1994-45814-Ordinance No. 94-051 Recorded 11/10/199494-45814
REVIEWED
bu W
LEGAL COUNSEL
013'-1288
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
An Ordinance Amending PL -20,
Deschutes County Comprehensive
Plan Map, Changing the Surface
Mining Plan Designation on Certain
Property in Deschutes County to
Surface Mining, and Declaring an
Emergency.
ORDINANCE NO. 94-051
WHEREAS, tax lot 500 in Section 4 of Township 19 South, Range 14 East, Willamette
Meridian, is a 120 -acre parcel (the parcel) designated as Agriculture under the County's
Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, Hap Taylor and Sons, Inc. has proposed a Plan Amendment to PL -20,
the Deschutes County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan, to change the designation of the parcel
from Agriculture to Surface Mining in the County's Comprehensive Plan Map;
WHEREAS, the Deschutes County Hearings Officer, after review conducted in
accordance with applicable law, has recommended approval of the proposed Plan Amendment
to PL -20; and
WHEREAS, after notice was given and hearing conducted on September 14, 1994 in
accordance with applicable law, the Board of County Commissioners has considered the
Hearings Officer's recommendation; now, therefore,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DESCHUTES COUNTY,
OREGON ORDAINS as follows:
Section 1. Adoption of ESEE. That PL -20, the Deschutes County Year 2000
Comprehensive Plan Map, as amended, is further amended to add the Conflict Analysis and
ESEE Findings and Decision for the subject surface mining site as part of the Resource
Element of the Plan, attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. Amendment of Comprehensive Plan Map. That PL -20, the Deschutes
County Year 2000 Plan Map, as amended, is further amended to change the plan designation
for the subject property, described as tax lot 500 in Section 4 of Township 19 South, Range
14 East, Willamette Meridian, and as further described by the legal description attached
hereto as Exhibit B and the map set forth as Exhibit G, both of which exhibits are
incorporated here in by reference, from Agricultural Use to Surface Mining.
l✓ICROFItMED
1 - ORDINANCE 94-051 7,-
K NCHED FEB 0 8 199 '
t , n }y 1994
013'7-1289
Section 3. Findings. In support of its decision, the Board adopts the Conflict Analysis
and ESEE Findings and Decision adopted by Section 1 above and the Findings,
Recommendation and Decision of The Hearings Officer, attached as Exhibit B to Ordinance
94-050 and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 4. REPEAL OF ORDINANCES AS AFFECTING EXISTING LIABILITIES.
The repeal, express or implied, of any ordinance, ordinance provision, code section or any line
of any map by this ordinance shall not release or extinguish any duty, condition, penalty,
forfeiture, or liability incurred under such ordinance, ordinance provision, code section or map
feature unless a provision of this ordinance shall so expressly provide, and such ordinance
repealed shall be treated as still remaining in force for the enforcement of such duty,
condition, penalty, forfeiture, or liability, and for the purpose of authorizing the prosecution,
conviction and punishment of the person or persons who violated the repealed ordinance.
Section 5. This Ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the
public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this Ordinance takes
effect on its passage.
DATED this _ 2 day of November, 1994.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
I)ESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
NANCY"E $ICHLANGEN, Chair
TOM THROOP, Commissioner
ST:
�v
(:ecording Secretary BARRY Hi SLAUGHTER, Commissioner
2 - ORDINANCE 94-051
Ex6l6;4 A
013'7-1290
Conflict Analysis and ESEE Findings and Decision
Site No. 496
Site Number 496, occupying tax lot 500 in Township 19 South, Range 14 E.W.M.,
Section 4, came before the Deschutes County Hearings Officer for hearing on May 24, 1994.
On July 28, 1994, the Deschutes County Land Use Hearings Officer made a preliminary
decision (Findings, Recommendation and Decision; County File Nos. PA -94-2 and ZC-94-2)
on this site. The site came before the Board of County Commissioners (Board) for hearing
on SeQt,»bw tz , 1994. By adoption of these findings and this decision, the Board
confirms anratifies that recommendation and decision.
The purpose of the hearing before the Board was to determine whether the subject
site, listed on the County's inventory of aggregate sites and should be classified under the
County's comprehensive plan and zoning regulations as "SM" or Surface Mining. For the
reasons given below, the Board determines that this -site should be so classified.
