1995-24349-Ordinance No. 95-042 Recorded 7/12/1995REVIEWED
._ 1)
LEGAL COUNSEL
9524349
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DES CI4UTES COUN`T`Y; OREGON
Nj?`
r;,
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.
* 01 4 / X0630
*
ORDINANCE NO. 95-042
WHEREAS, the southern 240 acres in tax lot 200 in Sections 1 and 12 of Township 19
South, Range 14 East, Willamette Meridian (the subject site), are designated as Agriculture under
the County's Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, Howard M. Day has proposed a Plan Amendment to PL -20, the Deschutes
County Year 2000 Comprehensive Plan, to change the designation of the subject site from
Agriculture to Surface Mining in the County's Comprehensive Plan Map; and
WHEREAS, a portion of tax lot 200 in Sections 1 and 12 of Township 19 South, Range
14 East, Willamette Meridian, encompasses 200 acres designated Surface Mining under the County's
Comprehensive Plan; and
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 July 12, 1995 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, as amended, is further amended to add the Conflict Analysis and ESEE
Findings and Decision for the subject property 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
1 - ORDINANCE 95-042
31895
014'7-0631
property, described as the southern 240 acres of tax lot 200 in Sections 1 and 12 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 C, both of which exhibits are
incorporated herein by reference, from Agricultural Use to Surface Mining.
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 Decision of The Hearings Officer,
attached as Exhibit B to Ordinance 95-041 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 day of July, 1995.
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
2 - ORDINANCE 95-042
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
DESCHUTES COUNTY, OREGON
BARRY H. 9LAUGHTER, Chair
-pom- Yw'U.W�'
NANCY POE 9CEPNGEN, Commissio er
- 7 1 y4p-
ROBkT
L. NIPPER, Com i sioner
EXHIBIT A
TO ORDINANCE 95-042
CONFLICT ANALYSIS AND ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION
Site No. 404 0147-0100312
Site No. 404, occupying tax lot 200 located in Township 19 South, Range 14 E.W.M, portions of
Sections 1, 2, and 12 consists of two areas which have been separately considered for inclusion in the
County's Goal 5 aggregate inventory.
The first area, consisting of 200 acres, is hereinafter referred to as the "existing surface mining
area." It came before the Board of Commissioners (Board) for a hearing on August 7, 1989. On October
17, 1989, the Board made a Preliminary decision on this area. By the adoption of findings and an ESEE
decision, the Board confirmed and ratified its preliminary decision for the first area of Site No. 404. The
ESEE and findings for the existing surface mining area for Site No. 404 was adopted by the Board on July
16, 1990. (Ord. No. 90-029).
The second area of Site No. 404 consisting of 240 acres is situated immediately south of the
existing surface mining area and is hereinafter referred to as "the hard rock area" or "the expansion area. "
The Deschutes County Hearing's Officer conducted a hearing on May 2, 1995, to determine whether the
second area should be made a part of site No. 404, listed on the County's inventory of aggregate sites and
classified under the County's comprehensive plan and zoning regulations as SM (Surface Mining),
The Hearing's Officer made a Preliminary decision (Findings, Recommendation and Decision;
County File No. PA -95-3 and ZC-95-3) regarding the expansion area. The site came before the Board for
hearing on n4 12, 199j , 1995. By adoption of these findings and this ESEE decision, the Board
confirms and ratifies that recommendation and decision on the expansion area of Site No. 404 and
incorporates the findings and decision on the expansion area in the original ESEE for Site No. 404.
The purpose of the hearing before the Board was to determine whether the expansion area should
be listed on the County's inventory of aggregate sites and should be classified under the County's
Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations as "SM" (Surface Mining). For the reasons given below, the
Board determines that the expansion area should be classified SM.
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
Site No. 404 comprises approximately 440 acres and is located approximately one mile north of
Highway 20 and one and one-half miles north of Horse Ridge. The site is owned by Howard M. Day.
The existing surface mining area is currently zoned SM and WA. The expansion area is currently zoned
EFU-HR (Exclusive Farm Use -Horse Ridge Subzone) and WA (Wildlife Area Combining Zone) . Most
of the surrounding land is managed by the Bureau of Land Management.
The existing surface mining area of Site No. 404 was identified as containing aggregate resources
in the County's Goal 5 aggregate inventory adopted by the Board on December 6, 1988. Based on the
existing surface mining area's inclusion on the inventory, a hearing was held to determine whether to zone
it under Goal 5 to protect the aggregate resource. It was so zoned on July 16, 1990. (Ord. No. 90-029).
1 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
014'7-0633
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 those uses
permitted in an EFU zone, including farming and grazing. The subject property and surrounding lands
lie withip a deer winter range that is designated on the County's Comprehensive Plan maps. The County
is presently studying the feasibility of siting a new solid waste landfill in this area, as the County's Knott
Road landfill is nearing capacity. No specific property has been identified as a landfill site.
