY POPE SCMANGEN, and DICK MAUDILTS, the above named Board of County Commissioners of Deschutes County, Oregon, and acknowledged the if A oinq instrument 0 behalf of Deschutes County, Oregon, this May of —.-T, 1991. 'A Notary Public If . ... ... my commission Expires: t0-9--fz— it DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 5 Own, ��i.2LYa'L`rA'.7rtl:'t4b'iR�:R.2ir�f;4'.'3.-s.':h;°Y.9'1.J.'l^Ysj�aCP'�'.!3u^,1�•tiy P%�Y:!•`�:'t?n4:i v1 •; l:_r.•r.'•y}m•,: •�>t"`3�Y.' .. .. pX:*:::�'l": `i ems: ��y of . 1991. 254 DU78 DATED this , STaTS OF ORF.ON, County of Deschutes: ss. On this /day of ��rl 1991, before me, the undersigned, a No ry Public n and for said County and State, personally appeared the within named. LAMP PAIVERSON, City z"nagger, The City of Send, who is known to me to be the identical individual adescribed cknowledged n to me who hthatex heed e executed within same instrument ty freely and and voluntarily. .IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year last above written. Gf Notate Yubla f cy-o /Q'�� My Commissian Expires:/ � �© Q(�lC�+AL SEl1LSEAL 7',rrI1 iA�-Oi1EG�Oh1 t:+COIRF.1M1OtV57(PIRES140V.'Z-.%$: il DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - 6 .LTs'(� 'ace,"ry:3t't5.+,a'''.�:y�•g4..r'? Lse.,a...._,...n .- :.. - ..... .. � .. .r-.. ... - �- - .. ._.. ... ....rr..... .,. . - T.,o.....�.._ ... r ...,. .. ..: _..a- i a .nu,... ,.:.> Page 1 of 3 . DISCLAIMER AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY Information on the Deschutes County Computer is not guaranteed to be accurate and may contain errors and omissions. Deschutes County provides NO WARRANTY AS TO THE MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE FOR ANY INFORMATION. Original records may differ from computer entries. If reliance upon computer record is intended, verification of information on source documents is required. User expressly acknowledges and agrees that the use of any information appearing on the Deschutes County Computer is at User's sole risk. Deschutes County shall not be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages caused by mistakes, omissions, deletions, errors, defects; in any information, or any failure or delays in receiving information'. The following property tax assessment data is updated nightly. Account: 257780 Map/TL: R 2-006 171100 00 06202 Al See also: 180789 CITY OF BEND C/O PUBLIC WORKS (A) PO BOX 1458 BEND OR 97709-1458 Spec. Int.: Al Prop C1s:205 MA:6 VA:22 NH 000 Asmt Zone:RR10 *** Land Values *** Asmt type Acres COMMERCIAL LOT 1.00 ***** Values shown below are as of the Assessment Date, January 1 of each year ***** *** -- 2010---------------- 2009-------- -=------- 2008-------- Total Taxable Total Taxable Total Taxable RMV A.V. RMV A.V. RMV A.V. LND: 74,680 52,440 109,820 50,920 124,800 49,440 **.'* TAX PAYMENTS * * * For a copy of the 2010 property tax statement select the following button: C�et:20t Q., ruperty,ta�x statement #ar this props http://w3.deschutes.orgtDIAUriewDIALSystemBroker.cfm?OP_T=T&OP A=A&CMD=... 9/119/2011 Page 2 of 3 This web site uses the FREE Adobes Acrobat® ReaderTm plug-in. If you do not have this plug-in, dick the loon to get It. MIN For a copy of the 2009 property tax statement select the following button: ,Get gpop pr9 erty:tax statement-for;this _ rapefi! .. This web site uses the FREE Adobes Acrobat® ReaderTm plug-in.'A� If you do not have this plug -In, dick the loon to get It. For current balance due information on this account select the following button (Please note that this link will provide current balance information, including interest & fees, EXCEPT FOR ACCOUNTS IN FORECLOSURE, please call the tax office @ 388-6540 for payoff information on foreclosure accounts) .:... Get_real tim�aa�c semrna!Yfgr,;,th is,propartl! , ._ : :.. This web site uses the FREE Adobes AcrobatO ReaderTm piugdn. +� It you do not have this plug-in, dick the Icon to gat it. For balance due information on this account for a future date, specify a future date and select the following button (Please note that this link will provide current balance information, including interest & fees, EXCEPT FOR ACCOUNTS IN FORECLOSURE, please call the tax office @ 3884540 for payoff information on foreclosure accounts) Enter a value future Date (mmtddlyyyy) 09/19/2011 ,Get,teal�tirt�e:iax summe..,for.e futute,da#e 1or•thjs,prop ny ,. ;,, ;.k This web site uses the FREE Adobe® Acrobat® ReaderTT" plug -In. If you do not have this plug-in, dick the loon to get ft. " 2010 Balance Due Adval Tax 0.00 688.77 Trn Date Btch Received Int/Disc Jrnl Rcpt# Description 11-22-10 2010 -668.11 -20.66 109748 2009 Balance Due Adval Tax 0.00 680.82 Trn Date Btch Received Int/Disc Jrnl Rcpt# Description 11-23-09 2309 -660.40 -20.42 947602 2008 Balance Due Adval Tax 0.00 587.27 Trn Date Btch Received Int/Disc Jrnl Rcpt# Description 11-18-08 1808 -569.65 -17.62 782095 http://w3.deschutes.org/DIAUnewDL4LSystemBroker.cfm?OP T=T&CAP A=A&CMD=... 9/19/2011 Page 3 of 3, , 2007 Balance Due Adval Tax 0.00 557.75 Trn Date Btch Received Int/Disc Jrnl Rcpt# Description 06-11-08 1108-587.50 29.75 6.93276 liq://w3.deschutes.org/DLAUnewDIALSystemBroker.cfm?OP T=T&OP_A=A&CMD=... 9/19/2011 1a41 iWs7tr .4#eaYlbsd id OP whs.,""sted the-Mi.ih#a instiuisent, cord a+okgorXcllSed 4e,aw 9 that ihlg► ,e"oa#:tla ttae osapgs trqil1>". and VeA►mtarsiy. I xlt T SxZlzilflC B Ht? voF.. I bole :hextuote got 310► hand 'and .Mtfioiai •iel t he dw sud yow. s last vwove written. 4T. }S, I.ovcronac. . !!Maxis rulbuo for. bregon. 10 Coculocion lhgiirev Apprt,l 10,194 (Ztotarial Sear 1 Ox#ioA wootrrai 4oicii4laiation Got• at al. A isl2 3iikt•d Oo/obea :fith.• A. D. y9R6. .: 4920 o"alisih V.. M.. To 1. if. !lane?" County tixoxiC. " - - - Owen Ix'air►, 1)eputy. Ktfbl� .ELT. ltbtl±4]E'i�'Sit Qrcgon dlat�sv 4�o3otil8sation COne#ian7r4 s oorUoratlo of 8•t.' PaGi. jd pnieoti►# and Z.. 34 Soonabooter TwSr and taro ifooaiuhcater, hie wife, of DesaiuuteG , County, , 07Fe ;it herailna r'toi 'ililiea the grantors is aionaialesa�tion of the pa 4t to them of $1.0G by city of Bona* a nunlaipal oorporotion, of veeohaatce tiouuty, Oregon. reoaiiyt of which is ha ret►y Acknowledged and the ParFoa ioe•by laid amity o! Send of tiia oonditiane and oowrn• unto hc'Sreinafter sot !'ortli, Yaosa*. 13H8tST tim uOz Y unto eaid city of Rands hereinafter i oai]ad liie .grant**. #te succ#saroars or aeeigae �usoaasment fnr_ih�_ognatrug#ig..Sta3tnLr- qnd g# etGaal maiafttlaanae, vt i. pips .or conduit for the conveyance or water over and upon a. .� etr}p of Sande 1iS feet wide. a feet on -eaoh slid* of the center Ilne# srid strip of load belre ioawted .3n ,flit 8.. #►alt or tho -Sot of Seation 34 end in the !�t of the St .ot Seatlans 3tj ;eqa . + T. 17 B of itunge 11 Nast tnr U. sold oentex line baing deeorib*d as failowit Btlgiani qg at a point on • t#k north and south center .11ne of section 34 'go.. X7 8. R• 11 8 toot } at a distwgoa► of 740.*/ noz:tU of + seeti'an corner betweap sold riei'gti,oa 34 and Section 3 T. Xa:{ _ .. Giai can =f5o Fset thence north 7.7a pv - rw ♦ .. theasc& north9fzs 47" eaat "a' di'ftuncN 9 2 ,D tact 1 2?.QO fast tho.no& (Mouth Gg• la" tl&st A dim Una* of thenoe duo 4a to .a, 4istauaa_0 at y oc loot ti7ence aiartta � Ste` ss:.t a..Oxt1t47nnta'ot` 5400 faint f thence south 43r ouat A dim thenceo! ebb teett r thence rowt'fa �i1r!; 13• ot..ft 4 dista"go, of 3,90 to" - ! to. a point an file ad•st boundarg liiae of 600*100 3a T. 1t «..7t• �l �_tlhx°� p°#'n; �i" noflh f a distamag of lfp..ritet fro>wa fiat ro)adh+aaet,arsraaer 09. Ag4d tisotip 1Aa Ti4 luaic3� !e also the eoutb� saa&.t, of arn#Ir ec,1d t. 17 a oaf i 1a cast at W111wnstte'Xfxtdiad; raft o a pprpartual easement . a oiwo ►Y.aetar of oxer!'iow or, accosts . glafar from sad ipipe. 110e., or •.coaa¢ul t to Tuaa+l.o Oze� thZ a existing draw or dopresoion, located in the DV of tics S� .Saot� pn° 8¢ T. 17 a it. 11 ,# 7tc t4. UPtWi?;ii?r.w�.the rSght #a• rersona�ie laera wgoras tc1„��wiu}lL,,strcip of land for {he" n re►#ion of a�.i4• iineiri'itOtitmpg, the ,araat bgrow: a� Purport of mainteiu►aae. 'repair• ad cp*•' .. i wads ie eub3t+a.� to -.ate r1. la•Es,ot.waay heretofore tfire*led thy' or.>gon &,T'estern•Colgpitaa4tian } acerpou r or Ito. Vre4walmeeke 34, !a,#eraet ,anal .tneinting. 2 As a !farther, coigsidlpratibn For the,arant 13&r!Rby,IM494 the SraWtee 4apoxi the '"Pitt" request of the grantoros their 0uc-;;& Goso Or ameiane• 08"0111 ti► !natal! aolt+wrptions in NOW gip& not to expo". inataiel, in, dlatautOr. at..polast s d¢sig4t,04--iiy _ # an4 Wipe iY to !, Wish waater far domestic gsaspcsas to the gxeaet ore .or to their nssians Or .auaoarneoxB., dp; pig . at the Game , rates as are o)4rged for the etmm servioe wi thin the city halt t�,.y�f. JzitnX Attd subaaat to ttad ewe xaai&a-bas ta. Aietribution; Provided, that the number, atclauolr+.;o9nnectionr' ehs11 not slaxaeed #"Gus for each quarter of a iA16 of 6446 Pip!« It 1a further ag?reed.by end botwoea lice parties ;laa<t We girnatstM.sia!411 hryre the rtat to Wild, at hoar turta*of the, aroaarad stu-oh, ewtrcwcoe to. cuid Vivo Tine an x*Y be ttsesasary gratldeA tkuat �ruat+. ageg3nas, ba not lwraar thian• 4 ft. rguaypr Fm# ;?re?1„i►&. oar, ooxered us to bs) safe ;far. the croeoing of aatool: or vehiolesr.. 'i atbull 00 so IrAd Uxet the top thtxeaf .will r Return to: Pacific Power Ann. Linda Peacock 328 NE Webster Bend OR 97761 CC: 11216 WO: 01889878 NAME: City of Bead, Oregon 09SCH 11r1C# COUNTY OFFICSIL RECORM WV��tii1� INIMM WW ai-M Cents I;U,.a r«MIJ /48=1 00: 17:4 to W." sum *10,00 ".00 For value received, City of Bend Oregon, ("Grantor"). hereby grants to PaeifiCorp, an Oregon corporation, its successors and assigns, ("Grantee"), an easement for a right of way 20 feet in width and 395 feet In length, more or less, for the construction, reconstruction, operation, maintenance, repair. replacement, enlargement, and removal of electric power distribution and communication lines and all necessary or desirable accessories and appurtenances thereto, including without limitation: supporting towers. poles. props, guys and anchor, including guys and anchors outside of the right of way: wires. fibers, cables and other conductors and conduits therefor: and pads, transformers. switches, vaults and cabinets, along the general course now located by Grantee on, over or under the surface of the neat property of Grantor In Deschutes County, State of Oregon, as more particularly described and/or shown on Exhibit(s) "A" attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof: Located in the S !4 of the S % of Section 34. T. 17 S., R 11 E.. WM Assessor's Map No. 17-11 Tax Parcel No, 6202 Together with the right of doom to the right of way from adjacent lands of Grantor for all activities in connection with the purposes for which this easement has been granted; and together with the present and (without payment therefor) the future right to keep the right of way and adjacent lands clear of all brush, trees, timber, structures, buildings and other hakaards which might endanger Grantee's facilities or impede Grantee's activities. At no time shall Grantor place, use or permit any equipment or material of any kind that exceeds twelve (12) feet in height, light any fires, place or store any flammable materials (other than agricultural crops). on or within the boundaries of the right of way. Subject to the foregoing limitations, the surface of the right of way may be used for agricultural crops and other purposes not inconsistent, as determined by Grantee, with the purposes for which this easement has been granted. The rights and obligations of the parties hereto shall be binding upon and shall benefit their respective heirs, successors and assigns. / L DATED this 41 �n day of, 2_Q2L. tqlV�. ZA mmnt1'lana�' City o Bon ,Oregon :`Officer Name. Title REPRESENTATIVE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF y St�huk5 Count of. This Instrument was acknowledged before ate on this day of ': �p ' by CVdustla- ,as nohr toh11cCU of 1 Notary Public j,woa•'r -"y'" My commission expires: DAR" CC JttRMS NOTARY PUBLIC OAMON 00 MMISSION Nt?• 306729 M Mt9 ��dl�►Mid111 z��'" 1-9lZb b 1 vcr Wa V-is nor pM -. 0 iat 11nLlh1n �iLl�s pva 'K 1�wa�'S'"V ;Q<)z- I eol9bF 101 g*r 0£ 00 LOL. l-6l por > J PL W C�lO 1 00 w 1 N M p OOLlk*F M r. ZGj4 00 d m $S OIL OOLF�F JoinMbhabe r, amanx January 17, 2012 Deschutes County Community Development Department 117 NW Lafayette Avenue Bend, OR 97701 ATTN: Kevin Harrison RE: SP 1120 Department of Fish and Wildlife High Desert Region 61374 Parnell Road Bend, OR 97702 (541)388-6363 FAX (541) 388-6281 Jeffrey Fuchs and Susan Haupt of HDR Engineering asked us to review modifications of the Surface Water Improvement Project by the City of Bend. The modifications we reviewed was to the fence around the facility. The document we reviewed was not dated, titled "Surface Water Improvement Project Site Plan Review Overall Site Layout, COB# WA0902. The modification of the fence, was hand drawn on this document. This modification, as presented to us, would not alter the effectiveness of the previous application and approval of the fence. In our opinion it should be just as effective as the previous design was. If we can be of any further assistance please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, �i r Steven George Deschutes District Wildlife Biologist steven.w.george@state.or.us Fish and wudtira High Desert s 61374 Paird[ Road Bod.OR 97702 (541) 388.6363 FAX (541) 388.6281 December 27, 2005 Dan Grabber City of Bend Public Works Department 575 NE le St Bend, OR 97701 00 Outback Water`Fadlltj . This Letter concems your request for a determination on the outback water facility protection fence, and its compatibility with Deschutes County ordinances. Because of the need for safety and protection of the facility a security fence Is necessary. A gap in the fence was designed to mitigate some of the negative effects of a tall fence. This gap should provide deer with an avenue to move through the area. If we can be of any further assistance please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Steven George Deschutes District WiMe Biologist aWeaw.gaorge@d&te or us ' E S CCG o Deschutes County Board of Commissioners 1300 NW Wall St, Bend, OR 97703 (541) 388-6570 - Fax (541) 385-3202 - https://www.deschutes.org/ AGENDA REQUEST & STAFF REPORT For Board of Commissioners BOCC Monday Meeting of January 27, 2020 DATE: January 21, 2020 FROM: Cynthia Smidt, Community Development, 541-317-3150 TITLE OF AGENDA ITEM: Preparation for Public Hearing on Redmond UGB Amendment BACKGROUND AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS: The Board of County Commissioners will conduct a work session on January 27, 2020 in preparation for a public hearing on February 5, 2020 to consider an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) adjustment and amendments to Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps. The applicant requests a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The request also includes a Zone Change for each area of reconfigured and exchanged land. The exchange property is being offered to achieve better industrial land needs that were detailed in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 by providing more development ready land within the Redmond UGB. There will be no change in the amount of industrial zoned land in the City of Redmond nor there a change in the amount of agricultural land in Deschutes County. The request includes a Comprehensive Plan amendment to Agricultural for those lands leaving the UGB and a corresponding zone change to Exclusive Farm Use - Alfalfa Subzone to match the zoning of adjacent properties. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. ATTENDANCE: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner MEMORANDUM TO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner DATE: _ January 21, 2020 RE: Redmond UGB Amendment - Deschutes County Plan Amendment and Zone Change (247-19-000648-PA, 247-19-000649-ZC) The Board of County Commissioners (Board) is conducting a work session on January 27, 2020 in preparation for a public hearing on February 5 to consider an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) adjustment and amendments to Deschutes County's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps. The applicant, Deschutes County, requests a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB'. The request also includes a Zone Change for each area of reconfigured and exchanged land. The exchange property is being offered to achieve better industrial land needs that were detailed in the 2012 Senate Rill 1544 by nrnvirlincr mnra development ready land within the Redmond UGB. There will be no change in the amount of industrial zoned land in the City of Redmond nor there a change in the amount of agricultural land in Deschutes County. The applicant has also submitted an amendment to the City of Redmond for the same reasons (Redmond file no. 711-19-000163-PA). Redmond City Council adopted the proposal unanimously on January 14, 2020 with the condition of approval that the Council approval is contingent upon the Board approval on February 5, 2020. I. BACKGROUND In 2013, a regional industrial land needs analysis was conducted to maintain a stable and sustainable rural economy in the Redmond area. The "Exclusion Site" (see footnote 1) and surrounding area was brought into the Redmond UGB to accommodate the regional large lot The region of property to be added to the Redmond UGB is referred to herein as the Inclusion Property (or Inclusion Site or Land). In addition, the region of the property proposed for removal from the Redmond UGB is referred to herein as the Exclusion Property (or Exclusion Site or Land). 11 7 NW I afayeae. Avenue, Bend, Oregon 97703 1 P.O. Box 6005, Bend, OR 97708--600.5 ZI' (541) 388-6575 @ cdd@deschutes or wwvv.deschwes.org/cd industrial land need. However, industrial land along the eastern boundary of Redmond continued to develop, which resulted in the extension of facilities and services away from the Exclusion Site. As such, the Exclusion site is no longer the preferred location for new industrial development. Accordingly, the applicant has requested to revise the location of the UGB to accommodate large - lot industrial land need. By shifting this large -lot industrial land closer to developing areas of the City of Redmond, the Inclusion Site will be more readily available for development based on current growth and availability and extension of facilities and services for such uses and thus better achieve the needs detailed in SB 1544. As proposed, the amount of land needed by the regional large lot industrial lands program (County Ordinance 2013-002) will be maintained, provided in the same general vicinity, and located to take advantage of recent development patterns. The land being added to the UGB will temporarily change from Exclusive Farm Use - Alfalfa subzone (EFUAL) to Urban Holding (UH-10). Once the City of Redmond annexes the land, the zoning will include a combination of Light Industrial (M-1) and Heavy Industrial (M-2). The land being removed from the UGB will change from a combination of M-1 and M-2 to EFUAL. The proposal will also change three combining zones, including the Redmond Urban Reserve Area (RURA), Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA) and Airport Safety (AS) Combining Zones. II. PUBLIC COMMENTS AND HEARING OFFICER RECOMMENDATION A public hearing was held by the Deschutes County Hearings Officer on November 19, 2019. The Hearings Officer issued a decision recommending approval of the proposed Plan Amendment and Zone Change of 11 December-)J, w i �. There have been two formal public comments to date from neighbors, Izaac Ross and Jenni Carver - Ross, who believe that their property should be brought into the UGB before or in conjunction with the Inclusion Site. The Hearings Officer agreed with the applicant and found that since the proposed Redmond UGB amendment is a quasi-judicial application specific to an "acre for acre" adjustment and not a legislative UGB expansion, the request by the neighbors is not applicable nor is it the proper proceeding for such a request. Patrick Brady with EzraTerra, which is a business that acquires contaminated properties to cleanup for redevelopment. Mr. Brady testified at the public hearing and provided written comments during the open record period. The Hearings Officer summarized Mr. Brady's comments as follows: Mr. Brady expresses concerns that the County has not exercised due care in protecting the public from toxic dusts. In short, Mr. Brady contends contamination and drug use on the Exclusion Property will limit development opportunities and, by rezoning to EFU, the Exclusion Property will remain in state of blight that threatens public health. Accordingly, according to Mr. Brady, the proposal violates various approval criteria and Comprehensive Plan policies. Mr. Brady identified several criteria and policies where the proposal was in violation. Moreover, Mr. Brady argues that there has not be a change in circumstances; rather the change is the symptom of contamination on the Exclusion Site. The Hearings Officer addressed all comments and concerns 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 2 of 3 in his decision found that the rezoning the two areas will not affect the quality of the air, water, and land resources. Moreover, the County has adopted policies to protect such resources and the remediation plan for the Exclusion Site will ensure appropriate clean-up of the property prior to or in ronh inrtinn with development, meeting all DEQ req� iiromontc I11. BOARD CONSIDERATION AND NEXT STEPS The Board will hold a public hearing for the Redmond UGB amendments on February 5, 2020. Redmond City Council adopted the proposal on January 14, 2020 contingent on Board approval. Attachments: Binder Document Item No. 2020-01-21 Draft Ordinance 2020-002 30 2020-01-21 Draft Exhibit A: -Comprehensive -Plan Section 23.01.010, introduction 29 202v=v1=21 Dr aft Exhibit B; Comprehensive Plan lI S)ectiol lI 4.2, Urbanization 28 2020-01-21 Draft Exhibit C; Comprehensive Plan Section 5.2, Legislative History 27 2020-01-21 Draft Exhibit D; Legal Description 26 2020-01-21 Draft Exhibit E; Plan Designation Map 25 2020-01-21 Draft Exhibit F; Zone Change Map 24 2020-01-21 Draft Exhibit G; Hearings Officers Decision 23 2019-12-24 Hearings Officer Decision 22 2019-12-04 Applicant Post Hearing Final Argument 21 2019-12-03 Applicant Post Hearing Rebuttal 20 2019-11-25 P. Brady Post Hearing Comments 19 2019-11-20 P. Brady Comments & PowerPoint 18 2019-11-19 Hearing Documents 17 2019-11-19 Link to Hearing Audio 16 2019-11-19 Hearing Agenda & Packets 15 2019-11-14 Staff Report 14 2019- i 1-13 Remediation Plan information 13 2019-11-08 Deschutes County Transportation Comments 12 2019-11-04 Surface Mining Zone Location information 11 2019-11-01 Applicant Response to Ross Comments 10 2019-10-31 LUA Sign Affidavit 9 2019-10-25 Ross Comments 8 2019-08-23 Application Materials 7 2019-08-23 Application Exhibit O - SB1544 6 2019-08-23 Application Exhibit R - Alternative Site Analysis 5 2019-08-23 Application Exhibit T - SM 482 ESEE 4 2019-08-23 Application Exhibit V - Deschutes County ORD 2013-002 3 - 2019-08-23 Application Exhibit W - COIL Agreement 2 2019-08-23 Application Exhibit CC - Redmond ORD 2013-15 1 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 3 of 3 REVIEWED LEGAL COUNSEL BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS_ OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON An Ordinance Amending Deschutes County Code Title 23, the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, to Adjust the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary and Comprehensive Plan Designations for Certain * ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 Properties, and Title 18, the Deschutes County Zoning Map, to Adjust Zoning for Certain Properties. * WHEREAS, Deschutes County applied for amendments to the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan and the Deschutes County Zoning Map to adjust the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary ("UGB") to better achieve industrial land needs detailed in 2012 Senate Bill 1544 by providing more development ready lands, and to amend the Comprehensive Plan designation of "Agricultural" for those lands leaving the UGB and a corresponding zone change to Exclusive Farm Use, and a designation of "Urban Growth Boundary" for those lands entering the UGB and correspondingzone change to urban Holding 10,- and WHEREAS, the Joint Management Agreement between Deschutes County and the City of Redmond states that Urban Growth Boundary Amendments shall be approved by both Deschutes County Board of Commissioners' ("Board") and the Redmond City of Council; and WHEREAS, after notice was given in accordance with applicable law, a public hearing was held on November 19, 2019, before a Deschutes County Hearings Officer and, on December 24, 2019, the Hearings Officer recommended approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendments and zone change; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on November 18, 2019, before the Redmond Urban Area Planning Commission and after reviewing the record and gathering public testimony, recommended that the Redmond City Council approve the amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary; and WHEREAS, the Redmond City Council approved the first and second reading of its ordinance on January 14, 2020 and consistent with the Redmond Urban Area Planning Commission recommendation, subject to approval by the Board; and WHEREAS, after notice was given in accordance with applicable law, a de novo public hearing was held on February 5, 2020, before the Board; now, therefore, PAGE 1 OF 3 - ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESC14UTES COUNTY, OREGON, ORDAINS as follows: Section 1. AMENDMENT. DCC Title 23.Oi."v10, introduction, is amended to read as described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, with new language underlined and deleted language set forth in st>;�L�� h. Section 2. AMENDMENT. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 4, Urban Growth Management, is amended to read as described in Exhibit B attached and "incorporated by reference herein, with new language underlined and deleted language set forth in str-iket4ough.' Section 3. AMENDMENT. Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Section 5.12, Legislative History, is amended to read as described in Exhibit C attached and incorporated by reference herein, with new language -underlined and deleted language set forth in str4kethfeugh. - - Section 4. AMENDMENT. DCC Title 23, Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Map, is amended to change the plan designation for certain property described in Exhibit D and depicted on the map set forth as Exhibit E, with both exhibits attached and incorporated by reference herein, from Urban Growth Boundary to Agricultural and from Agriculture to Urban Growth Boundary. Section 5. AMENDMENT. DCC Title 18, Zoning Map, is amended to change the zone designation from Urban Growth Boundary to Exclusive Farm Use and from Exclusive Farm Use to Urban Holding 10 for certain property described in Exhibit D and depicted on the map set forth as Exhibit F, with both exhibits attached and incorporated by reference herein. Section 6. FINDINGS.. The Board adopts as its findings in support of this Ordinance, the Decision of the Hearings Officer as set forth in Exhibit G, and incorporatedby reference herein. Date this o f 7(1 1l1 T)l1 A 7l T �r r� r Tr 17 Dated �� , vcv 17vti[Vii yr L,lJU1141 x l V1V11V11�J1V1VtICJ OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON ATTEST: Recording Secretary Date of 1 sc Reading: PATTI ADAIR, Chair ANTHONY DeBONE, Vice Chair PHILIP G. HENDERSON, Commissioner day of , 2020. Date of 2"d Reading: day of 2020. PAGE 2 OF 3 - ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 Commissioner Patti Adair Anthony DeBone Philip G. Henderson Record of Adoption Vote: Yes No Abstained Excused Effective date: day of 12020 PAGE 3 OF 3 - ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 EXHIBIT A Chapter 23.01 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Chapter 23.01 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 23. [ALv 10. Introduction. A. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2011-003 and found on the Deschutes County Community Development Department website, is incorporated by reference herein. B. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2011-027, are incorporated by reference herein. C. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-005, are incorporated by reference herein. D. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-012, are incorporated by reference herein. E. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2012-016, are incorporated by reference herein. F. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-002, are incorporated by reference herein. G. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-009, are incorporated by reference herein. H. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-012, are incorporated by reference herein. I. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2013-007, are incorporated by reference herein. J. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments,, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-005, are incorporated by reference herein. K. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-006, are incorporated by reference herein. L. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-012, are incorporated by reference herein. M. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-021, are incorporated by reference, herein. N. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2014-027, are incorporated by reference herein. O. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-021, are incorporated by reference herein. P. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-029, are incorporated by reference herein. Q. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-018, are incorporated by reference herein. R. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2015-010, are incorporated by reference herein. S. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-001 are incorporated by reference herein. T. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-022, are incorporated by reference herein. U. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-005, are incorporated by reference herein. Chapter 23.01 (1/2020) EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE 2020-002 EXHIBIT A V. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-027, are incorporated by reference herein. W. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2016-029, are incorporated by reference herein. X. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2017-007, are incorporated by reference herein. Y. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-002, are incorporated by reference herein. Z. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-006, are incorporated by reference herein. AA. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-011, are incorporated by reference herein. BB. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-005, are incorporated by reference herein. CC. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2018-008, are incorporated by reference herein. DD. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-002, are incorporated by reference herein. EE. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-001, are incorporated by reference herein. FF. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-003, are incorporated by reference herein. GG. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-004, are incorporated by reference herein. HH. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-011, are incorporated by reference herein. II. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-006, are incorporated by reference herein. JJ. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2019-019, are incorporated by reference herein. KK. The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments, adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-001, are incorporated by reference herein. LL The Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendments adopted by the Board in Ordinance 2020-002 are incorporated by reference herein. (Ord. 2020-002§1, 2020; Ord. 2020-001§26, 2020; Ord. 2019-019 §2, 2019; Ord. 2019-006 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-011 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-004 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-003 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-001 § 1, 2019; Ord. 2019-002 §1, 2019; Ord. 2018-008 §1, 2018; Ord. 2018-005 §2, 2018; Ord. 2018-011 §1, 2018; Ord. 2018-006 §1, 2018; Ord. 2018-002 §1, 2018; Ord. 2017-007 §1, 2017; Ord. 2016-029 §1, 2016; Ord. 2016-027 §1, 2016; Ord. 2016-005 §1, 2016; Ord. 2016-022 §1, 2016; Ord. 2016-001 §1, 2016; Ord. 2015-010 §1, 2015; Ord. 2015-018 § 1, 2015; Ord. 2015-029 § 1, 2015; Ord. 2015-021 § 1, 2015; Ord. 2014-027 § 1, 2014; Ord. 2014-021 §1, 2014; Ord. 2014-12 §1, 2014; Ord. 2014-006 §2, 2014; Ord. 2014-005 §2, 2014; Ord. 2013-012 §2, 2013; Ord. 2013-009 §2, 2013; Ord. 2013-007 §1, 2013; Ord. 2013-002 § 1, 2013; Ord. 2013-001 § 1, 2013; Ord. 2012-016 § 1, 2012; Ord. 2012-013 § 1, 2012; Ord. 2012-005 § 1, 2012; Ord. 2011-027 § 1 through 12, 2011; Ord. 2011-017 repealed; Ord.2011-003 §3, 2011) Click here to be directed to the Comprehensive Plan (http://www.deschutes.org/compplan) Chapter 23.01 (1/2020) EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE 2020-002 6sectLDvi., 4.2 Lvbav"'ZatLov. Background This section describes the coordination between the County and the cities of Bend, La Pine, Redmond and Sisters on Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs) and Urban Reserve Areas (LIRAS). Statewide Planning Goal 2 recognizes the importance of coordinating land use plans. "City, county, state and federal agency and special district plans and actions related to land use shall be consistent with the comprehensive plans of cities and counties and regional plans adopted under ORS Chapter 268." Oregon Revised Statute 197.015(5) goes further to define comprehensive plan coordination, "A plan is "coordinated" when the needs of all levels of governments, semipublic anu private agencies and the citizens or Oregon nave Deen considered and accommodated as much as possible." Population An important basis for coordinating with cities is adopted population projections. Having an estimate of anticipated population is the first step to planning for future growth and conservation. ORS 195.025(I) requires counties to coordinate local plans and population forecasts. The County oversees the preparation of a population forecast in close collaboration with cities. This is important because the population of the County has increased significantly in recent decades and a coordinated approach allows cities to ensure managed growth over time. "able- .4.2.11 —Population Growth in Deschutes county i 98u to 20110 Sources 1 1980 1 1990 1 2000 1 2010 Population Research Center July I estimates 1 62,500 1 75.600 1 116.600 1 172.050 US Census Bureau April I counts 62,142 74,958 115,367 157,733 Source: As noted above in 1996 Bend, Redmond, Sisters and the County reviewed recent population forecasts from the Portland State University Center Population and Research Center (PRC) and U.S. Census Bureau, Department of Transportation, Woods and Poole, Bonneville Power Administration and Department of Administrative Services Office of Economic Analysis. After reviewing these projections, all local governments adopted a coordinated population forecast. It was adopted by Deschutes County in 1998 by Ordinance 98-084. The results of the 2000 decennial census and subsequent population estimates prepared by the PRC revealed that the respective populations of the County and its incorporated cities were growing faster than anticipated under the 1998 coordinated forecast. The cites and the County re-engaged in a coordination process between 2002 and 2004 that culminated with the County adopting a revised population forecast that projected population to the year 2025. It was adopted by Ordinance -2004-012--and upheld by the Land Use Board of Appeals on March 28 2005. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 The following table displays the 2004 coordinated population forecast for Deschutes County and the UGBs of the cities of Bend, Redmond, and Sisters. Table 4.2.2 - Coordinated Population Forecast 2000 to 2025 Year Bend UGB Redmond UGB Sisters UGB Unincorporated County Total County 2000 52,800 15,505 975 47,320 116,600 2005 69,004 19,249 1,768 53,032 143,053 2010 81,242 23,897 2,306 59,127 166,572 2015 91,158 29,667 1 2,694 1 65,924 189,443 2020 100,646 36,831 3,166 73,502 214,145 2025 109,389 45,724 3,747 81,951 246,811 Source: 2004 Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County The process through which the County and the cities coordinated to develop the 2000-2025 coordinated forecast is outlined in the report titled "Deschutes County Coordinated Population Forecast 2000-2025: Findings in Support of Forecast." The fourth city in Deschutes County is the City of La Pine. Incorporated on November 7, 2006, the City of La Pine's 2006 population estimate of 1,590 was certified by PRC on December 15, 2007. As a result of La Pine's incorporation, Deschutes County updated its Coordinated Population Forecast with Ordinance 2009-006. The purpose of this modification was to adopt a conservative 20 year population forecast for the City of La Pine that could be used by city officials and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development to estimate its future land need and a UGB. The following table displays the coordinated population forecast for Deschutes County, the UGBs of the cities of Bend, Redmond, and Sisters, and La Pine from 2000 to 2025. By extending the growth rate to the year 2025, La Pine's population will be 2,352. The non -urban unincorporated population decreases by 2,352 from its original projection of 81,951, to 79,599. Table 4.2.3 - Coordinated Population Forecast 2000 to 2025, Including La Pine Year Bend UGB Redmond UGB Sisters UGB La Pine UGB Unincorporated County Total County 2000 52,800 15,505 975 - 47,320 116,600 2005 69,004 19,249 1,768 - 53,032 143,053 2010 81,242 23,897 2,306 1,697 57,430 166,572 2015 91,158 29,667 2,694 1,892 64,032 189,443 2020 100,646 36,831 3,166 2,110 71,392 214,145 2025 109,389 45,724 3,747 2,352 79,599 240,811 Source: 2004 Coordinated Population Forecast for Deschutes County - updated MY 2030 Population Estimate This Comprehensive Plan is intended to manage growth and conservation in the unincorporated areas of the County until 2030. Because the official population forecast extends only to 2025, County staff used conservative average annual growth rates from the adopted population forecast to estimate population out to 2030. The following table estimates Deschutes County population by extending the adopted numbers out an additional five years. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 EXHIBIT B Table 4.2.4 — Deschutes County 2030 Population Forecast Year Bend Redmond Sisters La Pine Unincorporated Total County UGB UGB UGB UGB County 2030 119,009 51,733 4,426 2,632 88,748 266,538- Source: County estimates based on the 2004 Coordinated Pnnulatinn Fnreracr ac chnwn hpinw Bend's average annual growth rate from 2025 to 2030 is 1.70% Redmond's average annual growth rate from 2025 to 2030 is 2.50% Sisters' based their population on forecasted rates of building growth, residential housing units, and persons per dwelling unit La Pine's average annual growth rate from 2025 to 2030 is 2.20% Deschutes County's unincorporated area average annual growth rate from 2025 to 2030 is 2.20% As the pie chart below indicates, if population occurs as forecasted, 67%_ of the_County's population will reside in urban areas by 2030. Sisters 2% 1 Unincorporated — Area 33% I La FRne Redniand 1 % 19% Figure 4.1 Deschutes County 2030 Bend_ Estimated Population 45% Such growth will undoubtedly require strategically managing the provision of public services and maintaining adequate amounts of residential, commercial and industrial lands. Growth pressures will also require programmatic approaches to maintain open spaces, natural resources, and functional ecosystems that help define the qualities of Deschutes County. Urban Growth Boundary Amendments Bend The City of Bend legislatively amended its UGB as part of a periodic review acknowledgment in December 2004. The Bend City Council and the Board of County Commissioners adopted concurrent ordinances that expanded the Bend UGB by 500 acres and satisfied a 20 year demand for industrial land. In July 2007, the Bend -La Pine School District received approvals to expand the City of Bend UGB to include two properties for the location of two elementary schools, one at the Pine - Nursery, the other on-Skyliner Road. In 2014, the -Bend -La -Pine -School -district received -- - approval to include a 33-acre site within the LIGB near Skyliners Road to facilitate the construction of a public middle school. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 The Bend City Council and the Board of County Commissioners approved a legislative amendment to the Bend UGB in September 2016. The adopted amendment added 2,380 acres of land intended to satisfy a 20-year land need for needed housing, employment, and public uses from 2008 to 2028. The adopted UGB amendment also satisfied the terms of a 2010 Remand Order from the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission (10-REMAND- PARTIAL AC KN OW-00 1795). The City of Bend UGB amendment identified 5 existing neighborhood typologies within the City, with the "Transect" being the defined neighborhood typology which "provides a transitional residential development pattern from urban to rural using a variety of housing types integrated with the surrounding natural landscape to minimize the impact on sensitive ecosystems, wildlife and to reduce the risk of wildfire." The City applied this Transect concept to specific areas added to the UGB identified as the "Shevlin Area" and the "West Area" and created area -specific policies for those areas to recognize the unique characteristics of the area and create a transition from higher densities within the city to lower densities extending westward to the City of Bend UGB. In coordination with the city, Deschutes County has continued this concept for the areas in the county on the west side of Bend adjacent to the "Shevlin" and "West Area" in its Rural Housing elements and policies found in Chapter 3 of this Comprehensive Plan. The Bend City Council and the Board of County Commissioners approved an applicant - initiated, quasi-judicial application to adjust the Bend UGB in 2019. The adjustment removed 4.02 acres of land from the Bend UGB and added approximately 8.18 acres for a net increase of 4.16 acres. The adjustment accommodated the Skyline Ranch Road right-of-way because the previous alignment was deemed topographically inteasible. Sisters The City of Sisters legislatively amended its UGB in September 2005 when its City Council and the Board of County Commissioners adopted respective ordinances. The Sisters UGB expansion covered 53 acres and satisfied a 20 year demand for residential, commercial, light industrial, and public facility land. In March 2009, Sisters amended their UGB to facilitate the establishment of a 4-acre fire training facility for the Sisters/Camp Sherman Fire District. Redmond The City of Redmond legislatively amended its UGB in August 2006 when its City Council and the Board of County Commissioners adopted respective ordinances. The Redmond UGB expansion covered 2,299 acres and satisfied a 20 year demand for residential and neighborhood commercial land. In February 2019, Redmond amended its UGB through a joint process when its City Council and the Board of County Commissioners adopted respective ordinances. This expansion covered 949 acres in total: 789 acres was designated for large lot industrial development in accordance with the Central Oregon Regional Large Lot Industrial Lands Program, and 160 acres allowed for the expansion of the existing Deschutes County Fairgrounds and Oregon Military Department's National Guard Armory. 4 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 EXHIBIT B The Redmond City Council and the Board of County Commissioners approved an applicant - initiated. auasi-iudicial aDDlication to adjust the Redmnnrl UGR in 2020. The adiUStment added approximately 156 acres of land into the Redmond UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The exchange property is being offered to better achieve land needs that were detailed in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 by providing more development ready land within the Redmond UGB. La Pine In 2012 La Pine adopted its first Comprehensive Plan. La Pine established a UGB that matches the city limits, because the City contains sufficient undeveloped land for future housing, commercial and industrial needs over a 20-year period. The Plan map includes land use designations intended to provide an arrangement of uses to ensure adequate and efficient provisiorI U1 puvnc If astructui a wr an por ions or the City and UG15. Urban Reserve Area Redmond In December 2005, Redmond City Council and the Board of County Commissioners adopted a 5,661 acre URA for the City. It is the first URA in Central Oregon because most cities find planning farther into the future than the 20-year UGB timeframe, challenging. Coordination As noted above, Statewide Goal 2 and ORS promote land use planning coordination. The purposes of the urbanization goals and policies in this section are to provide the link between urban and rural areas, and to provide some basic parameters within which the urban areas of Deschutes County can develop, although the specific comprehensive plan for each community remains the prevailing document for guiding growth in its respective area. These policies permit the County to review each city's comprehensive plan to ensure effective coordination, The Redmond and Deschutes County Community Development Departments received the Oregon Chapter of American Planning Association's (OAPA) Professional Achievement in Planning Award in 2006 for the "Redmond Urban Reserve Area / Urban Growth Boundary Expansion Project.". The following quote taken from the Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association's 2006 Awards Program shows why the Redmond Community Development Department was chosen for this award. "An outstanding effort to address Redmond's rapid population growth, including the successful designation of an Urban Reserve and the imminent designation of an Urban Growth Boundary, a "Framework Plan" with a requirement for master planning, and the establishment of "Great Neighborhood Principles." Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 During the 1990s, the Central Oregon region experienced a dramatic transformation from an economy concentrated largely in wood products into a service based economy serving a growing and diverse tourism and household base. Accelerated in -migration and tourism growth gave way to rapid economic expansion, escalation in home prices, and a systematic shift in the local economy from goods producing activities to service oriented industries. While initially representing a diversification of the local economy, this shift led to an over -reliance upon these types of industries. During the recent recession, the regional economy's vulnerabilities became apparent. Suitable land for today's industrial development forms emerged as one of Oregon's most severe development challenges. In 2010, 2011, and 2012, Deschutes, Crook and Jefferson counties and their respective cities, undertook an unprecedented regional evaluation of the economic opportunities and constraints associated with users of large industrial parcels in the Central Oregon region. The purpose of this evaluation was to aid in providing a more diversified economic base for the region that would accommodate industrial uses with a need for larger lots than possibly may be currently available in any of the Central Oregon cities. As part of that evaluation, Deschutes County hired a consultant to draft an analysis of Central Oregon's opportunities, competitiveness, ability, and willingness to attract more basic industries. The analysis focused specifically on industries that require large lots. The result was a document called the Central Oregon Regional Economic Opportunity Analysis, and was the basis for Ordinance 201 1-017, dated May 31, 2011. Ordinance 201 1-017 was appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals by 1,000 Friends of Oregon (" 1,000 Friends"). The appeal was stayed in early 2012 to allow Deschutes County, the Governor's Office, and 1,000 Friends to explore a settlement, which was ultimately reached in April, 2012. The settlement consisted of policy concepts focusing entirely on Central Oregon's short-term need for large -lot industrial sites as well as a commitment from the Department of Land Conservation and Development ("DLCD") to initiate rule -making that summer. The three counties, their respective cities, 1,000 Friends, and DLCD staff then engaged in drafting a proposed rule. In August, the final draft of that rule was then sent to the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission ("LCDC"). As a result, in November, the LCDC adopted Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-024-0040 and 660-024-0045. That rule provides that that the large lot industrial land need analysis agreed upon by all of the parties, once adopted by each of the participating governmental entities, would be sufficient to demonstrate a need for up to nine large industrial sites in Central Oregon. Six of the sites will be made available initially. Three more sites may be added under the rule as the original sites are occupied. After the adoption of the new OARs, Deschutes County voluntarily repealed Ordinance 201 1-017 and adopted a new ordinance, Ordinance 2013-002, in accordance with the OARs. Utilizing the new OARS, Ordinance 2013-002 emphasized Central Oregon' short term need for a critical mass of competitive and diverse vacant, developable industrial sites. An additional necessary component is an intergovernmental agreement ("IGA") between the region's jurisdictions and the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council ("COIC"). Through the IGA, COIC will provide oversight of the short-term land supply of large -lot industrial sites to enable 6 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 the region to become competitive in industrial recruitment. Once each of the three counties and their respective cities adopt similar ordinances and enter into an IGA with COIC, the large lot sites will enable industrial recruitment opportunities to attract potential industrial users t^. consider the region that may not have otherwise without the availability of these large lots. The lGA between COIC and the region's cities and counties was executed on April 9, 2013. Participating local governments will review the program after all nine sites have been occupied or after ten years, whichever comes first In February 2019, Deschutes County adopted Ordinance No. 2019-003, which implemented the large lot industrial policies defined by Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-024-0040 and 660-024-0045. The ordinance amended the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan map to allow for 769 acres of a 949-acre parcel awned by the Oregon Department of State Lands to be incorporated into the City of Redmond's UGB (the remaining 160 acres were transferred tL I It-D J:Il__ \ TI f into �IIe wo pursuant to different criteria). 