PRELRYU NARY FINDINGS
Site number 496 comprises approximately 120 acres and is located on the old Bend -
Burns Highway roughly two miles west of the east end of the road, just east of the site of the
Horse Ridge grade on Highway 20. The site is owned by Hap Taylor & Sons, Inc. and is
currently zoned EFU-HR, Exclusive Farm Use (Horse Ridge Subzone) and WA, Wildlife
Area. Adjacent land is zoned EFU, SM, LM and WA. Most of the surrounding land is
owned by the Bureau of Land Management.
Deschutes County has previously determined that an area within one-half mile. of a
mining site constitutes the impact area surrounding a mining site. This determination has
been accepted by the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) .as
evidenced by DLCD's acknowledgement of the County's comprehensive plan with respect to
Goal 5.
Existing or possible uses within this impact area must be considered when
determining whether or not any conflicts with mining exist. Uses within the impact area for
the subject parcel include historic surface mining by ODOT on tax lot #600 (also known as
county site no. 405), located immediately adjacent to the applicant's property. Uses on tax
lot #700 to the east include those uses permitted in an EFU zone, including farming and
grazing.
The subject property and surrounding lands lie within a deer winter range that is
designated on the County's comprehensive plan maps. The surface pit known as the "Moon
pit" is located approximately three miles to the east of the subject property, on the north side
of Highway 20. The Moon pit is adjacent to an abandoned BLM owned mining site. The
County is presently studying the feasibility of siting a new solid waste landfill in this area, as
Page 1 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
01.37-1291
the County's Knott Road landfill is nearing capacity. No specific property has been
identified as a landfill site.
Geotechnical evidence suggests that Site 496 contains approximately 1,800,000 cubic
yards of sand and gravel select fill resources. The Deschutes County Land Use Hearings
Officer has recommended that Site 496 be included on the Deschutes County Goal 5 Mineral
and Aggregate inventory. Based upon the site's quantity and quality of an identified source
of mineral and aggregate resources, a hearing was held by the Board to determine whether to
zone this site under statewide planning goal 5 to protect the mineral and aggregate resource.
APPLICABLE CRITERIA
Criteria applicable to this decision are Statewide Planning Goal 5, its implementing
rule, OAR 660-16-000, and the Deschutes County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan regarding
surface mining goals and policies.
*,1_ 4 C l" r1 CI1:
Prior to the Hearings Officer's preliminary decision on this site, staff prepared an
Conflict Analysis and ESEE Findings and Conclusions (ESEE) setting forth the site's
aggregate resources and conflicting resource and land use values. The Hearings Officer
included that ESEE, with minor modifications, with her preliminary decision regarding this
site The ESEE identified conflicting resources and uses and their impacts, evaluated the
economic, social, energy, and environmental consequences of protecting the mineral and
aggregate resource or in the alternative, protecting the conflicting values or uses as follows:
ESEE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
SITE NO. 496
1. Inventory. The County's Goal 5 mineral and aggregate inventory establishes that the
site has 1,800,000 cubic yards of sand and gravel which appear capable of meeting
the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) standards for select fill and which
are needed for use as fill material for building construction sites throughout the Bend
area.
2. Site Characteristics. This site is generally level, natural range land with a lower
elevated drainage area near the south property boundary. Bordering the site is a large
reclaimed gravel pit, formerly an active mining site operated by ODOT, which runs
parallel to the road. The site is naturally vegetated with juniper and sagebrush. The
Old Bend -Burns Highway bisects the site. There are no utilities or improvements on
the site. The road to the subject site is paved. Land in the surrounding area consists
of undeveloped range land with no dwellings or other uses within one-half mile.
Page 2 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
0137-1292
3. Conflicts analysis.
a. Conflicts
Resource Conflicts.
1. Wildlife. The Department of Fish and Wildlife has identified this site for deer
winter range. The resource element of the County's comprehensive plan
shows the site to fall within a designated deer winter range.
The County finds that winter wildlife habitat for deer is a significant Goal 5 resource,
in conflict with zoning for surface mining. Full protection of the deer winter habitat
resource would preclude zoning for surface mining as surface mining results in the
destruction of deer winter habitat, alters the topography to create deep holes where
deer may become trapped by predators, and causes noise, dust emissions and an
increased human presence which make the area less suitable for use as deer habitat.
Land Use Conflicts.