Geotechnical evidence suggests that the expansion area in Site 404 contains approximately 800,000
- 2,000,000 cubic yards of hard rock, and 1.5 million cubic yards of gravel, topsoil and fill. The
Deschutes County Land Use Hearing's Officer has recommended that the expansion area 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 the expansion area on the 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 Deschutes County Ordinance 90-028, revising the Deschutes County Year 2000
Comprehensive Plan regarding surface mining goals and policies.
HEARING AND EXHIBITS
Prior to the hearings on this site, staff reports and a Conflict Analysis and ESEE Findings and
Decision (the "ESEE") were prepared setting forth the site's aggregate resources and conflicting resource
and land use values. The reports and the ESEE, which were entered into the record at the hearings before
the Board on August 7, 1989 and July 12, 1995 , set forth the site's aggregate resources and
identified conflicting resources and land uses and their impacts and evaluated the economic, social, energy,
and environmental consequences of protecting the mineral resource or in the alternative, protecting the
conflicting values or uses.
ESEE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. Inventory. The County' s Goal 5 mineral and aggregate inventory. adopted by Ordinance 90-025
established that the site contains 193,000 cubic yards of aggregate resource in the existing surface mining
area. The applicant's geotechnical engineer has prepared a report based on an examination of the existing
and expansion areas which establishes that the site (both the existing surface mining area and the hard rock
area) has 800,000 to 2 million cubic yards of aggregate rock which appear capable of meeting the Oregon
Department of Transportation specifications for road base and asphalt rock, and approximately.3 million
cubic yards of sand, gravel, and topsoil resources.
2. Site Characteristics. The site is part of a working ranch and is essentially level with rock
outcroppings. The site is along the northwestern base of Bear Creek Buttes and no other special features
2 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
014'7-0634
have been noted. It consists of natural grazing land with juniper trees, sagebrush and grasses. There are
no improvements or utilities on the subject site other than the onsite ranch house. The surrounding area
consists of natural range land with no improvements within one-half mile. The site is currently being mined.
3. Conflicts Analysis.
A. Resource Conflicts.
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.
B. Land Use Conflicts.
Land uses on the EFU-HR (Exclusive Farm Use - Horse Ridge) zone 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 remoteness of the site and
the fact that most of the surrounding land is in public ownership. The County finds that
the large minimum lot size of 320 acres would prevent any dense development near the site.
4. Current Mining Use of Site. The County finds that surface mining is a current use at the existing
surface mining area and could continue within any valid existing DOGAMI or County permit area
regardless of whether or not the expansion area on this site is zoned in the Goal 5 process. Accordingly,
the consequences of allowing mining to proceed on the existing site have occurred or are already occurring
and could be allowed to occur until such time as expansion of the site would be necessary. Therefore, the
relevance of the ESEE discussion below with respect to the existing surface mining area is primarily
whether any expansion would be allowed at the site and whether the expansion area is important enough
that limitations should be placed on existing and potential land use conflicts.
3 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
014'7-0635
Resource Conflicts
Protection of Aggregate Resource
5. Economic Consequences. The County finds that the economic consequence of protecting the
aggregate conflicts with other natural resources is difficult to measure, given that deer habitat does not have
any economic values attached to it. Deer winter habitat does not have any economic value attached to it.
Deer generate indirect economic benefits to the County when 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. Economic consequences would tend to be of a secondary nature,
such as a reduction in tourists who would come to the site to view.
6. Social Consequences. The County finds that the social consequences of protecting the mineral
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.
7. 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 cover. 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.
8. Energy Consequences. The County finds that the energy consequences of protecting the mineral
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 as well as the fuel expended
in transportation of the product to its end use. Such energy use would be bound to occur in any event.
Aggregate is a resource that is needed in the County and failure to protect the mineral resource at this site
would only 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. The County finds
generally that the energy consequences of not allowing mining of sites convenient to highway construction
and maintenance sites such as this one would be greater than if such mining were not allowed, due to the
greater distances involved in transporting aggregate to the point of use.
Protection of Conflicting Goal 5 Resources
9. 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.
4 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
014"7-0636
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 aggregate materials each year. Under the laws of
supply and demand, failure to protect sufficient amounts of 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 aggregate would need to be hauled in from outside
the area, the cost of aggregate would be increased by haulage costs, which the Board 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 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 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.
The County finds that 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, manufacturing
and construction jobs tend to pay at higher rates than those found in the service sector and are an important
part of the local economy.
Finally, the County finds that the economic impacts of failing to preserve sufficient aggregate
reserves is not readily mitigated. Mineral resources are locationally dependent and are finite resources.