1 his site, referred to as the South Redmond Tract, was submitted to the Large Lot Industrial Lands program by the City of Redmond in 2015 after an extensive analysis of several potential sites utilizing the criteria of the adopted Central Oregon Large Lot Industrial Lands Needs Analysis ("the Analysis"). COIC accepted the property into the Large Lot Industrial (LLI) program on May 7, 2015. Subsequently, the City of Redmond amended its zoning code to add a Large Lot Industrial Zone, which addresses the requirements of the LLI program and ensures that properties with this zoning designation are to be utilized solely for large lot industrial or directly related purposes. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 7 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 SeOU'01 A, 4.2 1�trbaw�zat�ow �ol.�c��s Goals and Policies Goal 1 Coordinate with cities, special districts and stakeholders to support urban growth boundaries and urban reserve areas that provide an orderly and efficient transition between urban and rural lands. Policy 4.2.1 Participate in the processes initiated by cities in Deschutes County to create and/or amend their urban growth boundaries. Policy 4.2.2 Promote and coordinate the use of urban reserve areas. Policy 4.2.3 Review the idea of using rural reserves. Goal 2 Coordinate with cities, special districts and stakeholders on urban growth area zoning for lands inside urban growth boundaries but outside city boundaries. Policy 4.2.4 Use urban growth area zoning to coordinate land use decisions inside urban growth boundaries but outside the incorporated cities. Policy 4.2.5 Negotiate intergovernmental agreements to coordinate with cities on land use inside urban growth boundaries and outside the incorporated cities. Policy 4.2.6 Develop urban growth area zoning with consideration of the type, timing and location of public facilities and services provision consistent with city plans. Policy 4.2.7 Adopt by reference the comprehensive plans of Bend, La Pine, Redmond and Sisters, as the policy basis for implementing land use plans and ordinances in each city's urban growth boundary. Goal 3 Coordinate with cities, special districts and stakeholders on policies and zoning for lands outside urban growth boundaries but inside urban reserve areas. Policy 4.2.8 Designate the Redmond Urban Reserve Area on the County Comprehensive Plan Map and regulate it through a Redmond Urban Reserve Area (RURA) Combining Zone in Deschutes County Code, Title 18. Policy 4.2.9 In cooperation with the City of Redmond adopt a RURA Agreement consistent with their respective comprehensive plans and the requirements of Oregon Administrative Rule 660-021-0050 or its successor. Policy 4.2.10 The following land use policies guide zoning in the RURA. a. Plan and zone RURA lands for rural uses, in a manner that ensures the orderly, economic and efficient provision of urban services as these lands are brought into the urban growth boundary. b. New parcels shall be a minimum of ten acres. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 EXHIBIT B c. Until lands in the RURA are brought into the urban growth boundary, zone changes or plan amendments shall not allow more intensive uses or uses that g= Pnerate more trnffirthan were allowed nrinr t^ the establishment ^f the RURA. d. For Exclusive Farm Use zones, partitions shall be allowed based on state law and the County Zoning Ordinance. e. New arterial and collector rights -of -way in the RURA shall meet the right-of- way standards of Deschutes County or the City of Redmond, whichever is greater, but be physically constructed to Deschutes County standards. f. Protect from development existing and future arterial and collector rights - of -way, as designated on the County's Transportation System Plan. g. A single family dwelling on a legal parcel is permitted if that use was permitted 'before the RURA designation. Policy 4.2.1 I Collaborate with the City of Redmond to assure that the County -owned 1,800 acres in the RURA is master planned before it is incorporated into Redmond's urban growth boundary. Goal 4 To build a strong and thriving regional economy by coordinating public investments, policies and regulations to support regional and state economic development objectives in Central Oregon. Policy 4.2.12 Deschutes County supports a multi -jurisdictional cooperative effort to pursue a regional approach to establish a short-term supply of sites particularly designed to address out -of -region industries that may locate in Central Oregon. Policy 4.2.13 Deschutes County recognizes the importance of maintaining a large -lot industrial land supply that is readily developable in Central Oregon. Policy 4.2.14 The Central Oregon Regional Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis k 1-malraw ), adopted by V►LIIIdIIce LV I J-VVL IS incorporated by reference herein. Policy 4.2.15 Within 6 months of the adoption of Ordinance 20I3-002, in coordination with the participating local governments in Central Oregon, Deschutes County shall, execute an intergovernmental agreement ("IGA") with the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council ("COIC") that specifies the process of allocation of large lot industrial sites among the participating local governments. Policy 4.2.16 In accordance with OAR 660-024-004 and 0045, Deschutes County, fulfilling coordination duties specified in ORS 195.025, shall approve and update its comprehensive plan when participating cities within their jurisdiction legislatively or through a quasi-judicial process designate regionally significant sites. Policy 4.2.17 Deschutes County supports Economic Development of Central Oregon ("EDCO"),-a non-profit organization facilitating new job creation and capital investment to monitor and advocate for the region's efforts of maintaining an - - inventory of appropriate sized and located industrial lots available to the market DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT REFERENCES EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 Policy 4.2.18 Deschutes County will collaborate with regional public and private representatives to engage the Oregon Legislature and state agencies and their commissions to address public facility, transportation and urbanization issues that hinder economic development opportunities in Central Oregon. Policy 4.2.19 Deschutes County will strengthen long-term confidence in the economy by building innovative public to private sector partnerships. 10 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT SECTION 4.2 URBANIZATION EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO.2020-002 EXHIBIT C sect�ow 522 LegUsLatWe I-t%storu Background This section contains the legislative history of this Comprehensive Plan. Table S.12.1 Comprehensive Plan Ordinance History Ordinance Date Adopted/ Effective Chapter/Section Amendment All, except Transportation, Tum alo and Terrebonne 201 I -003 - 8- 10- I -I / I i =9- I 1 Community Plans, Deschutes Junction, Comprehensive Plan update Destination Resorts and ordinances adopted in 2011 2.5, 2.6, 3.4, 3.10, IS, Housekeeping amendments to 201 1-027 10-31-1 1 / 1 1-9-1 1 4.6, 5.3, 5.8, 5.1 1, 23.40A, 23.40B, ensure a smooth transition to 23.40.065, 23.01.010 the updated Plan 2012-005 8-20-12/ 1 1-19-12 23.60, 23.64 (repealed), 3.7 (revised), Appendix C Updated Transportation (added) System Plan 2012-012 8-20-12/8-20-12 4.1, 4.2 La Pine Urban Growth Boundary ..,.. , ,... LUIL-V16 12-3-12%3-4-13 3.9 Hnl1SP.kPPnin4 amendment,, to -----------r---o-------_..._..-- -- Destination Resort Chapter Central Oregon Regional 2013-002 1-7-13/ 1-7-13 4.2 Large -lot Employment Land Need Analysis Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2C 13-009 2-6- i 3/5-8- i 3 1.3 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area Comprehensive Plan Map 2013-012 5-8-13/8-6-13 23.01.010 Amendment, including certain property within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary Newberry Country: A Plan 2013-007 5-29-13/8-27-13 3.10, 3.1 1 for Southern Deschutes County DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 Comprehensive Plan Map 2013-016 10-21-13/ 10-21-13 23.01.010 Amendment, including certain property within City of Sisters Urban Growth Boundary Comprehensive Plan Map 2014-005 2-26-14/2-26-14 23.01.010 Amendment, including certain property within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary 2014-012 4-2-14/7-1-14 3.10, 3.1 1 Housekeeping amendments to Title 23. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain 2014-021 8-27-14/ 1 1-25-14 23.01.010, 5.10 property from Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Forest to Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Utility Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing designation of certain 2014-021 8-27-14/ 1 1-25-14 23.01.010, 5.10 property from Sunriver Urban Unincorporated Community Fnrnet to Ciinrivor I Irhnn Unincorporated Community Utility Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2014-027 12-15-14/3-31-15 23.01.010, 5.10 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Industrial Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2015-021 1 1-9-15/2-22-16 23.01.010 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Surface Mining. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2015-029 1 1-23-15/ 1 1-30-15 23.01.010 designation of certain property from Tumalo Residential 5-Acre Minimum to Tumalo Industrial 2015-018 12-9-15/3-27-16 23.01.010, 2.2, 4.3 Housekeeping Amendments to Title 23. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 EXHIBIT C Comprehensive Plan Text and 2015-010 12-2-15/ 12-2-15 2.6 Map Amendment recognizing Greater -cage-Grouse Habitat Inventories Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2016-001 12-21-15/04-5-16 23.01.010; 5.10 designation of certain property from, Agriculture to Rural Industrial (exception area) Comprehensive Plan Amendment to add an exception to Statewide 2016-007 12-10-16/5-10-16 123.01.010; 5.10 I Planning Goal l I to allow sewers in unincorporated lands in Southern Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Amendment recognizing non- 2016-005 1 1-28-16/2-16-17 23.01.010, 2.2, 3.3 resource lands process allowed under State law to change EFU zoning Comprehensive plan 2016-022 9-28-16/ 1 1-14-16 23.01.010, 1.3, 4.2 Amendment, including certain proneerty within City of Bend Urban Growth Boundary Comprehensive Plan Map 0 msr+ii rvcr+t n�.n r.lei r..� 2016-029 12-14-16/ 12/28/ 16 23.01.010 designation of certain property from, Agriculture to Rural Industrial Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2017-007 10-30-17/ 10-30-17 23.01.010 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area Comprehensive Plan 2018-002 1-3-18/ 1-25-18 23.01, 2.6 Amendment permitting churches in the Wildlife Area Combining Zone 3 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 Housekeeping Amendments correcting tax lot numbers in Non -Significant Mining Mineral 2018-006 8-22-18/ 1 1-20-18 23.01.010, 5.8, 5.9 and Aggregate Inventory; modifying Goal 5 Inventory of Cultural and Historic Resources Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2018-01 1 9-12-18/ 12-1 1-18 23.01.010 designation of certain property from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, removing Flood 23.01.010, 2.5, Tumalo Plain Comprehensive Plan 2018-005 9-19-18/ 10-10-18 Community Plan, Designation; Comprehensive Newberry Country Plan Plan Amendment adding Flood Plain Combining Zone purpose statement. Comprehensive Plan Amendment allowing for the 2018-008 9-26-18/ 10-26-18 23.01.010, 3.4 potential of new properties to be designated as Rural Commercial or Rural Industrial Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment changing designation of certain property from Surface Mining 2019-002 1-2-19/4-2-19 23.01.010, 5.8 to Rural Residential Exception Area; Modifying Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Inventory; Modifying Non - Significant Mining Mineral and Aggregate Inventory Comprehensive Plan and Text 2019-001 1-16-19/4-16-19 1.3, 3.3, 4.2, 5.10, 23.01 Amendment to add a new zone to Title 19: Westside Transect Zone. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 EXHIBIT C Comprehensive Plan Map I r Amendment changing designation of certain 2019-003 02-12-19/03-12-19 23.01.010, 4.2 property from Agriculture to Redmond Urban Growth Area for the Large Lot Industrial Program Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment changing designation of certain property from Agriculture to 2019-004 02-12-19/03-12-19 23.01.010, 4.2 Redmond Urban Growth Area for the expansion of the Deschutes County Fairgrounds and relocation of Oregon Military Department National Guard Armory. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to adjust the Bend Urban Growth Boundary to accommodate the refinement of the Skyline Ranch Road alignment and the 2019-01 1 05-01-19/05- 16/ 19 23.01.010, 4.2 refinement of the West Area Master Plan Area I hnllnrlary. The ordinance also amends the Comprehensive Plan rlpcianntinn of 1 lrhan ,Aron Reserve for those lands leaving the UGB. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment, changing 2019-006 03- 13- 19/06- I I -19 23.01.010, designation of certainproperty from Agriculture to Rural Residential Exception Area Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments incorporating language from DLCD's 2014 2019-016 1 1-25-19/02-24-20 23.01.01, 2.5 Model Flood Ordinance and Establishing a purpose statement for the Flood Plain Zone. 5 DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments to provide procedures related to the 2019-019 12-1 1-19/ 12-1 1-19 23.01.01, 2.5 division of certain split zoned properties containing Flood Plain zoning and involving a former or piped irrigation canal. Comprehensive Plan and Text amendments relating to 2020-001 1-8-20/4-20-20 23.01.01, 2.6, 3.5, 5.2 Religious Institutions to ensure compliance with RLUIPA. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment to adjust the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary through an equal exchange of land to/from the Redmond UGB. The exchange property is being offered to better achieve land needs that were detailed in the 2012 SB 2020-002 2-X-20/2-X-20 23.01.01, 4.2, 5.2 1544 by providing more development ready land within the Redmond UGB. The ordinance also amends the Comprehensive Plan designation of Urban Area Reserve for those lands leaving the UGB. DESCHUTES COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — 2011 CHAPTER 5 SUPPLEMENTAL SECTIONS SECTION 5.12 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY EXHIBIT C TO ORDINANCE NO. 2020-002 1_0,14,511 INCLUSIVE LEGAL DESCRIPTION A tract of land located in the Southwest one -quarter of Section 11 and located in the Northwest one - quarter of Section 14, Township 15 North, Range 13 East, Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the West one -quarter corner Section 11 marked with a 3 1/4" Aluminum Cap; thence along the East-West centerline of said Section 11, South 89°53'52" East 1380.59 feet; thence leaving the East-West centerline of Section 11 South 0'00'00" East 52'<7.91 feet to a point on the East-West centerline Section 14; thence along the East-West centerline of Section 14 North 89°50'07" West i352.05 feet to the West one -quarter corner Section 14 marked with a 2 1/2" Brass Cap; thence along the West line of the Northwest one -quarter of Section 14 North 0°22'55" West 2638.63 feet to the Section corner common to sections 10, 11, 14, and 15 marked with a 3 1/4" Brass Cap; thence along the common line between Section 11 and Section 14 South 89°51'49" East 657.55 feet to the West -West 1/64th corner marked with a 3/4" Iron Pipe; thence North 0'14'53" West 659.55 feet to the Southwest - Southwest 1/641h corner marked with a 3/4" Iron Pipe; thence North 89°51'13" West 657.56 feet to the South -South 1/64th corner marked with a 3/4" Iron Pipe, said point also being on the West line of Section 11; thence along the West line of Section 11 North 0°14'02" West 1979.15 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described lands contain 155.80 acres of land, more or less. EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2020-002 EXHIBIT D EXCLUSIVE LEGAL DESCRIPTION A Parcel of land located in the Southeast one -quarter and Southwest one -quarter of Section 14, Township 15 North, Range 13 East, Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, more particularly described as follows: BEGINNING at the center one -quarter Section 14; thence along the East-West centerline of Section 14 South 89°50'06" East 1311.57 feet to the Center East 1/16" corner of Section 14; thence along the North -South centerline of the Southeast one -quarter of Section 14 South 0016'25" East 1596.84 feet to a point; thence leaving the North -South centerline of the Southeast one -quarter South 60°31'00" West 2123.78 feet to a point on the South line of Southwest one -quarter of Section 14; thence along said South line North 89°58'07 West 1077.47 feet to a point; thence leaving the South line of Section 14 North 0'25'21" West 2650.02 feet to a point on the East-West centerline of Section 14; thence along the East-West centerline of Section 14 South 89°50'07" East 1626.59 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. The above described lands contain 156 acres of land, more or less. EXHIBIT D TO ORDINANCE 2020-002 Legend I Proposed Urban Growth Boundary Proposed Plan Amendment Boundary a®e®� Redmond Urban Growth Boundary Comprehensive Plan AG -Agriculture SM - Surface Mining I U IWA 0 WA J, 1:4 01 "1 111111 J, �1 Exhibit "E to Ordinance 2020-002 0 312.5 625 1,250 1,875 Feet January 22, 2020 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY OREGON Patti Adair, Chair Tony DeBone, Vice Chair Philip G. Henderson, Commissioner ATTEST: Recording Secretary Dated this day of , 2020 crsectiVe 1—ale., Legend 1 No Proposed Urban Growth Boundary iI 11111 Proposed Zone Change Boundary TWINE Redmond Urban Growth Boundary Urban Holding Zone (UH10) County Zoning EFUAL - Alfalfa Subzone EFUTRB - Tumalo/Redmond/Bend Subzone SM - Surface Mining PROPOSED ZONING MAP Exhibit T" to Ordinance 2020-002 0 312.5 626 1.250 1,675 Feet January 22, 2020 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON Patti Adair, Chair Tony DeBone, Vice Chair Philip G. Henderson, Commissioner ATTEST: Recording Secretary Dated this_ day of , 2020 Effective Date: 2020 FILE NUMBERS: APPLICANT/OWNER: PROPOSAL: STAFF REVIEWER: PUBLIC HEARING DATE: HEARINGS BODY: I. APPLICABLE CRITERIA: Mailing Date: -i EXHIBIT G Tuesday, December 24, 2019 DECISION OF THE DESCHUTES COUNTY HEARINGS OFFICER 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC1 Deschutes County, Property & Facilities The Applicant requests a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The Applicant also requests a Zone Change for each area of reconfigured and exchanged land. The land being added to the UGB will change from Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) to a combination of Light Industrial (M-1) and Heavy Industrial (M-2). The land being removed from the UGB will change from a combination of M-1 and M-2 to EFU, specifically. There will be no change in the amount of industrial zoned land in the City of Redmond nor is there a change in the amount of agricultural land in Deschutes County. Cynthia Smidt, Associate Planner Cynthia.Smidt@deschutes.org 1 541-317-3150 November 19, 2019 Hearings Officer Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance Chapter 18.16. Exclusive Farm Use Zone Chapter 18.24. Redmond Urban Reserve Area Combining Zone Chapter 18.52. Surface Mining Zone Chapter 18.56. Surface Mining Impact Area Combining Zone Chapter 18.80. Airport Safety Combining Zone Chapter 18.84. Landscape Management Combining Zone Chapter 18.136. Amendments Title 20, Redmond Urban Reserve Area Chapter 20.36. Amendments 1 The Applicant submitted a concurrent request to the City of Redmond. The associated file number for the City of Redmond is 711-19-000163-PA. -l'Hj'BI T G TO OdC1 I-Tq irgCE 2020-002 EXHIBIT G Title 22, Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Chapter 2, Resource Management Chapter 3, Rural Growth Management Chapter 5, Supplemental Sections Appendix C, Transportation System Plan Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660 11. FINDINGS OF FACT: LOCATION: The subject property has an assigned address of 1002 NE 17th Street, Redmond, and identified on County Assessor's tax map 15-13 (index map) as tax lot 103. The subject property is shown in its entirety on the following map: "k, yd r , a 1 � AV E Z Subject; Property (highlighted) t� Vw f xik ate. ,✓ w V ss5 l REDMUND RED►MGtD 126 61RBAf G BOUNDARY,; Y } LOT OF RECORD: The subject property is a legal lot of record as it is recognized as Parcel 1 of Partition Plat 2001-29 and subsequently adjusted through property line adjustment LLA-01-07. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 2 of 41 EXHIBIT G ZONING AND PLAN DESIGNATIONS: The subject property is within the jurisdiction of both Deschutes County and City of Redmond. The proposal involves two areas, each approximately 156 acres in size, within the subject property that will be exchanged by Deschutes County and City of Redmond. For reference, the Inclusion and Exclusion Properties are shown below on a map submitted by the Applicant. PROPOSED UGB INCLUSION (155.150 ACRES +J-) PROPOSED UGB EXCLUSION (156ACRES 4-r j Inclusion Property: The region of property proposed to be added to the Redmond UGB — referred to as the "Inclusion Property" — is located along the eastern boundary of the current UGB. The existing zoning for this region of the property is Exclusive Farm Use - Alfalfa Subzone (EFU-AL). The existing plan designation is Agriculture. Exclusion Property: The other region of the property proposed to be removed from the Redmond UGB — referred to as the "Exclusion Property" — is located along the eastern boundary of the current Redmond UGB and abutting the southeast corner of the Inclusion Property. The existing zoning for this region of the property is Light Industrial (M-1) for approximately 111 acres and Heavy Industrial (M-2) for approximately 45 acres. The existing plan designation for this region is Urban Industrial -Light and Urban Industrial -Heavy, respectively. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 3 of 41 EXHIBIT G The subject property also includes the following Deschutes County zone designations of Surface Mining (SM) Zone, Redmond Urban Reserve Area (RURA) and the Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA), Airport Safety (AS) and Landscape Management (LM) Combining Zones. Additional Redmond UGB zoning designations include Limited Service Commercial (C-4). SITE DESCRIPTION: The subject property is approximately 1,610 acres in size and is located along the eastern boundary of the Redmond UGB. Oregon Highway 126 abuts the southern boundary of the property. The property has varying terrain with "40 feet of elevation change", according to the , and includes native vegetation such as juniper trees and groundcover (e.g. shrubs and grasses). According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) for Deschutes County and the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI), respectively, the subject property is not located in the 100-year flood plain nor does it contain mapped wetlands. Inclusion Property: The Inclusion Property consists of 156 acres of farm -zoned land but is currently vacant, not farmed, and does not contain irrigation water rights. The site is has numerous undesignated off -road vehicle roads, trails, and paths. The site has a history of being used as homeless camps. The Inclusion Property, according to the , does not have "any areas of known contamination and/or needed remediation prior to development." Exclusion Property: The Exclusion Property consists of approximately 111 acres of land zoned for light industrial and 45 acres of land zoned for heavy industrial. The site is currently vacant, not farmed, and does not contain irrigation water rights. Highway 126 is adjacent to the southern boundary of the Exclusion Property. As with the Inclusion Property, the site contains multiple undesignated off -road vehicle roads, trails, and paths. The Applicant indicates that portions of the Exclusion Site have a history of being used as a solid waste deposal site and a shooting range for the Redmond Rod and Gun Club and the Deschutes County Sherriff. The Exclusion Property's historic uses, according to the Applicant, "will require remediation prior to development." The Applicant's representation that remediation of the Exclusion Property will be required is corroborated by comments made Patrick Brady at the public hearing and in a subsequent open record submittal. SOILS: According to the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) maps of the Inclusion and Exclusion Sites, there are three mapped soil units. 35B Deschutes-Stukel complex, dry 0-8 percent slopes. This soil unit is comprised of 50 percent Deschutes soil and similar inclusions, 35 percent Stukel soil and similar inclusions, and 15 percent contrasting inclusions. The Deschutes soil is well drained with moderately rapid permeability and an available water capacity of about 4 inches. The Stukel soil is well drained, with moderately rapid permeability and an available water capacity of about two inches. The contrasting inclusions consist of Redmond soils in swales, soils that have a loamy sand surface layer, and rock outcroppings. Major uses for this soil type include livestock grazing and irrigated cropland. 104A Redmond sandy loam, 0-3 percent slopes. This soil unit is comprised of 85 percent Redmond soil and similar inclusions and 15 percent contrasting inclusions. The soil is well drained with moderate permeability and an available water capacity of about 4 inches. The contrasting inclusions consist of Buckbert, Deschutes and Houstake soils in swales, along with Stukel soils on ridges. The major use for this soil type is irrigated crop land and livestock grazing. 142B Stukel-Rock outcrop - Deschutes complex dry 0-8 percent slopes. This soil unit is comprised of 20 percent Deschutes soil and similar inclusions, 35 percent Stukel soil, 30 percent rock outcrop, and similar inclusions, and 15 percent contrasting inclusions. The Deschutes soil is well drained with moderately rapid permeability and an available water capacity of about 4 inches. The Stukel soil is well drained, with Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 4 of 41 EXHIBIT G moderately rapid permeability and an available water capacity of about two inches. The contrasting inclusions consist of Redmond and Houstake soils in swales. Major uses for this soil type include livestock grazing. SURFACE MINE DESIGNATION: The subject property includes approximately 319 acres of land identified as Surface Mining (SM) Site No. 482 on the County's Surface Mining Mineral and. Aggregate inventory and is further identified as the Negus Transfer Station and Recycle Center. The proposed Inclusion Land is just south of but does not include this region of the property. SURROUNDING LAND USES: The subject property is approximately 1,610 acres. However, the proposed land exchange is held within these 1,610 acres and includes two regions 156 acres each (312 acres total). The Applicant provides the following analysis surrounding the two subject 156-acre sites, including the remaining regions of the subject property and neighboring properties. The area surrounding the Inclusion and Exclusion lands can be described as the Redmond urban periphery. South - To the south is the Redmond - Roberts Field Municipal Airport, which is within the Redmond UGB and City Limits, zoned Airport. The Redmond - Roberts Field Municipal Airport is the major commercial airport serving Central Oregon. Southwest - To the southwest is 250 acres of vacant land owned by the Central Oregon Irrigation District ("C00"11. This land is within the Redmond UGB and City Limits, it is zoned Light Industrial ("M- 1 "), Limited Service Commercial ("C-4 "), and Park Reserve Open Space ("OSPR"). West - To the west, between the extension of Kingwood Avenue and Antler Avenue, is an M-2 zoned area that is within the Redmond UGB and City Limits. This area is being developed with industrial uses. North of the Kingwood Avenue extension (to the west), the land is located outside of the Redmond UGB and City Limits, zoned EFU-AL and Rural Residential -10 Acre Minimum ("RR-10"), and generally undeveloped or developed with low -density residential uses. North and East - The areas to the north and east contain Deschutes County owned land, located outcirle of the Redmond UGB and City Limits. These areas are zoned EFU-AL and Surface Mirie (n�if "). The Applicant also highlights those uses found on the county -owned lands located to the north and east to include the Negus Transfer Station, Redmond Area Park Recreation District sport fields, radio transmission tower, natural gas pipeline, high voltage power line, and the Antler Avenue unimproved right-of-way. Otherwise, the area is undeveloped and has relatively level topography with rock outcroppings and native vegetation. Further east are public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Most of the surrounding area lies within Redmond Urban Reserve Area. [Intentionally Left Blank] Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 5 of 41 EXHIBIT G LAND USE HISTORY: The following land use applications, identified below by their file numbers and description, relate to the subject property. With an exception of the Negus Transfer Station, the uses reviewed below are no longer located on the subject property via relocation to another property or are located on a parcel that has since been separated from the parent parcel. CU-81-89 Conditional Use permit for a ballpark in the EFU Zone V-81-29 Variance to allow advertising signs at ballpark; no decision Site Plan review for auto recycling storage yard in the M-2 Zone SP-84-41 withdrawn SP-86-51 Site Plan review for log storage and whole log chipping in the M-1 Zone Conditional Use permit for a caretaker's residence at the Redmond Rod CU-91-137 and Gun Club CU-92-165 Alteration of a Nonconforming Use to change the Negus Landfill to a SP-92-130 transfer station and recycling center; denied CU-92-214 Conditional Use permit and Site Plan review to change the Negus Landfill P-92-170 SP-92-170 to a transfer station and recycling center; approved Conditional Use permit for a caretaker's residence at the Redmond Rod CU-93-31 and Gun Club Conditional Use permit improve and relocate Redmond Rod and Gun CU-07-13 Club facilities PRPOPOSAL: The Applicant requests a Comprehensive Plan Amendment ("plan amendment") to reconfigure the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The request also includes an associated Zone Change (also known as a zone map amendment) for each area of reconfigured and exchanged land. There will be no change in the amount of industrial -zoned land in the City of Redmond, nor a change in the amount of agricultural land in Deschutes County. As described above, the region of property to be added to the Redmond UGB is referred to herein as the Inclusion Property (or Inclusion Site or Land). In addition, the region of the property proposed for removal from the Redmond UGB is referred to herein as the Exclusion Property (or Exclusion Site or Land). The proposed zone changes are illustrated on the following map provided by the . The plan designation and primary zone change information is noted below. Inclusion Property Exclusion Property Comprehensive Plan Designation Current Proposed Primary Zone Current Proposed Area (acres) Agriculture Urban Industrial EFU M-1 111 Agriculture Urban Industrial EFU M-2 45 Urban Industrial Agriculture M-1 EFU 111 Urban Industrial Agriculture M-2 EFU 45 Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 6 of 41 EXHIBIT G The County combining zone change information is noted below. Inclusion Property I RURA, SMIA, AS I -- Exclusion Property I -- I RURA, AS PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS: The Planning Division mailed notice to several agencies and received the following comments. Deschutes County Transportation Planner: On November 8, 2019, Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner submitted the following comments. I havereviewedthe materials for 247-19-000648-PA/649-ZC, which involves a transfer of 156 acres ^f (u"ntyInnuytltle �ioCtyRillUtrtIra..UU11L f iof ccliwil/uld ulu UUJ-Nly he UUUl Growth Boundary for property described on the County Assessor Map at 15-13-00, Tax Lot 103 along the eastern side of Redmond. The exchange would remove less developable lands from the UGB in exchange for including more developable lands. The burden of proof included a traffic analysis dated Aug. 19, 2019, prepared by Transight Consulting to assess compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 12 (Transportation) and the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). The traffic study also assessed consistency with the TPR work related to the Senate Bill (SB)1544 land exchange from 2012. I agree with the traffic report's methodology, conclusions, and recommendations and find it complies with the TPR. The following agencies did not respond or had no significant comments: Central Electric Cooperative, Central Oregon Irrigation District, Deschutes County Assessor, Deschutes County Road Department, Deschutes County Seninr Tronc—r+a+inn Planner Or..gon Department of A .:. : r+ _ __ r�____�_--'-. -c ' ----' _ . ." �..,. ....., F...u..w�� un��c�, vI c6VII vcNal Ln lcl L of MVId LIV11, %ilugU11 UCPd1L111C11L UI Ld11U Curlservation and Development, Oregon Department of Transportation, Pacific Power and Light, Redmond Airport, Redmond Area Parks and Recreation District, Redmond Fire and Rescue, Redmond Planning Division, Redmond Public Works, Bureau of Land Management — Prineville District, and Watermaster — District 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS: The Planning Division sent notice of this proposal to all property owners within 750 feet of the subject property. The following comments were submitted by Izaac Ross and Jenni Carver -Ross on October 25, 2019. We are writing today so that we can express our concern for the proposed zone change outlined in this application (e.g. File Numbers: 247-1900648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC and 711-19-000163-PA). We want to be clear that we do not approve of this zone change under the said proposal. The proposed zone change excludes our lot which is positioned between the current UGB and the lots in question. Logically our lot should be brought into the UGB before the lot(s) in the said proposal or at the least in conjunction with the said lots. Jenni and I propose two options. Please accept this rebuttal or appeal into the overall conversation. We will also plan to attend the public hearing to voice -our concern. 1. Combine our lot into the proposal. This exchange would bring our land into the [UGB] and change the zoning from Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) to a combination of Light Industrial (M-1) and Heavy Industrial (M-2). Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 7 of 41 EXHIBIT G 2. Deny the proposal in the said re -zoning application (e.g. File Numbers: 247- 1900648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC and 711-19-000163-PA). The Applicant provides the following response on November 1, 2019 (referenced aerial photo is incorporated herein by reference). Thank you for forwarding the comment letter from the Ross'. The attached aerial photo shows the relationship between the Ross" property and the Inclusion Area of the UGB adjustment application. While the Ross' are correct that their property abuts the overall property (1513000000103), it does not adjoin the inclusion area which is the subject of the application. Also, since this is a quasi-judicial application specific to an "acre for acre" adjustment and not a legislative UGB expansion for additional industrial lands, their proposal to include their property in the Redmond UGB as part of this project is not applicable. The Hearings Officer agrees with the Applicant's response to the above comments. For the reasons explained below, this is a quasi-judicial acre -for -acre adjustment; not a legislative amendment. Mr. Ross and Ms. Carver - Ross may wish to discuss with the City of Redmond and Deschutes County what options there are for bringing their property into the UGB. However, this is not the property proceeding for doing so. As noted above, Mr. Brady testified at the public hearing and provided additional written comments during the open record period. Mr. Brady is the Chairman of a business called EzraTerra, which "acquires contaminated properties for cleanup and redevelopment." P. Brady, Open Record Submittal, pg. 1.2 Mr. Brady expresses concerns that the County has not exercised due care in protecting the public from toxic dusts. In short, Mr. Brady contends contamination and drug use on the Exclusion Property will limit development opportunities and, by rezoning to EFU, the Exclusion Property will remain in state of blight that threatens public health. Accordingly, according to Mr. Brady, the proposal violates various approval criteria and Comprehensive Plan policies. The criteria and policies identified by Mr. Brady are as follows: Deschutes County Code 18.16.010. Purpose (EFU Zone) 18.84.020. Applicant of Provisions (Landscape Management Combining Zone) 18.136.020. Rezoning Standards (subsections A, B, & D) Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.9. Environmental Quality Policy 3.5. Natural Hazards The Hearings Officer will address the cited approval criteria and policies below. NOTICE REQUIREMENT: The Applicant complied with the posted notice requirements of Section 22.24.030(B) of Deschutes County Code (DCC) Title 22. The Applicant submitted a Land Use Action Sign Affidavit, dated October 30, 2019 indicating the Applicant posted notice of the land use action on October 30, 2019. z The subject line in Mr. Brady's open record submittal notes that the record was only held open five days. This appears to be mistake, but to ensure that the record is clear, the Hearings Officer notes the record was held open seven days (November 19th to November 26th) Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 8 of 41 EXHIBIT G REVIEW PERIOD: The applications for 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC were submitted to the Planning Division on August 23, 2019. According to Deschutes County Code (DCC) 22.20.040(D), the review of the proposed quasi-judicial plan amendment application is not subject to the 150-day review period. III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: In order to approve the comprehensive plan amendment and zone change request, the proposal must comply with the criteria found in statutes, statewide planning goals and guidelines and their implementing administrative rules, County comprehensive plan, and land use procedures ordinance. Each of these approval criteria is addressed in the findings below. Title 18, Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance CHAPTER 18.16. EXCLUSIVE FARM USE ZONES Section 18.16.010. Purpose. A. The purpose of the Exclusive Farm Use zones is to preserve and maintain agricultural lands and to serve as a sanctuary for farm uses. B. The purposes of this zone are served by the land use restrictions set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and in ®CC 18.16 and by the restrictions on private civil actions and enforcement actions set forth in ORS 30.930 through 30.947. FINDING: The Applicant requests a plan amendment and zone change to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The land being added to the UGB will change from EFU zoning to a combination of Light and Heavy Industrial (M-1 and M-2, respectively). The land being removed from the UGB will change from a combination of M-1 and M-2 to EFU, specifically. There are differing opinions as to the importance of DCC 18.16.010. The Applicant takes the position that the "applicable criteria are intended to assess what property is most appropriate to be included within an established [UGB] ..." Further, the Applicant takes the position that at the time future use occurs Exclusion Property, "the suggested remediation actions will be employed." J. Lewis, Applicant Rebuttal, pgs. 1-2. On the other hand, Mr. Brady implies that because the Exclusion Property will be taken out of Industrial and put into EFU zoning, the Exclusion Property must be examined to determine whether appropriate for farm use. P. Brady, Open Record Submittal, pg. 3. His contention is that "due to the extensive RCRA characteristic hazardous waste lead soils, landfill debris and apparent residual AFFF fire fighting foam contamination" the Exclusion Property will not support farming or livestock operations. As noted above, the Applicant believes that at the time the property is put to farm use remediation of the Exclusion Property will be employed. There is an open question as to what remediation is necessary. Some remediation is more affordable than others. While remediation may increase the cost to allow the property to be put into farm use, because remediation is a possibility, the Hearings Officer finds the Exclusion Property will nonetheless be preserved for farm use and serve as a sanctuary for farm use. Lastly, nothing in DCC 18.16.010 requires that, in a case like this, where there is an acre -for -acre exchange, that the new farm land must be of the same quality as the old farm land. For these reasons, the Hearings Officer finds the general statements contained in DCC 18.16.010 are met. That said, DCC 18.16.010 is a purpose statement. The Hearings Officer believes DCC 18.16.010 is a generally worded expression of a goal or objective to preserve farm land. See Beck v. City of Tillamook, 20 Or LUBA 178, Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 9 of 41 EXHIBIT G 185-186 (1990). Nothing in DCC 18.16.010 imposes an affirmative duty to consider the language as an approval criterion. Thus, as an alternative to the Hearings Officer's above finding, he also notes DCC 18.16.010, as a purpose statement, may not be an approval criterion. CHAPTER 18.24. REDMOND URBAN RESERVE AREA COMBINING ZONE Section 18.24.10. Purposes. The Redmond Urban Reserve Area (RURA) Combining Zone implements the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan for those areas designated as urban reserve. The RURA Combining Zone maintains lands for rural uses in accordance with state law, but in a manner that ensures a range of opportunities for the orderly, economic, and efficient provision of urban serves [sic] when these lands are included in the Redmond Urban Growth Boundary. Section 18.24.070. Limitations for Future Urban Development The following limitations shall apply to uses allowed by DCC 18.24.020 and 18.24.030. Zone changes and plan amendments involving land within the RURA Combining Zone and Multiple Use Agricultural, Surface Mining, or Rural Residential zoning districts that propose more intensive uses, including higher residential density, than currently allowed are prohibited. FINDING: The proposed Inclusion Property falls within the RURA Combining Zone while the Exclusion Property falls within the UGB but not the RURA. As proposed, the RURA Zone will be removed from the Inclusion Property and added to the Exclusion Property intended future urban development as documented in the Redmond Eastside Framework Plan. However, the proposal does not include uses that are more intensive then what is already permitted in each respective zone. In this case, the RURA is not in combination of the Multiple Use Agricultural or Rural Residential zoning districts. The proposed inclusion Property is adjacent to but does not include the Surface Mining Zone. CHAPTER 18.52. SURFACE MINING ZONE Section 18.52.010. Purpose. The purposes of the Surface Mining Zone are: A. To implement the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, FINDING: The overall subject property includes approximately 319 acres of land identified as Surface Mine Site No. 482 on the County's Surface Mining Mineral and Aggregate Inventory and is further identified as the Negus Transfer Station and Recycle Center. The Applicant's request for a plan amendment and zone change involves land zoned EFU and a combination of M-1 and M-2 that fall within the Redmond UGB. According to the Applicant, the proposed Inclusion Property is just south of but does not include the SM-zoned region of the subject property. The Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies associated with the SM Zone are addressed below. In addition, a SMIA Zone change is addressed in the following finding under DCC 18.56.020. The Hearings Officer notes that the effect of the proposed conversion of lands will remove the protections currently afforded to the neighboring surface mine operation. Notwithstanding said removal of protections the Hearings Officer finds the proposed amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 10 of 41 EXHIBIT G CHAPTER 18.56. SURFACE MINING IMPACT AREA COMBINING ZONE Section 18.56.020. Location. The SMIA zone shall apply to all property located within one half mile of the boundary of a surface mining zone. However, the SMIA zone shall not apply to any property located within an urban growth boundary, city or other county. The extent and location of the SMIA Zone shall be designated at the time the adjacent surface mining zone is designated. FINDING: The request for a plan amendment and zone change, if approved, will reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. A portion of the Inclusion Property falls within the Surface Mining Impact Area Combining Zone (SMIA) associated with Surface Mining Site No. 482 (Negus Transfer Station). This transition from County - zoned lands to Redmond UGB-zoned lands would also remove the existing County SMIA zoning from this portion of the Inclusion Property. As stated in the foregoing finding, the exchange of land and change to the SMIA Zone essentially removes the protections that are afforded to Site No. 482 in this area. The Hearings Officer is unaware of similar protections to protect surface mining areas from uses within Redmond's UGB. As noted, the Negus Transfer Station, operated and owned by Deschutes County, did not express concern about the rezone and plan amendment due to the potential impact on the landfill. As a result, the Hearings Officer assumes the risk of potential noise or dust sensitive uses on the Inclusion Property must be limited. Moreover, both staff and Applicant represented that the proposed zoning likely does not permit noise or dust sensitive uses, thus leading to no reduction in Goal 5 protection. No party contended otherwise. The Exclusion Property is further south of the SM Site No. 482 and does not include the associated SMIA designation. Therefore, rezoning the Exclusion Property will not affect the SMIA. All that said, DCC 18.56.020 merely describes the location of the SMIA Combining Zone. As best that the Hearings Officer can tell, this Section of the Code merely clarifies that Chapter 18.56 will not apply to the Inclusion Property once brought into the UGB. Nothing in DCC 18.56.020 prohibits the Inclusion Property from being brought into the UGB and, consequently, out of the SMIA. Again, the Hearings Officer finds it telling that the owner of Surface Mining No. 482 did not express any concern and assumes Deschutes County, as the owner/operator of the landfill, is not concerned that future property owners in the inclusion Property might complain about the Negus Transfer Station. CHAPTER 18.80. AIRPORT SAFETY COMBINING ZONE Section 18.80.020. Application of Provisions. The provisions of DCC 18.80.020 shall only apply to unincorporated areas located under airport imaginary surfaces and zones, including approach surfaces, transitional surfaces, horizontal surfaces, conical surfaces and runway protection zones. While DCC 18.80 identifies dimensions for the entire imaginary surface and zone, parts of the surfaces and/or zones do not apply within the Redmond, Bend or Sisters Urban Growth Boundaries. The Redmond Airport is owned and operated by the City of Redmond, and located wholly within the Redmond City Limits.... FINDING: The lands proposed for exchange are entirely within the County Airport Safety Combining Zone (AS) associated with the Redmond Airport (Robert's Field). City of Redmond has land use regulations that also protect the Redmond Airport. This transition from County -zoned lands to Redmond UGB-zoned lands, as proposed, will remove the existing County AS zoning from the Inclusion Property and add the County AS zoning Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 11 of 41 to the Exclusion Property. A similar exchange of zoning regulations will occur within the Redmond UGB as proposed. Transportation and airport policies are discussed below in more detail. The Hearings Officer finds the proposal is not subject to the County AS Zone review as no development is proposed at this time for the Exclusion Property. When development is proposed in the future, the County will review compliance with AS Zone regulations. Section 18.80.026. Notice of Land Use and Permit Applications. Except as otherwise provided herein, written notice of applications for land use or limited land use decisions, including comprehensive plan or zoning amendments, in an area within this overlay zone, shall be provided to the airport sponsor and the Department of Aviation in the same manner as notice is provided to property owners entitled by law to written notice of land use or limited land use applications. (ORS 836.623(1); OAR 738-100-010; ORS 215.416(6); ORS 22Z175(6)] For the Redmond, Bend, Sunriver, and Sisters airports: A. Notice shall be provided to the airport sponsor and the Department of Aviation when the property, or a portion thereof, that is subject to the land use or limited land use application is located within 10,000 feet of the sides or ends of a runway: B. Notice of land use and limited land use applications shall be provided within the following timelines. 