Land uses on the EFU-HR (Exclusive Farm Use - Horse Ridge) and SM (Surface
Mining) zones surrounding the site are set forth in Title 18 of the County Code. The
County finds that given the impacts of noise, dust, traffic, and physical scarring of the
landscape associated with surface mining, all allowed uses in the EFU zone are
conflicting in that full protection of those uses would preclude zoning for surface
mining. Farm and forest uses are conflicting uses in the sense that those uses can not
occupy the same space as surface mining activities on the site. In addition, farm uses
on adjacent property involving livestock operations can be a conflicting use.
The County finds that none of the conflicting allowed or conditional uses currently
exist at the site or within the impact area. Further, the County finds that such uses,
with the exception of livestock grazing, are unlikely to occur due to the remote
location of the site and the fact that most of the surrounding land is in public
ownership. The County also finds that the large minimum lot size of 320 acres and
the large size of existing, adjacent lots will prevent dense residential development
near the site.
Resource Conflicts
Protection of Mineral and Aggregate Resource
4. Economic Consequences. The County finds that the economic consequence of
protecting the mineral and aggregate resource, in conflict with other natural
resources, is difficult to measure. Deer winter habitat does not have any economic
value attached to it. Deer generate indirect economic benefits to the County when
Page 3 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
0137-1293
hunters travel to hunt the deer and when tourists travel to the County to hunt deer.
Additionally, a few tourists or local residents might travel to the subject property to
view wildlife.
5. Social Consequences. The County finds that the social consequences of protecting the
mineral and aggregate resource over the other natural resources would be negative.
Surface mining would have negative impacts on wildlife. Given that few people live
in the area, the social consequences would be felt primarily by those travelling
Highway 20 who might be deprived of wildlife viewing opportunities.
6. Environmental Consequences. The County finds that allowing surface mining
activities would have adverse environmental consequences on deer habitat. Surface
mining activities would reduce the available cover and forage at the site, which would
cause increased competition among deer for the remaining forage and co ,/er. Some
wildlife would be forced to leave the area to find other food sources and cover, thus
adding more competition in other areas for these resources. Increased truck traffic
associated with mining activities could increase the mortality rate for the area's
wildlife.
In some cases, over the long term, surface mining can be beneficial to environmental
values in that it gives an opportunity for a site already desecrated by the actions of
man or otherwise lacking in natural values to be improved as part of the reclamation
process. There is no evidence to suggest that this is one of those instances.
7. Energy Consequences. The County finds that the energy consequences of protecting
the mineral and aggregate resource, over the other natural resources, would be to
increase the energy consumption at the site due to fuel expenditures needed to run the
heavy equipment and processing equipment and to transport select fill to its end use
and to return to the site with loads of material for crushing. Such energy use would
be bound to occur, in any event. Mineral and aggregate resources are needed for use
in the County. Failure to protect the mineral and aggregate resources at this site
would mean that such energy use would occur elsewhere. This site is conveniently
located near the rapidly growing eastside of Bend, where most fill material will be
needed. Travel from this location to the eastside of Bend may occur without passing
through the center of Bend, as presently done by trucks from mines located to the
west of Bend. This fact will enable trucks to conserve energy as they will not be
required to stop and start for the numerous traffic lights in the Bend community.
Protection of Conflicting Goal 5 Resources
8. Economic Consequences. Protection of the natural resources would preclude mining
at the site. Deer winter habitat is in limited supply and the proposed surface mine
would cause displacement of wildlife and increased competition in remaining
unaffected areas.
Page 4 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
013`-1294
The County finds that, as reflected in the goals and policies statement of the County
comprehensive plan, the County consumes 2 million cubic yards of mineral and
aggregate materials each year. Under the laws of supply and demand, failure to
protect sufficient amounts of mineral and aggregate for the 20 -year planning cycle
will result in an increased cost in aggregate resources. Increases in mineral and
aggregate costs would in turn result in increased construction costs. To the extent
that minerals and aggregate would need to hauled in from outside the area, the cost of
mineral and aggregate would be increased by haulage, costs; which the County finds to
be at a rate of 22 cents per cubic yard per mile.
The County finds there to be a total of 73,538,000 cubic yards of sand, gravel and
rock in the County, accounting for the inventoried amount of sand, gravel and rock
and the amount of those materials located at sites within the urban growth boundary.
