Klamath County planning hearing closes record on 200‑MW Diamond Solar project; decision pending

Klamath County planning staff and the applicant presented a proposed 200‑megawatt photovoltaic project near Diamond Lake Junction at a joint planning commission/board hearing Oct. 28, 2025; the evidentiary record was closed for later deliberation.

Invenergy project manager Abby Wright said Diamond Solar would interconnect to Pacific Power’s 230 kV line and occupy roughly 1,300 fenced acres within a leased 1,560‑acre parcel. Wright told the commission the facility would include about 405,000 solar panels, a battery energy‑storage area, an operations and maintenance building and a small substation. “Two hundred megawatts of solar could power 40,000 homes on an annual basis,” Wright said during her sworn testimony.

Why it matters: the proposal combines a county land‑use exception to Goal 4 (forest lands) with a conditional‑use permit because of its size in a forestry zone. Staff told the commission the application includes 56 written findings and an extensive record of site surveys, agency coordination and environmental analyses intended to meet county code and state standards, but the county must still adopt findings and issue a final decision.

What was presented: staff described the layout as two separated solar arrays with an approximately 600–700‑foot vegetated wildlife passage between them, an 8‑foot chain‑link fence around the fenced area and an outside 30‑foot cleared fire buffer. The applicant said about 3 acres are proposed for a substation and about 7 acres for battery storage; the fenced facility is intended to be largely screened from highway views by surrounding forest.

Wildlife and mitigation: the applicant and Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) testified that a conservation/mitigation parcel of about 1,920 acres has been identified with the landowner to offset habitat impacts. Environmental consultant Katie Taylor, sworn in for the record, said the corridor will include roughly 600 feet of vegetated passage plus two 50‑foot cleared fire breaks on either side, “which totals 700 feet.” Mike Moore, ODFW district wildlife biologist, said the department has worked with the applicant under the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Policy and that ODFW considers the area to have higher habitat value than some materials in the application suggest; ODFW also reported finding that one collared deer was killed by a wolf on the project’s edge during recent field work.

Fire, access and emergency response: commissioners pressed the applicant on wildfire risk and emergency access. Invenergy said collection cabling will be buried, battery storage will be containerized with suppression systems, the O&M building will provide code‑required on‑site water storage, and the project will implement a vegetative‑management plan, internal access roads, Knox locks for emergency responders and annual joint trainings. The applicant agreed to work with the Chamault Rural Fire Protection District and the Oregon Office of State Fire Marshal on final design and permits and to seek final sign‑offs as a condition of construction permits.

Decommissioning and financial assurances: planning staff and commissioners discussed how decommissioning liability will be secured. Staff reported the developer and landowner have a contractual arrangement (bond) to address decommissioning obligations and advised the commission that, in this case, county naming as obligee was considered duplicative. The applicant said the lease and conservation arrangements include required security and that the record contains contract language and an exhibit addressing financial assurance; the planning record will include a condition requiring continued maintenance of that security during the lease term.

Economic effects and taxes: Randy Cox of Casita (the county’s economic development organization) testified that the project could produce new tax revenue for the county and local taxing districts. Cox said negotiations are ongoing about whether a Strategic Investment Program (SIP) or a pilot payment per megawatt will be used for tax/incentive structuring; he said this is being worked with the Department of Revenue and county staff.

Procedure and disposition: no final action was taken at the hearing. After testimony and applicant rebuttal, the commission closed the evidentiary portion of the hearing and scheduled deliberation and findings to follow; a short break was taken at the hearing’s close. Any decision will require written findings that address the county’s exception criteria and CUP standards.

Details and caveats: the hearing record and staff report include numerous technical exhibits (site surveys, ecological studies, property and agency coordination records). The applicant said construction could employ 250–300 union jobs during build-out and 2–3 permanent operations staff; Invenergy estimated a roughly 24‑month construction window with winter seasonal shutdowns. The applicant also said it is working to identify a non‑interested third‑party land trust to be the conservation easement holder alongside the landowner and project owner; that third‑party holder had not been finalized at the hearing.

What’s next: the planning commission will deliberate on findings after the hearing and the board/commission will ultimately issue an approval, approval with conditions, or denial supported by written findings. The record contains suggested findings from staff and the applicant; commissioners may adopt, modify or substitute findings in their final order.