1. Notice of land use or limited land use applications involving public hearings shall be provided prior to the public hearing at the same time that written notice of such applications is provided to property owners entitled to such notice. 2. Notice of land use or limited land use applications not involving public hearings shall be provided at least 20 days prior to entry of the initial decision on the land use or limited land use application. 3. Notice of the decision on a land use or limited land use application shall be provided to the airport sponsor and the Department of Aviation within the same timelines that such notice is provided to parties to a land use or limited land use proceeding. 4. Notices required under DCC 18.80.026(8)(1-3) need not be provided to the airport sponsor or the Department of Aviation where the land use or limited land use application meets all of the following criteria: a. Would only allow structures of less than 35 feet in height; b. Involves property located entirely outside the approach surface; c. Does not involve industrial, mining or similar uses that emit smoke, dust or steam; sanitary landfills or water impoundments; or radio, radiotelephone, television or similar transmission facilities or electrical transmission lines; and d. Does not involve wetland mitigation, enhancement, restoration or creation. FINDING: As stated in the Staff Report, the Planning Division mailed notice of the proposed land use application and scheduled public hearing at the same time that written notice of such applications was provided to property owners entitled to such notice. Per the Staff Report, notice was also mailed to Oregon Department of Aviation and Redmond Airport. No comments were received. CHAPTER 18.84. LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT COMBINING ZONE Section 18.84.020. Application of Provisions. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to all areas within one-fourth mile of roads identified as landscape management corridors in the Comprehensive Plan and the County Zoning Map. The provisions of this chapter shall also apply to all areas within the boundaries of a State scenic waterway or Federal wild and scenic river corridor and all areas within 660 feet of rivers and streams otherwise identified a landscape Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 12 of 41 EXHIBIT G management corridors in the comprehensive plan and the County Zoning Map. The distance specified above shall be measured horizontally from the centerline of designated landscape management roadways or from the nearest ordinary high water mark of a designated landscape management river or stream. The limitation in this section shall not unduly restrict accepted agricultural practices. FINDING: Highway 126 is identified on the County Zoning Map as the landscape management feature. Pursuant to the Staff Report, the Exclusion Property is adjacent to, but outside of, the County LM Zone. The Inclusion Property, further north from Highway 126, does not fall within the LM Zone. The location of the LM Zone will not be affected by this amendment. Mr. Brady notes that the Exclusion Property, which is adjacent to Hwy 126, is a blight. He contends that if rezoned to EFU, "all value will be removed from the site and guarantee perpetual blight conditions in the foreseeable future." P. Brady, Open Record Submittal, pg. 4. As noted above, Staff indicates that the Exclusion Property is not within the LM zone. Even if the _Exclusion Property is in the LM zone, the LM Zone will remain applicable and apply to future development of the property. In other words, changing the underlying zone will not impact the protections of the LM zone. Moreover, the Hearings Officer finds that, while Mr. Brady's position raises a legitimate public concern, it does not explain how the concern can be addressed by applying DCC 18.84.020. CHAPTER 18.136. AMENDMENTS Section 18.136.010. Amendments. DCC Title 18 may be amended as set forth in DCC 18.136. The procedures for text or legislative map changes shall be as set forth in DCC 22.12. A request by a property owner for a quasi-judicial map amendment shall be accomplished by filing an application on forms provided by the Planning_ Department and shall be subiect to applicable procedures of DCC Title 22. FINDING: The Applicant requests a quasi-judicial map amendment to change the comprehensive plan designation and zone from/to Agriculture to/from Urban Industrial. The Applicant filed the appropriate applications for a plan amendment and zone change. The proposal is being reviewed under the procedures of DCC Title 72. Section 18.136.020. Rezoning Standards. The Applicant for a quasi-judicial rezoning must establish that the public interest is best served by rezoning the property. Factors to be demonstrated by the Applicant are: A. That the change conforms with the Comprehensive Plan, and the change is consistent with the plan's introductory statement and goals. FINDING: In previous Hearings Officer's decisions, the Hearings Officers have found that comprehensive plan goals and policies do not constitute mandatory approval criteria for quasi-judicial zone changes. This Hearings Officer agrees. Instead, County goals and policies are implemented through the zoning ordinance, and thus if the proposed zone change is consistent with the applicable provisions of the zoning ordinance it also will be consistent with the plan. Nevertheless, some provisions of Deschutes County's comprehensive plan are the relevant provisions of the plan that should be considered in reviewing applications to change the zoning of EFU to a plan designation of Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 13 of 41 EXHIBIT G urban industrial and Redmond zoning of Light and Heavy Industrial. Similarly, the relevant provisions should be considered to change the zoning of Redmond Light and Heavy Industrial to a plan designation of agriculture and zoning of EFU. Those relevant to this application, including the provisions cited by Mr. Brady, are addressed below. Other provisions of the plan do not apply. B. That the change in classification for the subject property is consistent with the purpose and intent of the proposed zone classification. FINDING: For the Inclusion Property, the Applicant proposes a zone change from EFU to Redmond Light Industrial (M-1) and Heavy Industrial (M-2). Similarly, for the Exclusion Property, an equal area of land is proposed to change from Redmond Light Industrial (M-1) and Heavy Industrial (M-2) to EFU. Mr. Brady contends that the Exclusion Property is better suited to serve the purpose and needs of the existing zoning designation (industrial). His argument is based on the premise that the current zoning keep the value of the property high enough that remediation makes financial sense. In other words, if that is the case, it is more likely that a developer will pay for remediation to address the existing contamination. Mr. Brady also explains that the contamination and drug use on the Exclusion Property has deterred development on nearby property. He lists several properties that have gone unsold and explains his belief that the reason they have not sold is the result of the condition of the Exclusion Property. Even if Mr. Brady is correct, the Hearings Officer is unsure how that relates to this standard. As the Applicant explains, and the Hearings Officer agrees, the Inclusion Property is more well suited for industrial use because it nearer services and fits into the existing development pattern. Regarding the Exclusion Property, the purpose of the EFU zone, as noted above, is to preserve agricultural land. Although it has its blemishes, the Exclusion Property will be preserved as farm land. Nothing requires that the farmland be immediately farmable. Inclusion Property: Since the Inclusion Property is closer to current development and services (including planned services), the Hearings Officer finds the Inclusion Property is more readily developable than the Exclusion Property for urban level development, and thus the exchange would better address the purpose and intent of the proposed zone classifications (Redmond Light Industrial, M-1, and Heavy Industrial, M-2). Exclusion Property: Since the Exclusion Property is further from urban services and development, it is better suited for farm use. Although the Exclusion Property will require remediation, the Applicant is working on addressing remediation requirements with the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality and will employ the required remediation before future farm use. Moreover, it is not lost on the Hearings Officer that the Inclusion Property (nearer and more impacted by urban development) is not in active farm use. Neither parcel appears to be real ideal for farm use. The Exclusion Property will serve the same purpose as the Inclusion Property; 156 acre'/_ to preserve land for future farm use. Thus, the Hearings Officer finds that the change in classification for the Exclusion Property from industrial to agriculture is consistent with the intent of the EFU zone. C. That changing the zoning will presently serve the public health, safety and welfare considering the following factors: 1. The availability and efficiency of providing necessary public services and facilities. 2. The impacts on surrounding land use will be consistent with the specific goals and policies contained within the Comprehensive Plan. FINDING: The proposed land exchange has the intention to support orderly, efficient, and cost-effective siting of urban public facilities and services for the industrial lands within the Redmond UGB. The proposed Inclusion Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 14 of 41 EXHIBIT G Property is adjacent to a grid street system, wherein utilities, facilities, and streets would be able to be extended and provided in the road rights -of -way. The Exclusion Property, in comparison, contains locational and topographical constraints, as it is further away from these facilities and services. Moreover, the Exclusion Property will require remediation of the site based on historic use of the property. As discussed throughout this decision, the impacts on surrounding land use will be consistent with the specific goals and policies contained within the County Comprehensive Plan. D. That there has been a change in circumstances since the property was last zoned, or a mistake was made in the zoning of the property in question. FINDING: The Applicant requests a plan amendment and zone change to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The Inclusion Property will change from EFU zoning to a combination of Light and Heavy industrial (M-1 and M-2, respectively). The Exclusion Property will change from a combination of M-1 and M-2 industrial zoning to EFU, specifically. The Applicant states the following regarding the change in circumstances. Since the area of the Exclusion Site (and surrounding properties) was brought into the City of Redmond UGB to accommodate a regional large lot industrial land need other industrial land in the City of Redmond have continued to develop extending facilities and service along the eastern boundary of the City Limits. During this time of development, the County (land owner) has attempted to develop and/or market the property. The ongoing property assessment has uncovered the fact that with recent development, the Exclusion property is a greater distance away from developed facilities and services and the Inclusion Site is more readily developable. The recent development pattern provides an adequate change in circumstance, to necessitate the need to revise location of the UGB to accommodate Large Lot Industrial Land. (emphasis added) On the other hand, Mr. Brady contends that there has been no change in circumstances. P. Bradv, Open Record Submittal, pg. 11. Instead, he believes what the Applicant cites as a change of circumstance is merely a symptom of the contamination and drug use on the Exclusion Property. The Hearings Officer agrees with Mr. Brady that the failure of the property to sell or be traded to the Department of State Lands is not relevant to this criterion. However, the fact that other industrial land in the Citv of Redmond has continued to develop, extending facilities and services along the eastern boundary, making the Inclusion Property more readily developable is a change of circumstance. The Hearings Officer, finds there has been a change in circumstances that represents a change in circumstances under this criterion. Title 20, Redmond Urban Reserve Area Ordinance CHAPTER 20.36. AMENDMENTS Section 20.36.010. Authorization to Initiate Amendments A. An amendment to the text of DCC Title 20 or a legislative amendment to a zoning or plan map may be initiated by either the City, the Board, Planning Commission or an Owner. B. Quasi-judicial plan map amendments shall be initiated by an Owner. C. An Owner shall initiate a request for an amendment by filing an application with the Director.. FINDING: The Applicant is requesting a quasi-judicial UGB reconfiguration together with a Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan amendment and zone change. The proposal has been initiated by owner, Deschutes County, by filing concurrent applications with the City of Redmond and Deschutes County. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 15 of 41 EXHIBIT G Section 20.36.020. Zone -Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The Hearings Body shall hold a public hearing on a quasi-judicial zone change or Comprehensive Plan amendment in accordance with the provisions of the Joint Management Agreement. FINDING: The Applicant submitted a copy of the joint Management Agreement between the City of Redmond and Deschutes County (DC Document No. 2007-110). The initial public hearings were held before a County Hearings Officer and the Redmond Planning Commission for their respective applications. The Deschutes County Board of Commissioners is the final local review body for the applications before the County. Section 20.36.030. Criteria for Map Amendments. For all zoning or Comprehensive Plan map amendments, the Applicant shall show the proposed change: A. Conforms with the applicable state statutes; B. Conforms with the applicable state wide planning goals and Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) whenever they are determined to be applicable; C. Conforms with the City Comprehensive Plan. FINDING: As detailed throughout this report, the Hearings Officer finds the proposal before the County for the UGB reconfiguration, plan amendment, and zone change conforms to the applicable state statutes, state wide planning goals, and Oregon Administrative Rules. Conformance with the Redmond Comprehensive Plan will be reviewed as part of the city process. Section 20.36.040. Legislative Amendment Procedure. Except as set forth herein, legislative zone, plan or map changes shall be heard pursuant to the procedures set forth in the joint Management Agreement. FINDING: The Applicant is requesting a quasi-judicial plan and map amendment. Although this criterion is not applicable, the Hearings Officer believes that this application has been and will be processed in accordance with the procedures of the Joint Management Agreement between the City of Redmond and Deschutes County. Section 20.36.050. Limitations on Reapplications. A. No application of a owner for an amendment to the text of DCC Title 20, to the City Comprehensive Plan map or to the Title 20 zoning map shall be considered by the Hearings Body within a six month period immediately following a previous denial application. B. If, in the opinion of the Hearings Body, however, new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it, the Hearings Body may permit a new application. FINDING: In the event that reapplication becomes necessary, the Hearings Officer cites them to that Applicant understands that these provisions will apply. [Intentionally Left Blank] Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 16 of 41 EXHIBIT G Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan CHAPTER 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING Section 1.3 Land Use Planning Goals and Policies Goal Maintain an open and public land use process in which decisions are based on the objective evaluation of facts. FINDING: The Applicant requests a plan amendment and zone change to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The adjustment is necessitated by a change in circumstances (as explained above), which are based the evaluation of on development patterns and available services as it relates to the regional large lot industrial lands program (County Ordinance 2013-002). The County will follow procedures outlined in Title 22, the Deschutes County Development Procedures Ordinance, in order to ensure a land use process that is open and based on objective evaluation of facts. Goal 2 Promote regional cooperation and partnerships on planning issues. FINDING: The proposal requires review from both the City of Redmond and Deschutes County. The Applicant submitted concurrent applications to both jurisdictions. A public hearing was held before the Hearings Officer on November 19, 2019. In addition, the City of Redmond held public hearing on November 18, 2019 before its Planning Commission. Furthermore, the Applicant met with County and City staff to discuss their proposal. Given the structure of the UGB amendment process and the Applicant's willingness to engage both the County and the City, the Hearings Officer concludes this proposal is based on a cooperative partnership process for regional planning and is consistent with this goal. CHAPTER 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Section 2.2 Agricultural Lands Goals and Policies Goal 1 Preserve and maintain agricultural lands and the agricultural industry. Policy 2.2.1 Retain agricultural lands through Exclusive Farm Use zoning. FINDING: The Applicant requests a plan amendment and zone change to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The Inclusion Property falls within the Redmond Urban Reserve Area Combining Zone. The Exclusion Property falls within the UGB but not the RURA. As proposed, the RURA Zone will be removed from the Inclusion Property and added to the Exclusion Property intended future urban development as documented in the Redmond Eastside Framework Plan. The proposed Inclusion Property will change from Comprehensive Plan designated and zoned EFU to a combination of Light and Heavy Industrial (M-1 and M-2, respectively). The proposed Exclusion Property will change from a combination of M-1 and M-2 industrial zoning to Comprehensive Plan designated and zoned EFU. As noted previously, both the Inclusion and Exclusion Lands have similar soil types, vegetation, and are devoid of water for irrigation. The Applicant states that these two areas are "substantially equivalent" and thus "the exchange of the lands will retain an equal amount of Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 17 of 41 EXHIBIT G agricultural land and EFU zoned land in Deschutes County." The Hearings Officer notes that the Exclusion Property does have contamination issues that do not exist on the Inclusion Property. However, because the EFU zone is intended to preserve agricultural land, which can be accomplished regardless of contamination, and because it is an acre -for -acre exchange, this policy goal is achieved. Policy 2.2.3 Allow comprehensive plan and zoning map amendments, including for those that qualify as non -resource land, for individual EFU parcels as allowed by State Statute, Oregon Administrative Rules and this Comprehensive Plan. FINDING: As detailed in the Findings of Fact above, the Applicant requests a plan amendment and zone change (zone map amendment). The County allows this request. Moreover, the proposed amendments are allowed by all applicable Oregon State Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules (see above and below). Goa13 Ensure Exclusive Farm Use policies, classifications and codes are consistent with local and emerging agricultural conditions and markets. Policy 2.2.13 Identify and retain accurately designated agricultural lands. FINDING: Similar to Policy 2.2.1 discussed above, the proposal includes a substantially equivalent exchange of land that will maintain the same amount of Comprehensive Plan designated and farm -zoned (EFU) land in Deschutes County. The proposal involves a reconfiguration of the Redmond UGB by adding 156 acres into the UGB in exchange for removing the same amount of land from the UGB. The Inclusion Land will change from a Comprehensive Plan designated and farm -zoned area to a combination of Light and Heavy Industrial zoning. In return, the proposed Exclusion Property will change from a combination of Light and Heavy Industrial zoning to Comprehensive Plan designated and farm -zoned. As noted previously, both the Inclusion and Exclusion Lands have similar soil types, vegetation, and are devoid of water for irrigation. Based on this information, the proposal is consistent with this policy. Section 2.3 Forest Lands FINDING: The proposal does not impact any forest lands. Therefore, the provisions of this section are not applicable. Section 2.5 Water Resources FINDING: The proposal does not impact any water resources and thus this section is not applicable. Section 2.6 Wildlife FINDING: The proposal does not affect lands identified in the County's Goal 5 inventories for the protection of wildlife and thus the provisions of this section are not applicable. Section 2.7 Open Spaces, Scenic Views and Sites FINDING: As noted previously, a portion of the subject property falls within the Highway 126 scenic view corridor and thus includes the associated Landscape Management Combining Zone. The Exclusion Property is adjacent to, but outside of, the County LM Zone. The Inclusion Property, which is further north of Highway 126, does not fall within the LM Zone. Based on this information, the proposal does not impact any lands that have been designated open space, scenic views and thus provisions of this section are not applicable. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 18 of 41 EXHIBIT G Section 2.8 Energy Resources Background Land use decisions often have a direct effect on energy use and conservation. How communities and buildings are designed and what transportation and utility options are available all impact energy usage. Energy is addressed in the Oregon land use system through Statewide Planning Goal 13, Energy, which requires land uses to be managed for energy conservation, based on sound economic principles. A prime method of managing land for energy conservation is to design communities to be compact and walkable, so as to limit the need for automobiles and conserve fossil fuel. For a rural county, these types of transportation related energy savings are limited. Instead the County can focus on other conservation measures. The second energy issue to be addressed is how to promote alternative energy generation, while managing the inevitable impacts. The impacts and problems stemming from traditional fossil fuel energy sources such as oil and coal are clear, but little agreement exists over a solution. As of 2010 there is an emphasis on promoting sustainable, alternative power generation from wind, solar, biomass, hydroelectric or geothermal. FINDING: Although the goals and policies of the energy resources section are not specifically relevant to the proposal, the Applicant states the following as it relates the above noted background of the resource. The proposed land exchange will improve upon the location of 156 acres of land that is intended for urban industrial development. The proposed land exchange and associated Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Zoning Map Amendment will relocate urban land for industrial development to a location that is closer to existing urban water, sewer, and transportation facilities, along with utilities. The proposed land exchange will facilitate a more compact development pattern and better manage land for energy conservation, which is consistent with this section. The Hearings Officer agrees with the Applicant. Section 2.9 Environmental Quality Background ... Two primary methods for the County to promote careful stewardship of the environment are by setting a good example through County actions and by providing information to the community on a variety of environmental issues. Additionally the County can thoughtfully manage the impacts of growth on the environment in cooperation with other agencies, organizations and jurisdictions. FINDING: The Applicant notes that the proposed Inclusion Property does not have any known areas of contamination and/or needed remediation prior to development. The Applicant further notes that based on the historic use of being shooting ranges for the Redmond Rod and Gun Club and the Deschutes County Sheriff and an unpermitted disposal area, the Exclusion Property will require remediation prior to development. The Applicant has indicated that a very specific remediation plan has been prepared by APEX, an environmental consulting firm. The remediation plan is currently under review by Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). According to the remediation plan, as stated by the Applicant, the nature and extent of the contamination appears to be confined to the surface of the soils. Based on the groundwater depths of greater than 300 feet, Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 19 of 41 EXHIBIT G together with the type of contamination, the report notes that contamination does not impact groundwater. Contaminants are primarily "lead associated with shot and bullets, and benzo(a)pyrene from binders in clay pigeons." The unofficial disposal area includes low concentrations of metals and organic chemicals, according to the report, that have not migrated to underlying soil. Mr. Brady appears to contend that, since the County is the responsible party, the findings should be treated cautiously. See P. Brady, Open Record Submittal, pg. 13. For the sake of this Decision, the Hearings Officer will assume that Mr. Brady is correct that the County is the responsible party. In that regard, the Hearings Officer agrees that statements made by the County should be reviewed with some level of skepticism. However, the County's representations appear to be based on the recommendation of a 3rd party consultant that is an expert in this area. More importantly, though, the County does not appear to be hiding information from the public regarding the condition of this Exclusion Property and is work with the DEQ to address issues on the Exclusion Property. Those actions are consistent with the Policy. The Hearings Officer finds that rezoning the two areas will not affect the quality of the air, water, and land resources. Deschutes County has adopted policies to protect the air, water, and land resources and to situate pollution -causing development accordingly. Moreover, the remediation plan for the Exclusion Property will ensure clean-up of the property will be completed in conjunction with development and will meet all DEQ requirements. The proposed land exchange, however, will allow for more compact development pattern by incorporating the Inclusion Property in the Redmond UGB The proposed land exchange was devised through the cooperation of County and City agencies to manage growth impacts to the environment, specifically this eastern region of the City of Redmond. Section 2.10 Surface Mining Goals and Policies Goal Protect and utilize mineral and aggregate resources while minimizing adverse impacts of extraction, processing and transporting the resource. Policy 2.10.1 Goal 5 mining inventories, ESEEs and programs are retained and not repealed. FINDING: The overall subject property includes approximately 319 acres of land identified as SM Site No. 482 on the County's Surface Mining Mineral and Aggregate Inventory and is further identified as the Negus Transfer Station and Recycle Center. As proposed, the Inclusion Property is just south of, but does not include, the SM-zoned region of the subject property. The Inclusion Property, as proposed, will be zoned M-1 and M- 2, both of which will allow for landfills and similar uses. The request for a plan amendment and zone change, if approved, will reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. A portion of the Inclusion Property falls within the SMIA Zone associated with Site No. 482. The Goal 5 mine resource is protected by the SMIA Zone. This transition, however, from County -zoned lands to Redmond UGB- zoned lands would remove the SMIA zoning from this portion of the Inclusion Property and thus removes the protections that are afforded to Site No. 482 in this area. While similar protections within Redmond UGB do not appear to exist, no one contends the proposed industrial zoning will permit new noise or dust sensitive uses. Thus, there is likely no reduction in Goal 5 protection. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 20 of 41 EXHIBIT G Notwithstanding the above information, the Applicant has indicated that the County plans to continue use the Negus Transfer Station. In the long-term, however, the site may be reclaimed in accordance with all applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Through the reclamation process, the County will coordinate with DOGAMI. Based on the above information, the Hearings Office finds the proposed amendment is consistent with this policy and will not interfere with the neighboring Goal 5 resource. Policy 2.10.3 Balance protection of mineral and aggregate resources with conflicting resources and uses. FINDING: As addressed in a foregoing finding, the requested plan amendment and zone change will reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. A portion of the Inclusion Property falls within the Surface Mining Impact Area Combining Zone associated with Surface Mining Site No. 482. This transition from County - zoned lands to Redmond UGB-zoned lands would also remove the existing County SMIA zoning from this portion of the Inclusion Property and thus remove the protections afforded to a Goal 5 resource. As noted above, the Hearings Officer is unaware of similar protections within the Redmond UGB. The Exclusion Property is further south of the SM Site No. 482 and does not include the associated SMIA designation. Therefore, the Exclusion Property will not be affected by this amendment. Section 2.11 Cultural and Historic Resources FINDING: There is no evidence of cultural or historic resources on either the Inclusion or Exclusion Properties. The proposal does not affect cultural or historic resources; therefore, the provisions of this section are not applicable. CHAPTER 3 RURAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT Section 3.3 Rural Housing Goals and Policies Goal 1 Maintain the rural character and safety of housing in unincorporated Deschutes County. FINDING: The proposed UGB adjustment results in approximately 156 acres that will added to the Redmond UGB and the same amount being removed from the UGB and rezoned EFU. The requested zone change application addresses the 156 acres proposed to be removed from the Redmond UGB and placed into Deschutes County jurisdiction. The Hearings Officer finds the proposed exchange of land will not adversely impact the rural character and safety of housing in the unincorporated Deschutes County, as neither the proposed Inclusion Property nor the Exclusion Property is not planned to be used for housing. Therefore, the proposal complies with the rural housing Goal 1. Goal 2 Support agencies and non -profits that provide affordable housing. FINDING: The policies identified under Goal 2 are not applicable to this application. Section 3.4 Rural Economy Goal and Policies Goal 1 Maintain a stable and sustainable rural economy, compatible with rural lifestyles and a healthy environment. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 21 of 41 EXHIBIT G FINDING: The Applicant requests a plan amendment and zone change to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The land to be removed, the Exclusion Property, is part of a regional large -lot industrial land supply that was adopted by County Ordinance 2013-002. Through the process of adopting Ordinance 2013-002, a regional industrial land needs analysis was conducted, in addition to, a look at maintaining a stable and sustainable rural economy. By shifting this large -lot industrial land closer to developing areas of the City of Redmond, the Inclusion Property will be more readily available for development. This is based on current development trends in this region of the city and the availability and extension of facilities and services for such uses. The Exclusion Property, however, is of greater distance from developed facilities and services. Moreover, development of the Exclusion Property will require remediation based on historic uses of the site. The Hearings Officer finds the proposed land exchange is consistent with the goals and policies for a rural economy in the unincorporated Deschutes County as addressed here and through Ordinance 2013-002. Section 3.5 Natural Hazards Goals and Policies Goal Protect people, property, infrastructure, the economy and the environment from natural hazards. FINDING: The potential natural hazards for the Inclusion and Exclusion Lands are similar. Based on the information provided with the application, hazards include low radon potential, moderate earthquake shaking, and small areas of moderate landslide hazards. There are no mapped flood or volcano hazards. Additional hazards include wildfire and winter storm risks, which are identified in the County's Comprehensive Plan, The Hearings Officer finds that the goals and policies of this section not applicable or relevant to this proposal. Mr. Brady contends the Applicant missed the most threatening natural hazard: dust storms. P. Brady, Open Record Submittal, pg. 17. Mr. Brady cites the State of Oregon Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP) Risk Assessment and note that Deschutes County is one of the counties in Oregon that has dust storms. Due to the proneness of our region to dust storms, he is concerned that the lead contamination can be spread. The Hearings Officer finds that the distribution of the lead contamination by dust storms is a legitimate public concern. Given the stated potential impact on public health, it is an issue the public agencies should examine if they are not already. However, the Hearings Officer does not believe Section 3.5 of Comprehensive Plan applies to this issue in a way that prohibits the plan amendment and zone change. Section 3.5 lists potential natural hazards and polices to address those hazards. Those hazards are: (1) wildfire, (2) flooding, (3) volcanic eruptions, (4) earthquakes, and (5) winter storms. Dust storms are not one of the stated hazards. Even if dust storms are a natural hazard that Policy 3.5 is intended to apply to, it is unclear how an acre -for -acre exchange increase that threat to the public. Moreover, as stated by the Applicant it is waiting on DEQ for a final determination regarding remediation and that it anticipates remediation when the Exclusion Property is put into future use. Thus, the Applicant appears to be engaged in solving the contamination issue. Lastly, there is no guarantee that keeping the Exclusion Property zoned for industrial use will solve the problem any quicker. The contamination issues remains unsolved after many years despite its current zoning. Although Mr. Brady expresses a desire to purchase the Exclusion Property, no sale has ever materialized. It Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 22 of 41 19►�:1 i:� Y 1ChI takes two parties to consummate a real estate sale, which indicates to the Hearings Officer that despite Mr. Brady's desire to purchase the property, it remains economically unviable to employ remediation even with the industrial zoning. For the above reasons, the Hearings Officer does not believe the acre -for -acre exchange limits the County's ability to protect people, infrastructure and property from natural hazards under Policy 3.5. Section 3.6 Public Facilities and Services Policies Goal and Policies Goa11 Support the orderly, efficient and cost-effective siting of rural public facilities and services. Policy 3.6.11 Where possible, locate utility lines and facilities on or adjacent to existing public or private right-of-ways and to avoid dividing farm or forest lands. FINDING: The policies identified under Goal 1 are not applicable to this application. However, the Hearings Officer notes that the land exchange proposed here has the intention to support orderly, efficient, and cost- effective siting of urban public facilities and services for the industrial lands within the Redmond UGB. For example, the Inclusion Property is adjacent to a grid street system, wherein utilities, facilities, and streets would be able to be extended and provided in the road rights -of -way. The Exclusion Property, in comparison, contains locational and topographical constraints, as it is further away from these facilities and services. Section 3.7 Transportation FINDING: The Transportation planning program has been summarized and incorporated into the Deschutes County Transportation System Plan ("TSP"), which was adopted by Ordinance 2012-005 and is contained with Appendix C of the County Comprehensive Plan. The applicable goals and policies of the TSP are addressed below under Appendix C. CHAPTER 4 URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT Section 4.2 Urbanization Policies Goal 1 Coordinate with cities, special districts and stakeholders to support urban growth boundaries and urban reserve areas that provide an orderly and efficient transition between urban and rural lands. Policy 4.2.1 Participate in the processes initiated by cities in Deschutes County to create and/or amend their urban growth boundaries. Policy 4.2.2 Promote and coordinate the use of urban reserve areas. FINDING: The proposed Inclusion Property falls within the Redmond Urban Reserve Area Combining Zone while the Exclusion Property falls within the UGB but not the RURA. The proposed UGB amendment and subsequent zone changes were selected to accommodate a change of circumstances that involves current development trends and availability of services, which will allow for a more readily available lands for continued industrial development in Redmond. For example, the Inclusion Property can be developed in a more timely, orderly, and efficient manner with public facilities and infrastructure nearby compared to the Exclusion Property, which has locational and topographical constraints. The proposal amendments and zone changes require review from both the City of Redmond and Deschutes County. The Applicant submitted concurrent applications to both jurisdictions. The City and County coordinated separate public hearings before the Redmond Planning Commission and a County Hearings Officer that will review their respective applications. Furthermore, the Applicant met with City and County Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 23 of 41 EXHIBIT G staff to discuss their proposal. Notice of the application and public hearing was mailed to property owners within 750 feet of the subject area for the County application. Two comments were received from the public which have been addressed in this Decision. Lastly, the two public hearings — November 18 with the Redmond Planning Commission and November 19 with the County Hearings Officer — were open to the public and the public will be encouraged to provide testimony. The Hearings Officer concludes there has been adequate coordination with cities, special districts, and stake holders to provide an orderly and efficient transition between urban and rural lands. The Hearings Officer finds compliance with applicable urbanization policies has been demonstrated. Goal2. Coordinate with cities, special districts and stakeholders on urban growth area zoning for lands inside urban growth boundaries but outside city boundaries. Policy 4.2.4 Use urban growth area zoning to coordinate land use decisions inside urban growth boundaries but outside the incorporated cities. Policy 4.2.5 Negotiate intergovernmental agreements to coordinate with cities on land use inside urban growth boundaries and outside the incorporated cities. Policy 4.2.6 Develop urban growth area zoning with consideration of the type, timing and location of public facilities and services provision consistent with city plans. FINDING: As noted, the proposed Inclusion Property falls within the RURA Zone while the Exclusion Property falls within the UGB and thus both being considered to be located within the Redmond urban growth area. The City of Redmond's Eastside Framework Plan provides a planning concept for this area. Therefore, the proposed amendments will be consistent with the plan. The Applicant states the following The Applicant understands that the Inclusion Property may be located within the City of Redmond UGB, but outside of the City Limits for a short time period (prior to annexation), however, it is planned that upon approval, annexation will follow. Conformance to the City of Redmond Eastside Framework Plan ensures consistency with this policy. The Deschutes County and City of Redmond have negotiated an intergovernmental agreement, which was provided with the submitted application materials. The agreement coordinates development of lands held within the UGB but outside the city limits of Redmond. Although the proposed amendment and zone change will change the lands that are subject to this agreement, it will not alter the terms of the agreement. Goal 3. Coordinate with cities, special districts and stakeholders on policies and zoning for lands outside urban growth boundaries but inside urban reserve areas. Policy 4.2.8 Designate the Redmond Urban Reserve Area on the County Comprehensive Plan Map and regulate it through a Redmond Urban Reserve Area (RURA) Combining Zone in Deschutes County Code, Title 18. FINDING: Deschutes County adopted Chapter 18.24, Redmond Urban Reserve Area Combining Zone, together with Title 20, Redmond Urban Reserve Area Ordinance. The proposed amendment and zone change will modify the land designation and zoning; however, it will not modify the implementation of these codes. Policy 4.2.9 in cooperation with the City of Redmond adopt a RURA Agreement consistent with their respective comprehensive plans and the requirements of Oregon Administrative Rule 660- 021-0050 or its successor. FINDING: Deschutes County and the City of Redmond have adopted a RURA Agreement consistent with their respective comprehensive plans and the requirements of OAR 660-021-0050. Although the proposed Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 24 of 41 EXHIBIT G amendment and zone change will modify the land designation and zoning, it will not modify the implementation of this agreement. Policy 4.2.10 The following land use policies guide zoning in the RURA. a. Plan and zone RURA lands for rural uses, in a manner that ensures the orderly, economic and efficient provision of urban services as these lands are brought into the urban growth boundary. FINDING: As noted previously, the proposed UGB amendment and subsequent zone changes were selected to accommodate a change of circumstances that involves current development trends and availability of services, which will allow for a more readily available lands for continued industrial development in Redmond. The Inclusion Property can be developed in a timelier, more orderly, and efficient manner because of the neighboring public facilities and infrastructure. The Exclusion Property has locational and topographical constraints. The Applicant is not proposing new parcels to be created with this project. b. New parcels shall be a minimum of ten acres. FINDING: The Applicant is not proposing new parcels to be created with this project. c. Until lands in the RURA are brought into the urban growth boundary, zone changes or plan amendments shall not allow more intensive uses or uses that generate more traffic, than were allowed prior to the establishment of the RURA. FINDING: The proposed Inclusion Property falls within the RURA Combining Zone while the Exclusion Property falls within the UGB but not the RURA. The Applicant is requesting the Inclusion property be brought into the UGB (with associated zone changes), which results in the removal of the RURA Zone and thus not subject to this policy. However, the Exclusion Property will be removed from the UGB and the RURA Zone will be added. The Exclusion Property will be zoned EFU, which does not allow more intensive uses than the current industrial zones. This policy is further implemented through the Deschutes Zoning Ordinance, which would apply to any future amendments or zone changes. d. For Exclusive Farm Use zones, partitions shall be allowed based on state law and the County Zoning Ordinance. FINDING: The Exclusion Property will be rezoned to EFU with this proposal. The Applicant is not proposing a partition. e. New arterial and collector rights -of -way in the RURA shall meet the right-of-way standards of Deschutes County or the City of Redmond, whichever is greater, but be physically constructed to Deschutes County standards. f. Protect from development existing and future arterial and collector rights -of -way, as designated on the County's Transportation System Plan. g. A single family dwelling on a legal parcel is permitted if that use was permitted before the RURA designation. FINDING: The Applicant is not proposing new arterial or collector rights -of -way in the proposed RURA Zone. In addition, the proposal does not include new development, including a single-family dwelling. These policies are not applicable or relevant to this proposal. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 25 of 41 EXHIBIT G Policy 4.2.11 Collaborate with the City of Redmond to assure that the County -owned 1,800 acres in the RURA is master planned before it is incorporated into Redmond's urban growth boundary. FINDING: The City of Redmond Eastside Framework Plan includes the master plan of the County -owned subject property. Per staff, the proposed UGB land exchange, plan amendment and zone changes are consistent with the City of Redmond Eastside Framework Plan. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the plan that was established to implement this policy. Goal 4 To build a strong and thriving regional economy by coordinating public investments, policies and regulations to support regional and state economic development objectives in Central Oregon. Policy 4.2.12 Deschutes County supports a multi jurisdictional cooperative effort to pursue a regional approach to establish a short-term supply of sites particularly designed to address out -of - region industries that may locate in Central Oregon. Policy 4.2.13 Deschutes County recognizes the importance of maintaining a large -lot industrial land supply that is readily developable in Central Oregon. Policy 4.2.14 The Central Oregon Regional Large Lot Industrial Land Need Analysis ("Analysis"), adopted by Ordinance 2013-002 is incorporated by reference herein. FINDING: The Applicant requests a plan amendment and zone change to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The land to be removed, the Exclusion Property, is part of a regional large -lot industrial land supply that was adopted by County Ordinance 2013-002. However, by shifting this large -lot industrial land closer to developing areas of the City of Redmond, the Inclusion Property will be more readily available for development. This is based on current development trends in this region of the City of Redmond and the availability and extension of facilities and services for such uses. The Exclusion Property, however, is of greater distance from developed facilities and services. Moreover, development of the Exclusion Property will require remediation as a result on historic uses of the site. Therefore, the Hearings Officer finds the proposed land exchange would address these policies and the intent of the large -lot industrial land program. Policy 4.2.15 Within 6 months of the adoption of Ordinance 2013-002, in coordination with the participating local governments in Central Oregon, Deschutes County shall, execute an intergovernmental agreement ("IGA") with the Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council ("COIC") that specifies the process of allocation of large lot industrial sites among the participating local governments. FINDING: Deschutes County and City of Redmond have negotiated an intergovernmental agreement, which was provided with the submitted application materials. The proposed land exchange modifies the location of industrial land but not the amount of industrial land. Therefore, the proposal will not result in changes to the existing agreement or consistency with this policy. Policy 4.2.16 In accordance with OAR 660-024-004 and 0045, Deschutes County, fulfilling coordination duties specified in ORS 195.025, shall approve and update its comprehensive plan when participating cities within their jurisdiction legislatively or through a quasi-judicial process designate regionally significant sites. FINDING: The Hearings Officer finds the Applicant's response, in part provided below, is a sufficient response to this policy criterion. Deschutes County has previously fulfilled its duties and updated its comprehensive plan to account for a regional large lot industrial land need in Redmond. The current proposal does not modify the land Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 26 of 41 need, but does modify the exact location of the land that is available to address the need. As detailed in Section V - Discussion, Conclusions - State of Oregon, OAR 660-070 allows a jurisdiction to rely upon the adopted Land Need analysis for Economic Lands when reconfiguring an Urban Growth Boundary and there is no change in the amount of substantially equivalent land (which is the case for the current application). Given that documenting a land need is not applicable, the provisions of 660-024-0040 are not applicable. Furthermore regarding 660-024-0045, only subsections (7) and (8) address the process for selecting regional large lot sites... The City and County have previously determined that other land within the Redmond UGB is not available to accommodate the Regional Large Lot Industrial Land Needs, thus considering land within the UGB as potential exchange land is not practical or required at this time. Also, as detailed in Section V - Discussion; Conclusions - State of Oregon, the Land Exchange conforms to Goal 14 and the applicable locational requirements. As detailed in this section, the proposal is consistent with this Comprehensive Plan Policy. Policy 4.2.17 Deschutes County supports Economic Development of Central Oregon ("EDCO"), a non- profit organization facilitating new job creation and capital investment to monitor and advocate for the region°s efforts of maintaining an inventory of appropriate sized and located industrial lots available to the market FINDING: As proposed, the Inclusion Property will be more readily available for development based on not only development trends, but also the availability and extension of facilities and services for such uses in that region of the city. The Applicant provided a letter in support from EDCO. The Hearings finds consistency with this policy based on the comments provided by EDCO. Policy 4.2.18 Deschutes County will collaborate with regional public and private representatives to engage the Oregon Legislature and state agencies and their commissions to address public facility, transportation and urbanization issues that hinder economic development opportunities in Central Oregon. FINDING: In regards to this proposal, representatives of Deschutes County have collaborated with regional public and private entities including Oregon Division of State Lands, EDCO; and Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development to address public facilities, transportation, and urbanization issues. APPENDIX C, TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN The goals and policies to coordinate and implement the TSP are as follows: Goal 1 1. Achieve an efficient, safe, convenient and economically viable transportation and communication system. This system includes roads, rail lines, public transit, air, pipeline, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The Deschutes County transportation system shall be designed to serve the existing and projected needs of the unincorporated communities and rural areas within the County. The system shall provide connections between different modes of transportation to reduce reliance on any one mode. FINDING: Highway 126 is adjacent to the Exclusion Property and several roads within the City of Redmond jurisdiction are adjacent to the inclusion Property. The Applicant submitted a Traffic Report prepared by Transight Consulting, LLC with the application. The report concluded that the proposed UGB reconfiguration would not create any significant impacts on the transportation system, if approved. The report was reviewed by the County Transportation Planner, who determined compliance with the TSP. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 27 of 41 EXHIBIT G ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROAD PLAN Goal Establish a transportation system, supportive of a geographically distributed and diversified economic base, while also providing a safe, efficient network for residential mobility and tourism. Policy 4.4 Deschutes County shall consider roadway function, classification and capacity as criteria for plan map amendments and zone changes. This shall assure that proposed land uses do not exceed the planned capacity of the transportation system. FINDING: This policy applies to the County and advises it to consider the roadway function, classification, and capacity as criteria for plan map amendments and zone changes. Highway 126, an arterial, is located south of the Exclusion Property. The proposal does not alter this facility. However, the exchange of the large -lot industrial land to the Inclusion Property will result in a decreased need to connect to the facility, which results in a decrease in safety issues for this facility, as indicated by the Applicant. The Applicant submitted a traffic report with the application. The report was reviewed by the County Transportation Planner, who determined compliance with the TSP. The Hearings Officer finds the proposal is consistent with this policy. ACCESS MANAGEMENT Goal 5 5. Maintain an access management system adequate to protect the quality and function of the arterial and collector street system. FINDING: Highway 126 is adjacent to the southern boundary of the Exclusion Property. The proposal does not alter this facility. As indicated in the previous finding, the proposal will lessen the need for access points to this facility and thus decrease the number of trips directly onto this facility. The Hearings Officer finds the proposal is consistent with goal and policies of this section. AIRPORT PLAN Goal 16 16. Protect the function and economic viability of the existing public -use airports, while ensuring public safety and compatibility between the airport uses and surrounding land uses for public use airports and for private airports with three or more based aircraft. FINDING: The lands proposed for exchange are entirely within the County Airport Safety Combining Zone (AS) associated with the Redmond Airport. Deschutes County and City of Redmond have land use regulations (e.g. sound, noise, glaze, building heights, and incompatible uses) that protect the Redmond Airport. This transition from County -zoned lands to Redmond UGB-zoned lands, as proposed, will remove the existing County AS zoning from the Inclusion Property and add the County AS zoning to the Exclusion Property. A similar exchange of zoning regulations will occur within the Redmond UGB as proposed. The proposal is not subject to the County AS Zone review as no development is proposed at this time for the Exclusion Property. When development is proposed in the future, the County will review compliance with AS Zone regulations, which further ensure consistency with the County Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. Otherwise, the proposed exchange of land will not directly affect consistency with the goal and policies addressed here. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT Goal 18 18.1 In order to optimize the carrying capacity of the County road system, provide cost effective transportation improvements and implement strategies that shall improve the efficiency and function of existing roads. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 28 of 41 EXHIBIT G FINDING: As discussed in a foregoing finding, Highway 126 is adjacent to the proposed Exclusion Property. The proposed land exchange will not alter this facility but instead decrease the need for access to the highway and thus reduce the number of trips directly onto this facility. The Hearings Officer finds the proposal is consistent with goal and policies of this section. Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 660 DIVISION 12, TRANSPORTATION PLANNING (OAR 660-012) OAR 660-012-0060. Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments (1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then, the local government must put in place measures as provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section (3), (9) or (10) of this rule. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (8) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. (2) Where a local government determines that there would be a significant effect, compliance with section (1) shall be accomplished through one or a combination of the following: (a) Adopting measures that demonstrate allowed land uses are consistent with the planned function, capacity, and performance standards of the transportation facility. (b) Amending the TSP or comprehensive plan to provide transportation facilities, improvements or services adequate to support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of this division; such amendments shall include a funding plan or mechanism consistent with section (4) or include an amendment to the transportation finance plan so that the facility, improvement, or service will be provided by the end of the planning period. (c) Altering land use designations, densities, or design requirements to reduce demand for automobile travel and meet travel needs through other modes. (d) Amending the TSP to modify the planned function, capacity or performance standards of the transportation facility. (e) Providing other measures as a condition of development or through a development agreement or similar funding method, including transportation system management measures, demand management or minor transportation improvements. Local governments shall as part of the amendment specify when measures or improvements provided pursuant to this subsection will be provided. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 29 of 41 EXHIBIT G (3) Notwithstanding sections (1) and (2) of this rule, a local government may approve an amendment that would significantly affect an existing transportation facility without assuring that the allowed land uses are consistent with the function, capacity and performance standards of the facility where: (a) The facility is already performing below the minimum acceptable performance standard identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan on the date the amendment application is submitted; (b) in the absence of the amendment, planned transportation facilities, improvements and services as set forth in section (4) of this rule would not be adequate to achieve consistency with the identified function, capacity or performance standard for that facility by the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP; (c) Development resulting from the amendment will, at a minimum, mitigate the impacts of the amendment in a manner that avoids further degradation to the performance of the facility by the time of the development through one or a combination of transportation improvements or measures, (d) The amendment does not involve property located in an interchange area as defined in paragraph (4)(d)(C); and (e) For affected state highways, ODOT provides a written statement that the proposed funding and timing for the identified mitigation improvements or measures are, at a minimum, sufficient to avoid further degradation to the performance of the affected state highway. However, if a local government provides the appropriate ODOT regional office with written notice of a proposed amendment in a manner that provides ODOT reasonable opportunity to submit a written statement into the record of the local government proceeding, and ODOT does not provide a written statement, then the local government may proceed with applying subsections (a) through (d) of this section. FINDING: This above language is applicable to the proposal because it involves an amendment to an acknowledged comprehensive plan. The proposed amendments include reconfiguring the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The Inclusion Property will change from EFU zoning to a combination of Light and Heavy Industrial. The Exclusion Property will change from a combination of M-1 and M-2 to EFU, specifically. The Applicant is not proposing any land use development of either property at this time. The Applicant submitted a traffic report with the application. The report was reviewed by the County Transportation Planner, who agreed with the report's conclusions. Based on the report, the Hearings Officer finds that the proposed plan amendment and zone change will be consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the County's transportation facilities in the area. The Hearings Officer also finds the proposed changes will not change the functional classification of any existing or planned transportation facility or change the standards implementing a functional classification system. The changes will not allow types or levels of land uses that would result in levels of travel or access, which are inconsistent with the functional classification of nearby transportation facilities. Furthermore, it will not reduce the performance standards of the facilities below the minimum acceptable level the County's transportation system plan. (4) Determinations under sections (1)—(3) of this rule shall be coordinated with affected transportation facility and service providers and other affected local governments. FINDING: Notice of the proposed plan amendment and zone change was sent to several public agencies. Those agencies include Deschutes County Road Department and County Transportation Planner, Oregon Department of Transportation, Redmond Planning Department, Redmond Public Works, Redmond Fire and Rescue, Redmond Airport, Redmond Area Parks and Recreation District, Bureau of Land Management, Central Electric Cooperative, Pacific Power, Central Oregon Irrigation District, Oregon Department of Aviation, and Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 30 of 41 EXHIBIT G Water Resources Department — District 11. The submitted responses are listed in the foregoing Basic Findings section. The Hearings Officer finds that this notice complies with the requirement noted DIVISION 15, STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS (OAR 660-015) Goal 1: Citizen Involvement To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. FINDING: During the plan amendment and zone change process, public notice of the proposal was provided to affected agencies and property owners in the surrounding area. Planning staff mailed and published notice of the proposal and public hearing. The County held a public hearing before a hearings officer. The City of Redmond will hold a public hearing before the Redmond Planning Commission. Goal 1 is met. Goal 2: Land Use Planning To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decision and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. FINDING: In accordance with Goal 2, the Applicant has submitted an application to the County and the City of Redmond for the plan amendment and zone change. The Hearings Officer finds the proposed plan amendment and zone change satisfies this goal because the proposal has been reviewed in accordance with the County's acknowledged planning review process. Goal 3: Agricultural Lands To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. FINDING: The proposal includes a substantially equivalent exchange of land that will maintain the same amount of Comprehensive Plan designated and farm -zoned (EFU) land in Deschutes County. The proposal involves a reconfiguration of the Redmond UGB by adding 156 acres into the UGB in exchange for removing the same amount of land from the UGB, The Inclusion Land will change from a Comprehensive Plan designated and farm -zoned area to a combination of Light and Heavy Industrial zoning. In return, the proposed Exclusion Property will change from a combination of Light and Heavy Industrial zoning to Comprehensive Plan designated and farm -zoned. The proposal does not impact any agricultural lands within the City of Redmond. Both the Inclusion Land and Exclusion Land share soil types (the sites do not have class 1, 11, III, or IV soils), vegetation, and lack of water for irrigation. The Applicant provides a comprehensive assessment, an alternative analysis, and compatibility of the use with surrounding and related agricultural land and the retention of an equivalent amount of soils. Based on this information, the proposal is consistent with this policy. Goal 4: Forest Lands To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state's forest economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the leading use on forest land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 31 of 41 EXHIBIT G FINDING: The subject property is not identified as forest lands on the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan map. As indicated previously, the subject property is identified as agriculture under the County Comprehensive Plan. Goals 4 does not apply. Goal 5: Natural Resources Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces. FINDING: Goal 5 resources are listed in the acknowledged Comprehensive Plan. There is an identified Goal 5 resource on the subject property but neither the Inclusion nor the Exclusion Lands include the inventoried Goal 5 resource. Mineral and aggregate resources: Surface Mine Site No. 482, Negus Transfer Station, is located on the subject property. The Inclusion Property is just south of but outside of Site No. 482. As noted previously, a portion of the Inclusion Property falls within the Surface Mining Impact Area Combining Zone associated with SM Site No. 482, which offers protections to the Goal 5 resource. This transition from County -zoned lands to Redmond UGB-zoned lands would also remove the existing County SMIA zoning from this portion of the Inclusion Property. The Hearings Officer is unaware of similar protections offered within the Redmond UGB. The proposed industrial zoning likely does not permit new noise or dust sensitive uses and thus no reduction in Goal 5 protection. The Exclusion Property is further south of the SM Site No. 482 and does not include the associated SMIA designation. Therefore, the Exclusion Property will not be affected by this amendment. Energy sources: The subject property is not known to have significant energy resources, such as natural gas, oil, coal, or geothermal heat. Fish and wildlife habitat: The subject property is located outside of the County's Wildlife Area Combining Zone. The site has no designated fish habitat. There are no identified threatened or endangerea species present at the site. Ecologically and scientifically significant natural areas, including desert areas: There are no identified ecologically or scientifically significant areas present on the subject property. outstanding scenic views: Nothing about the property indicates it has a significantly better view than other sites in the vicinity. As noted in a previous finding, Highway 126 is identified on the County Zoning Map as a scenic corridor in Deschutes County. The Exclusion Property is adjacent to, but outside of, the associated County LM Zone. The Inclusion Property, further north from Highway 126, does not fall within the LM Zone. Water areas wetlands watersheds, and groundwater resources: There are no wetlands or watersheds within the subject site. There is no identified groundwater resources present at the site. Wilderness areas: The subject property does not meet the definition of "wilderness areas" as described within the Oregon State Goals and Guidelines. Historic areas sites, structures, and objects: The subject property does not have structures listed on the National Register of Historic Places. No structures or places of historical significance have been determined to exist on the property. There are no County designated historically significant sites within the vicinity of the property. Cultural areas: The site has no known cultural resources. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 32 of 41 C Goal 6: Air. Water and Land Resources Quality To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state. FINDING: The proposal includes a substantially equivalent exchange of land with the Redmond UGB and Deschutes County. The Inclusion Property that will be added to the Redmond UGB is not known to have any areas of contamination and/or needed remediation prior to development. Development of the Exclusion Property, land taken out of the Redmond UGB and into County EFU Zone, will require remediation based on historic uses of the site. As discussed previously, the Exclusion Property includes the Redmond Rod and Gun Club, a former shooting range used by the Deschutes County Sheriff, and an unpermitted disposal area. The Applicant has indicated that a remediation plan has been prepared by environmental consulting firm, APEX. The remediation plan is currently under review by DEQ. The Applicant does not propose a use for the Exclusion Property at this time. Addressed in a foregoing finding, the nature and extent of the contamination, according to the remediation plan, appears to be confined to the surface of the soils. Since groundwater depths are primarily greater than 300 feet, together with the low migration levels of the contamination, the report notes that contamination does not impact groundwater. Contaminants are primarily "lead associated with shot and bullets, and benzo(a)pyrene from binders in clay pigeons." The unofficial disposal area includes low concentrations of metals and organic chemicals, according to the report, that have not migrated to underlying soil. Rezoning the two regions will not affect the quality of the air, water, and land resources. Deschutes County has adopted policies to protect the air, water, and land resources and to situate pollution -causing development accordingly. Moreover, the remediation plan for the Exclusion Property will ensure clean-up of the property will be completed in conjunction with development and will meet all DEQ requirements. Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards To protect people and property from natural hazards. FINDING: The potential natural hazards for the Inclusion and Exclusion Lands are similar. Based on the information provided with the application; hazards include low radon potential, moderate earthquake shaking, and small areas of moderate landslide hazards. There are no mapped flood or volcano hazards. Additional hazards include wildfire and winter storm risks, which are identified in the County's Comprehensive Plan. Deschutes County has adopted policies to protect against natural hazards, which are adequate to ensure consistency with Goal 7. Goal 8: Recreational Needs To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, here appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. FINDING: This goal is not applicable because the proposed plan amendment and zone change do not reduce or eliminate any opportunities for recreational facilities either on the subject property or in the area. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 33 of 41 EXHIBIT G Goal 9: Economic Development To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. FINDING: This goal is to provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities. The Exclusion Property is part of a regional large -lot industrial land supply that was adopted by County Ordinance 2013-002. Through the process of adopting Ordinance 2013-002, a regional industrial land needs analysis was conducted. Additionally, maintaining a stable and sustainable rural economy was evaluated. The proposed shift of the large -lot industrial land so that it will be closer to developing areas of the City of Redmond will allow the Inclusion Property to be more readily available for development. Development trends in this region of the city, together with the availability and extension of facilities and services for such uses, support this proposed land exchange. In comparison, the Exclusion Property is of greater distance from developed facilities and services. Moreover, development of the Exclusion Property will require remediation based on historic uses of the site. The Hearings Officer finds the Inclusion Lands address a specific need and contain the needed site characteristics and thus the proposal is consistent with Goal 9 as addressed here and through Ordinance 2013-002. Goal 10: Housing To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. FINDING: The plan amendment and zone change do not reduce or eliminate any opportunities for housing on the subject property or in the area. This goal is not applicable. Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. FINDING: The proposal to shift the large -lot industrial land from the Exclusion Site to the Inclusion Site allows future development to be within close proximity of available facilities and services and thus lending to a more orderly and efficient arrangement as demonstrated by the Applicant. The Exclusion Property, however, is of greater distance from such facilities and services making development less orderly and efficient. According to the, the proposed exchange is consistent with current public facilities master plans. The Hearings Officer finds the proposal is consistent with Goal 11. Goal 12: Transportation To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. FINDING: This goal is implemented through OAR 660-012, commonly known as the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), which is addressed in a previous finding. The Applicant provides a traffic report, which was reviewed by the County Transportation Planner who determined compliance with the planning rule. Goal 13: Energy Conservation To conserve energy. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 34 of 41 EXHIBIT G FINDING: This goal seeks that "land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles." The proposed Inclusion Property and Exclusion Property are located within close proximity of each other. However, the exchange of large -lot industrial land to the Inclusion Property allows for better service of existing transportation and utility infrastructure and thus more energy efficient. In comparison, the Exclusion Property is further away from such facilities and services, which creates an island of land that would require the extension of service and thus be costly and energy intensive. The proposal is consistent with Goal 13 because of the locational efficiencies provided by the Inclusion Lands. Goal 14: Urbanization To provide for orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban use, to accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities. FINDING: The Hearings Officer finds the specific findings4 below by the Applicant are sufficient to comply with Goal 14. Goal 14 requires that all cities develop an urbanization framework as part of their comprehensive plan, appropriate implementing measures, and to periodically .review the supply of land within the urban growth boundary. A unique review framework, the Eastside Framework Plan, has been established by Deschutes County and the City of Redmond, which directs development in the area of the proposed land 2xil:ungc. Bc^%auSc^ urbanization pv^iILIc5 have been adopted Us port of Redmond s ocknowleagea Comprehensive Plan and the Eastside Framework Plan, along with the fact that implementing measures have been established, the City of Redmond's planning framework is consistent with Goal 14. There are also six factors that are evaluated to ensure consistency with Goal 14, which emphasize two central questions: is there enough land within the UGB to accommodate future population growth over 20 years, and if not, which land is suitable to bring within the existing UGB. These factors were evaluated in Section V.B of this report. As demonstrated therein, there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposal is consistent with all of them. For these reasons, the proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 14. Goal 15: Willamette River Greenwa Goal 16: Estuarine Resources Goal 17: Coastal Shorelands Goal 18: Beaches and Dunes Goal 19: Ocean Resources FINDING: These Goals are not applicable because the proposed amendment and zone change area is not within the Willamette Greenway; and does not possess any estuarine areas, coastal shorelands, beaches and dunes, or ocean resources. DIVISION 24, URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES (OAR 660-024) Section 660.024.0020. Adoption or Amendment of a UGB. 4 The referenced "Section V.B of this report" addresses alternative compliance of OAR 660-024-0070, UGB Adjustments, which is addressed in Applicant's Burden of Proof Statement. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 35 of 41 EXHIBIT G (1) All statewide goals and related administrative rules are applicable when establishing or amending a UGB, except as follows: FINDING: All statewide goals and related administrative rules are applicable with the proposed UGB amendment. Based on the findings below, no exception is provided to this requirement. (a) The exceptions process in Goal 2 and OAR chapter 660, division 4, is not applicable unless a local government chooses to take an exception to a particular goal requirement, for example, as provided in OAR 660-004-0010(1); FINDING: These provisions are not applicable to this application since this proposal is not seeking a goal exception. (b) Goals 3 and 4 are not applicable; FINDING: Goal 3 is applicable in this case; however, Goal 4 is not applicable. (c) Goal 5 and related rules under OAR chapter 660, division 23, apply only in areas added to the UGB, except as required under OAR 660-023-0070 and 660-023-0250; FINDING: Goal 5 resources are listed in the acknowledged Comprehensive Plan. There is an identified Goal 5 resource on the subject property but neither the Inclusion nor the Exclusion Lands include the inventoried Goal 5 resource. (d) The transportation planning rule requirements under OAR 660-012-0060 need not be applied to a UGB amendment if the land added to the UGB is zoned as urbanizabie land, either by retaining the zoning that was assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary or by assigning interim zoning that does not allow development that would generate more vehicle trips than development allowed by the zoning assigned prior to inclusion in the boundary; FINDING: The transportation planning rule requirements under OAR 660-012-0060 are applicable in this case. (e) Goal 15 is not applicable to land added to the UGB unless the land is within the Willamette River Greenway Boundary, (f) Goals 16 to 18 are not applicable to land added to the UGB unless the land is within a coastal shorelands boundary; (g) Goal 19 is not applicable to a UGB amendment. FINDING: The above three provisions are not applicable to the proposal. The subject property is not within the Willamette River Greenway Boundary or within a coastal shorelands boundary, and the proposal is a UGB amendment. (2) The UGB and amendments to the UGB must be shown on the city and county plan and zone maps at a scale sufficient to determine which particular lots or parcels are included in the UGB. Where a UGB does not follow lot or parcel lines, the map must provide sufficient information to determine the precise UGB location. FINDING: The proposed UGB and amendments to the UGB are shown on the city and county plan and zone maps at a scale sufficient to determine the precise UGB location. The location does not align with lot or parcel Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 36 of 41 EXHIBIT G lines, in this case, and so the Inclusion and Exclusion Properties are defined with a metes and bounds legal descriptions. Section 660.024.0070. UGB Adiustments. (1) A local government may adjust the UGB at any time to better achieve the purposes of Goal 14 and this division. Such adjustment may occur by adding or removing land from the UGB, or by exchanging land inside the UGB for land outside the UGB. The requirements of section (2) of this rule apply when removing land from the UGB. The requirements of Goal 14 and this division [and ORS 197.298] apply when land is added to the UGB, including land added in exchange for land removed. The requirements of ORS 197.296 may also apply when land is added to a UGB, as specified in that statute. If a local government exchanges land inside the UGB for land outside the UGB, the applicable local government must adopt appropriate rural zoning designations for the land removed from the UGB prior to or at the time of adoption of the UGB amendment and must apply applicable location and priority provisions of OAR 660-024-00v`0 through 660-020-006Z FINDING: Because the Applicant proposes an adjustment by exchanging land inside the UGB for land outside the UGB, the Hearings Officer understands the requirements of Goal 14 and this division (OAR 660.024.0070) [and ORS 197.298] apply. In addition, the County must: 1) ...adopt appropriate rural zoning designations for the land removed from the UGB prior to or at the time of adoption of the UGB amendment, and //�� /� 2) apply applicable location and priority provisions of OAR 66V-V24-VO60 through 660-V20-0)0675. The Applicant requests a plan amendment and zone change to reconfigure the Redmond UGB by adding approximately 156 acres of land into the UGB in exchange for removing equivalent area of land from the UGB. The Applicant provides the following response regarding UGB adjustments. The requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 14 relating to urbanization, as implemented by ORS Chapter 197 and OAR 660-024, require that important questions be evaluated in order to show that a net expansion of an acknowledged UGB is necessary to meet the community's established need for an adequate supply of urban land. Broadly speaking, these factors include 1) the demand for additional land based on a population forecast, as well as 2) the exact type of land needed. Under a standard urbanization proposal with a net increase in UGB land, sufficient evidentiary support must be provided to demonstrate that the proposal is consistent with both of these factors. In this case, however, the proposal is for an exchange of land with parallel comprehensive plan designations. The end result of this type of UGB reconfiguration will be an unchanged inventory in the amount of urban land, with the some ratio of urban land and rural land as previously existed. Based on this information, the Applicant addresses OAR 660.024.0070(3) in more detail below. The Hearings Officer finds that this proposal includes measures to adopt appropriate rural zoning designations for the land removed from the UGB prior to or at the time of adoption of the UGB amendment. Of the sited OARS, the Hearings finds that the following apply: • 660-024-0065, Establishment of Study Area to Evaluate Land for Inclusion in the UGB • 660-024-0067, Evaluation of Land in the Study Area for Inclusion in the UGB; Priorities 'This reference appear to be a typo in statute. The Hearings Officer assumes this reference is to OAR 660-024-0060 through 660-024-0067 Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 37 of 41 EXHIBIT G These are addressed under subsection (3), below. (2) A local government may remove land from a UGB following the procedures and requirements of ORS 197.764. Alternatively, a local government may remove land from the UGB following the procedures and requirements of 197.610 to 197.650, provided it determines: (a) The removal of land would not violate applicable statewide planning goals and rules, (b) The UGB would provide a 20-year supply of land for estimated needs after the land is removed, or would provide roughly the same supply of buildable land as prior to the removal, taking into consideration land added to the UGB at the some time; (c) Public facilities agreements adopted under ORS 195.020 do not intend to provide for urban services on the subject land unless the public facilities provider agrees to removal of the land from the UGB and concurrent modification of the agreement; (d) Removal of the land does not preclude the efficient provision of urban services to any other buildable land that remains inside the UGB; and (e) The land removed from the UGB is planned and zoned for rural use consistent with all applicable laws. FINDING: The Hearings Officer reads subsection (1) to say that subsection (2) does not apply to exchanges of land, as subsection (1) treats additions, removals, and exchanges separately. Subsection (2) applies to removals (not exchanges). (3) Notwithstanding sections (1) and (2) of this rule, a local government considering an exchange of land may rely on the land needs analysis that provided a basis for its current acknowledged plan, rather than adopting a new need analysis, provided. FINDING: The Hearings Officer understands this section to provide an exception to sections (1) ana (2) of this rule, subject to the criteria below. (a) The amount of buildable land added to the UGB to meet: (A) A specific type of residential need is substantially equivalent to the amount of buildable residential land removed, or (B) The amount of employment land added to the UGB to meet an employment need is substantially equivalent to the amount of employment land removed, and FINDING: The Hearings Officer finds that this proposal meets subsection (B) since there is a equal exchange of employment lands. (b) The local government must apply comprehensive plan designations and, if applicable, urban zoning to the land added to the UGB, such that the land added is designated. (A) For the same residential uses and at the same housing density as the land removed from the UGB, or (B) For the same employment uses as allowed on the land removed from the UGB, or FINDING: The Hearings Officer finds that this proposal meets subsection (B) since the zone designation will just be switched from the Exclusion Property to the Inclusion Property. (C) If the land exchange is intended to provide for a particular industrial use that requires specific site characteristics, only land zoned for commercial or industrial use may be removed, and the Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 38 of 41 EXHIBIT G land added must be zoned for the particular industrial use and meet other applicable requirements of ORS 197A.320(6). FINDING: The Applicant's response, provided below, responds to the above criteria together. Several important implications stem from a UGB exchange proposal, as opposed to a net UGB expansion or reduction. First and foremost, the burden of proof does not require a clear demonstration that there is a need for more urban land, because no appreciable additional urban land will be included within the boundary. OAR 660-024-0070 stipulates that: "a local government considering an exchange of land may rely on its acknowledged population forecast and land needs analysis, rather than adopt a new forecast and need analysis, provided the land added to the UGB is planned for the some uses." In terms of a UGB reconfiguration such as the one proposed here, no additional analysis of population and land need is required, which significantlyreduces the scope of a "needs analysis" because the land to be added is planned for the same uses. Subsection (a)(A) pertains to residential land and is therefore not relevant to this proposal. Subsection (a)(B) is relevant and pertains to the exchange of employment land. The manner in which substantial equivalency is used herein relates specifically to the amount of land. With regard to the type of land, the language makes a clear and important distinction between suitable and developable employment land to be added and suitable and developed employment land to be removed. Neither the Inclusion Land nor the Exclusion Land areas contain otherwise developed lands, so the accounting of employment land is limited that which is suitable. Therefore, the accounting of suitable employment land for inclusion is to be based on land that is suitable to meet a specific employment need and the amount of suitable land for removal is to be based on land that is suitable employment land without limitations on specific types, uses or needs. Exhibit R the Alternatives Analysis, includes an ESEE and Goal 14 Analysis, which demonstrates the manner in which the subject Inclusion Property is suitable to meet a specific type of employment need, specifically industrial lands detailed in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544. More specifically, the aforementioned Exhibit demonstrates the comparative ways in which the Exclusion Site is generally suitable for employment uses, however it is comparatively less appropriate for industrial lands detailed in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 based on a comprehensive and thorough ESEE and Goal 14 boundary location alternatives analysis. The accounting of Inclusion Land and Exclusion Land thusly, equates to the amount of suitable employment land to be included for a specific type of employment land compared to the amount of exclusion land generally suitable for employment. As evidenced by Exhibits K and L the Inclusion Site is 156 acres and the Exclusion Site is 156 acres of similarly developable land, thus substantially equivalent. In regards to Subsection (b)(A), the proposal will not impact residential lands or densities, therefore that subsection does not apply. In regards to Subsection (b)(B), the Exclusion Lands and the Inclusion Lands will directly swap plan designations and zoning, thereby providing an equal amount of land for employment uses in the Redmond UGB. In regards to Subsection (b)(C), the proposal will exchange industrial land for the uses established in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544. The proposed exchange will provide more development ready land within the Redmond UGB, by removing 111 acres of M-1 zoned land and 45 acres of M-2 zoned land, and replacing it with the some industrial acres of the some zones (111 acres of M-1 and 45 acres of M-2). Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 39 of 41 EXHIBIT G Regarding applicable requirements of ORS 197A.320(6 )6, the Applicant continues with the following: The exchange property is being offered to better achieve land needs that were detailed in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 (Exhibit 0). As detailed in the Exhibit, this Bill was adopted to accommodate a particular large lot industrial land type, as detailed therein, amongst other characteristics, the needed land includes: • Reliable large -lot, high -value employment sites • A large site that can be served readily with infrastructure • A site adjacent to the city's employment and industrial lands • A site adjacent to Oregon Route 126 • A site close to the Redmond airport, and • A framework plan for the site that identifies industrial zoning and service commercial zoning Given the provisions of this section, along with the goal and intent of the 2012 Senate Bill 1544, an Alternative Lands study area is included in this application (Exhibit R) and it is limited to properties that are immediately adjacent to the land defined in the 2012 Senate Bill 1544 (and could comprehensively maintain these site characteristics). When considering the site specific needs of large -lot, high -value, readily served with infrastructure, adjacent to employment and industrial lands, adjacent to Oregon Route 126, close proximity to the Redmond Airport, and an area where the framework plan identifies industrial zoning and service commercial uses, the Alternatives Analysis documents that the Inclusion Property is the most suitable property of the Alternatives Analysis. As documented herein and in the Alternatives Analysis, the proposal meets the applicable requirements of ORS 197A.320(6) CONCLUSION - As detailed above, OAR 660-024-0070(3) precludes the need for new land needs analyses. Furthermore, as documented above and referenced in the Alternatives Analysis, with an ESEE and Goal 14 Boundary Analysis, the proposal conforms to all applicable approval criteria, those listed in OAR 660-024-0070(3). The Applicant believes in this case that "demonstration of direct or indirect compliance with OAR 660-024- 0070(1) and (2) (and subsequently the Priority Lands Statute) is not required." While the language of OAR 660- 024-0070 is unclear, no party provides a counter argument, so the Hearings Officer ultimately agrees with the Applicant. Staff notes it in its Staff Report that it is aware of only one other case in Oregon that involved an equal exchange UGB adjustment where DLCD accepted the same or similar arguments. In 2015 Lake County Board of Commissioners and the Town of Lakeview approved an equal exchange UGB amendment in 2015 (Lake County File 15-0043-CPAUGB). 6 ORS 197A.320(6) states, (6) When the primary purpose for expansion of the urban growth boundary is to accommodate a particular industry use that requires specific site characteristics, or to accommodate a public facility that requires specific site characteristics and the site characteristics may be found in only a small number of locations, the city may limit the study area to land that has, or could be improved to provide, the required site characteristics. Lands included within an urban growth boundary for a particular industrial use, or a particular public facility, must remain planned and zoned for the intended use: (a) Except as allowed by rule of the commission that is based on a significant change in circumstance or the passage of time; or (b) Unless the city removes the land from within the urban growth boundary. Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 40 of 41 EXHIBIT G Alternatively, in the event the Board of County Commissioners finds that the UGB exchange is not exempt from the entirety of OAR 660-024-0070(1) and (2), or in part, and compliance with OAR 660-024-0070 in its entirety applies, the Hearings Officer notes that the Applicant has addressed all subsections of OAR 660-024- 0070 in the submitted Application Narrative (or Burden of Proof Statement) and referenced herein. IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: The Hearings Officer finds that the Applicant has met the burden of proof necessary to justify the request to exchange two regions, 156 acres each, of the subject property and change the associated City of Redmond and Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan designations and zones for a UGB reconfiguration. The Applicant has met the burden of proof through effectively demonstrating compliance with the applicable criteria of DCC Title 18 (Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance), the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, and applicable sections of OAR and ORS. Accordingly, the Hearings Officer recommends the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners approve the requested plan amendment and zone change. The Applicant submitted a concurrent request to the City of Redmond (file no. 711-19-000163-PA). The Hearings Officer understands the Redmond Planning Commission reviewed the application on November 18, 2019, and recommended approval to the Redmond City Council. Dated this 24`" day of December, 2019. Will Van Vactor, Hearings Officer Hearings Officer Decision 247-19-000648-PA and 247-19-000649-ZC Page 41 of 41 U U U U U U U U U N N N N N N N N N (1 Cl Cl Cl Cl m m m m V a 'V' rf d* V -d' *t V w lD w w w w w lD w ddddddadd D_ D_ Q. D_ O_ D_ n. C 0_ oa,ofa,o,o,o,o,o,d, W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i _ = = = = _ = = = Ln m O tD In lD � r, r, o n Ol N n al r,O1 O1 r, cr O O N O 0 0 0 O1 O Ol Ol Ol Ol z m m m m N of O p O c 0 c 0 0 0 T c Eo c a a c c + a a w p w v 0 w w c� m cr m D_ m m m m m N O N O O N Y Y O CA O >; 7 T N Q> ar -o O lD = C U O tD r, Lz u H O O z N 001 N m 00 O In V�1 r, lD N a D- ci r7 ci ci lD 1� � N U aJ N Y C a1 U E J Q J O pp N C > ' T J � O L J a�l N w L N 3 O @ c to N Lc": c > N o O c o U � p � U Y f` O s O maj-Ln U °0 a`j C U M a N Q a m= w z z V) O m CC z w w z > D_zz &gu D D 0� o _ 3: v Y w O Q v ai m Y D z O N vNi o — = C d al a� _ v o Y o E> Q ow w O c O a m o ac m w m z m m U