The County finds that virtually all sites have either resource or land use conflicts with
surface mining. Consequently, if more than 46% of the aggregate sites were to be
eliminated due to resource conflicts, the County would not have preserved sufficient
aggregate to meet its needs. The County finds that this particular site, standing alone,
is not essential to meeting the County's mineral and aggregate needs; however it also
recognizes that if enough other sites are eliminated due to conflicts, it could be.
Furthermore, the County recognizes the importance of preserving mineral and
aggregate resources for highway maintenance and construction and finds that failure
to protect such sites located along Highway 20 would result in increased costs for
maintenance and construction on Highway 20 east of Bend. While the select fill at
this site is presently intended for use in the building construction business, it would
also be available for use as select fill on highway projects.
The County finds that mineral and aggregate resources are a commodity with a
market value. Failure to allow mining of such resources would prevent the value of
such resources being realized by the local economy. Although the number of jobs
represented by the local aggregate industry is small in number, mining jobs tend to
pay at higher rates than those found in the service sector. The select fill from this
site will, however, be used in construction work in the Bend area. The construction
trades pay higher wage rates than paid in the service sector and are an important part
of the local economy.
Finally, the County finds that the economic impact of failing to preserve sufficient
mineral and aggregate reserves is not readily mitigated. Mineral and aggregate
resources are location dependent and are finite resources.
9. Social Consequences. Preserving the conflicting natural resources at the site could
have negative effects on the general welfare of the County if insufficient amounts of
mineral and aggregate are preserved. Regardless of the amount of supply readily
available, there will always be a demand for mineral and aggregate resources. The
Page 5 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
0137°1295
County's roads would still need improvement and maintenance. Select fill would still
be needed by the local building industry. A deterioration of the County's roads and
streets would negatively impact the liveability and quality of life in Deschutes County.
A lack of need fill would force major changes in methods of construction and might
prevent construction of some projects. The County also recognizes the social
consequences of increased building costs that can result from a shortage of readily
available mineral and aggregate resources.
10. Environmental Consequences. Protection of the conflicting natural resources would
preclude mining at the site. The noise, traffic, human presence and disruption of
habitat associated with surface mining is inimical to the protection of scenic views and
deer and antelope habitat. Therefore, protection of the natural resources by
precluding mining would have positive environmental consequences. As with the
mineral and aggregate resource, wildlife resources are limited by locational factors.
Wildlife habitat is continually shrinking in the face of increased development.
11. Energy Consequences. As mentioned above, the energy consequences of protecting
the natural resource values of this site and others like it along the Highway 20
corridor would involve increased haulage distances. The County finds that protection
of natural resource values at the site would have negative energy consequences.
12. Relative Values of the Conflicting Resources. The County finds that the conflicting
natural resource and the mineral and aggregate resource are important relative to one
another. Both resources are finite and locationally dependent. Mineral and aggregate
resources are in limited supply in the County and there is a need for the mineral and
aggregate resources along the Highway 20 corridor for highway maintenance and
construction and fill for construction sites. Deer habitat is continually being lost to
new development. Therefore, the County finds that both the mineral and aggregate
resource and the conflicting natural resources should be protected. Accordingly the
County finds that under OAR 660-16-010(3) protection of the mineral and aggregate
resource shall be limited by protection of the natural resources.
Conflicting Uses
Protection of Aggregate and Mineral Resource
13. Economic Consequences. The economic consequences of protecting the mineral and
aggregate resource relates to the impacts of surface mining on adjacent uses, the value
of mineral and aggregate as a commercial commodity and the impacts of protecting
employment in the mining industry and the development opportunities foregone by
development of the site. While the impacts of surface mining may in individual cases
have a short term impact on property values of surrounding properties, trend analysis
from the tax assessor's records of specific parcels either adjacent to or within one-half
mile of both existing and potential surface mines indicates that there were no drastic
Page 6 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
013"7-1290
fluctuations in these property values. This same analysis shows that there has been no
appreciable decline in sales of these or similar types of properties.
The most significant impact to surrounding property owners would be if regulations to
protect the mineral and aggregate resource were enacted that would make surrounding
properties unbuildable.
Allowing surface mining activities at this site could have some short-term negative
impacts on the ability to utilize this property for other uses. However, nothing
- indicates that such uses are likely to occur, given the remoteness of the site. Nothing
indicates that such uses would have a higher economic value than use of this site for
surface mining. There is no shortage of land in the County available for development
for the uses allowed in the EFU zone, while the supply of mineral and aggregate
resources in the County is in short supply. Furthermore, surface mining is a
transitional use, and after reclamation the land surface would then become available
for other uses.
14. Social Consequences. Preserving this site for the production of mineral and aggregate
resources would have a major impact on the quality of life associated with the other
land uses in the area. The impacts of noise, fugitive dust emissions, and increased
truck traffic would negatively impact the livability and scenic quality of the
surrounding area. Such impacts may be mitigated, however, through environmental
controls on the mining operation. Such controls are imposed, by the County, by
ordinance and through site plan review of mining operations.
The County finds that the negative social consequences of mining activity are low in.
this case due to the fact that there are few existing land use conflicts. Additionally, it
is likely that few such conflicting uses will arise in the future, due to the zoning and
public ownership of surrounding lands.
15. Energy Consequences. The County finds that preserving this site for the production
of minerals would have overall positive energy consequences. As stated above, the
energy consumed on site by mining equipment is likely to occur at some mining site,
in any event, as there is a basic need for such resources. Haul distances to Highway
20 repair jobs or construction projects, in the area, would be minimized. To the
extent that surface mining would preclude or discourage development of the
surrounding rural lands, the energy consequences would likewise be positive.
16. Environmental Consequences. The County finds that protecting the site for mining
would have negative environmental consequences for the same reasons given under
paragraph 14 above. The County further finds that such impacts can be mitigated.
Page 7 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
0137-1297
Protection of Conflicting Land Uses
17. Economic Consequences. With the exception of geothermal development and farm
and forest uses, all uses in the surrounding zoning designations are classed as noise
sensitive uses for purposes of DEQ noise regulations. Farm uses may be noise
sensitive uses in certain situations, such as with livestock operations. Protection of
such surrounding conflicting uses can have the effect of precluding or limiting further
surface mining activity due to noise regulations. Likewise, dust, traffic and aesthetic
impacts place constraints on surface mining operations amongst conflicting land uses.
While the elimination of part or all of any one site (except R.L. Coats's site No. 308
in 17-12-18 of 10 million cubic yards) would not significantly impact the total supply
of mineral and aggregate in Deschutes County, if every site with conflicting uses were
eliminated for that reason, Deschutes County would be unable to meet its mineral and
aggregate needs. Almost every mineral and aggregate site has some degree of
conflict with surrounding land uses. In light of that fact, each aggregate site takes on
importance, as cumulatively, individual sites with conflicts could be eliminated and
prevent the County from meeting its mineral and aggregate needs.
18. Social Consequences. The County finds that the social consequences of allowing
incompatible development to preclude the use of all or part of this site would be the
same as those under the Goal 5 discussion above.
19. Environmental Consequences. The environmental consequences of protecting
surrounding land uses is mixed. Protecting the conflicting land uses could well
preclude mining at the site. This would have positive environmental consequences in
that the noise, dust, traffic, and aesthetic impacts associated with surface mining
would be prevented. However, protecting the conflicting land uses, especially in a
site such as this that is largely undeveloped, can also have negative environmental
impacts. Thus, if surrounding areas become developed, they, too, can have a
detrimental impact on wildlife habitat, reducing the overall supply of food and cover
and increasing competition for adjoining undeveloped habitat.
20. Energy Consequences. Allowing development that would preclude or curtail mining
at this and other sites along the Highway 20 corridor would create greater energy
consumption because the mineral and aggregate resources for upkeep and
improvement of Highway 20 would have to come from sites located further away.
Furthermore, increased development at this remote site would increase energy use
from those living in or patronizing the allowed uses. Such development would likely
lead to a long term energy commitment because of the live span of such development.
21. Relative Values of Aggregate Use and Conflicting Uses. Based upon the analysis of
the ESEE consequences of protecting the identified conflicting uses and protecting the
mineral and aggregate resource and the relative weight of the conflicting uses and the
Page 8 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
mineral resource, the County finds that with respect to existing development both the
mineral resource and the conflicting resources and uses are important relative to one
another. The aggregate has importance due to its limited availability in the County
and its location near its point of use, Highway 20. Existing conflicting uses, if any,
are important in that they represent an economic commitment to development of
individual pieces of private property with economic value and expectations.
Accordingly, the County finds that, pursuant to OAR 660-16-010, it will limit the use
of the mineral resource at the site in favor of the conflicting resources.
Potential development in the impact area is not significant enough to be considered to
be a use that would limit the use of the aggregate resource at this site.
Program to Meet the Goal
22. The Board finds that, in order to protect both the aggregate resource and the
conflicting resources and uses, the site will be zoned for surface mining, subject to
the following ESEE conditions:
(a) Setbacks shall be required for potential conflicting residential and other
development;
(b) Noise and visual impacts shall be mitigated by buffering and screening;
(c) Hours of operation shall be consistent with DEQ standards and applicable
county ordinances;
(d) Operation of rock crushing equipment and mining operations shall be
discontinued, on-site, from December 1 through April 30.
(e) Roads on-site shall be blocked from December 1 through April 30 to prevent
access by the general public. Access roads shall be removed when mining
operations are completed.
(e) Reclamation shall meet ODFW recommendations, DOGAMI requirements and
applicable county ordinances,.
The County finds that processing on site will be allowed from May 1 through
November 30 each year.
Conflicting Resources
23. The County finds that surface mining use of the site will be limited' by conflicting
Goal 5 resource considerations by the provisions for screening and buffering to
mitigate noise and visual impact. The County further finds that the winter closure of
the site will offer protection for deer and antelope herds. The County finds that the
screening and buffering ESEE requirements are met by the screening and buffering
requirements in the Deschutes County zoning ordinance.
Page 9 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
0137-1299
The County finds that such mitigation will not prevent the County from achieving its
goal, since the site will be allowed to be mined. The County finds that the winter
closure will not be unduly restrictive, since it occurs at a time of the year when road
construction and the excavation stage of building construction projects are not
underway and some loading and unloading of trucks will be allowed.
Mineral Resource
24. The County will protect the mineral and aggregate resource by zoning the site SM to
allow for surface mining activities. The County finds that Deschutes County Zoning
Ordinance allows mining activities such as extraction, processing, crushing, batching,
and other mining -dependent uses as permitted or conditional uses and activities in the
zone. Conflicting uses, such as residential uses that would irretrievably commit
surface area to other uses and otherwise conflict with surface mining are not allowed
uses in the zone. Agricultural and forest uses are allowed in recognition that such
uses can occur without irretrievably committing the property to uses other than
surface mining. In this manner the surface area of the mineral and aggregate resource
is protected against establishment of uses that would prevent mining of the mineral
and aggregate in the future. Such protection advances the goal of protection of
sufficient mineral and aggregate resources to meet the County's mineral and aggregate
needs.
25. The County finds that imposition of a Surface Mining Impact Area (SMIA) combining
zone as a one-half mile buffer surrounding the SM zone, as set forth in the Deschutes
County Zoning Ordinance, will further protect the mineral and aggregate resource and
the County so zones the one-half mile area surrounding the SM zone. The County
finds that the SMIA zone limits conflicting uses as follows:
(a) New conflicting "noise -sensitive" and "dust -sensitive" uses, such as single-
family dwellings, may be sited closer than one-half mile to a SM zone only if
the applicant has signed a waiver of remonstrance precluding protest of any
surface mining activities; and
(b) In all cases new conflicting "noise sensitive" and "dust sensitive" uses are
prevented from locating any closer than 250 feet to an SM zone or one-quarter
mile from a processing site, whichever is further.
The County finds that these provisions satisfy the ESEE condition that residential and
other development be subject to setbacks. The County finds that such a provision is
sufficient to protect the mineral and aggregate resource from conflicting future
development.
26. The County finds that, in combination with the action taken on other mineral and
aggregate sites, zoning the site for surface mining and protecting the site from future
Page 10 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
0137--1300
surrounding conflicting land uses, the County's goal of preserving sufficient aggregate
resources to meet the needs of the County have been met.
Land Uses
27. Existing conflicting land uses are protected by the requirement that newly sited
surface mines or expansion of existing surface mines meet screening requirements,
setback requirements, noise standards, adhere to limits on maximum area of surface
disturbance and other limitations.
Page 11 - ESEE Findings and Decision (Site No. 496)
013'-1301
Exhibit B
To Ordinance 94-051
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The West Half of the Southwest Quarter (W 1/2 SW 1/4), and the
Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (NE 1/4 SW 1/4) in
Section Four (4), Township Nineteen (19) South, Range Fourteen (14)
East of the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon, less
that 12.34 acre portion of the State Highway property described in
that certain deed recorded in Volume 49, Page 319 Deschutes County
Deed Records located therein and excepting the Old Bend -Burns
Highway.