10. 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 aggregate are preserved. Regardless
of the amount of supply readily available, there will always be a demand for aggregate resources. The
County's roads would still need improvement and maintenance. A deterioration of the County' s roads and
streets would negatively impact the liveability and quality of life in Deschutes County. The County also
recognizes the social consequences of increased building costs that can result from a shortage of readily
available aggregate resources.
11. Environmental Consequences. Protection of the conflicting natural resource would preclude mining
at the site. The noise, traffic, human presence and disruption of habitat associated with surface mining is
inimicable to the protection of deer 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.
12. 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 likely involve increased
5 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
0147-0637
haul distances. The County finds that protection of natural resource values at the site would have negative
energy consequences.
13. Relative Values of the Conflicting Resources and Aggre atg e Use. The County finds that the natural
resources and the aggregate resource are important relative to one another. Both aggregate resources and
the conflicting natural resource of deer winter habitat are finite resources and locationally dependent.
Aggregate resources are in limited supply in the County and there is a need for the aggregate resources
along the Highway 20 corridor for highway maintenance and to construction sites. Deer habitat is
continually being lost to new development. Therefore, the County finds that both the aggregate resource
and the conflicting natural resources should be protected. Accordingly the County finds that under OAR
660-16-010(3) protection of the aggregate resource shall be limited by protection of the natural resources.
Conflicting Uses
Protection of Aggregate Resource
14. Economic Consequences. The economic consequences of protecting the aggregate resource relates
to the impacts of surface mining on adjacent uses, the value of aggregate resources as a commercial
commodity and the impacts of protecting employment in the mining industry and the development
opportunities foregone by development of the site. Cattle ranching by itself could not sustain commercial
values.
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 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 impact to surrounding property owners would be if regulations to protect the mineral resource
were enacted that would make surrounding properties unbuildable.
One potential cost to the community at large is the cost of road repairs necessitated by increased
heavy truck traffic on public roads. This is not viewed as a major problem in this case, due to the fact that
the site is to be used as a source for public road projects and would not involve everyday transit of trucks
to and from the site as would be the case with commercial sites.
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
in this case, given the remoteness of the site and 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 aggregate resources
in the County is limited. Furthermore, surface mining is a transitional use, and after reclamation the land
surface would then become available for other uses.
15. 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
negative impacts of noise, fugitive dust emissions, and increased truck traffic would contribute to the
impact on the livability, scenic quality and compatibility of other uses in the vicinity of the project. Such
6 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
0147-063 S
impacts may be mitigated, however, through environmental controls on the mining operation.
The County finds that the social consequences of mining activity are low in this case due to the fact
that there are few existing land use conflicts and likely to be few such conflicts in the future due to the
zoning and public ownership of surrounding lands.
16. Energy Consequences. The County finds that preserving this site for the production of aggregate
resources 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 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.
17. Environmental Consequences. The County finds that protecting the site for mining would have
negative environmental consequences for the same reasons given under paragraph 15 above. The County
further finds that such impacts can be mitigated.
Protection of Conflicting Land Uses
18. 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. Farms 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
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 aggregate in Deschutes
County, if every site with conflicting uses were eliminated for that reason, Deschutes County would be
unable to meet its aggregate needs. Almost every 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 aggregate needs.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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
7 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
0147-0639
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 life span of such development.
22. 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 aggregate resource and the
relative weight of the conflicting uses and aggregate resource, the County finds that with respect to existing
development both the aggregate 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, and on the east site of Bend. 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 Board finds that pursuant to OAR 660-
16-010 it will limit the use of the aggregate 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
23. The County finds that in order to protect both the aggregate resource and the conflicting resources
and uses that the expansion area at this site will be zoned for surface mining, and that both the existing
surface mining area and the expansion area will be 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) The site shall not be operated from December 1 through April 30.
The County finds that processing on site will be allowed from May 1 through November 30 each
year in the existing surface mining area and in the expansion or hard rock area. Blasting and drilling will
be allowed in the expansion area.
Conflicting Resources
24. 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 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.
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
8 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
014'7-0640
restrictive, since it occurs at a time of the year when road construction and the excavation stage of building
construction projects are not underway.
Aggregate Resource
25. The County will protect the mineral or aggregate resource by zoning the site SM to allow for
surface mining activities. The County finds that the 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 or aggregate resource is protected against establishment of uses that would prevent mining
of the aggregate resources in the future. Such protection advances the goal of protection of sufficient
aggregate resources to meet the County's aggregate needs.
26. 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 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 allowed 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
aggregate resource from conflicting future development.
27. The County finds that, in combination with the action taken on other aggregate sites, zoning the
site for surface mining and protecting the site from future surrounding conflicting land uses, the County's
goal of preserving sufficient aggregate resources to meet the needs of the County has been met.
Land Uses
28. 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 set forth in the Program to
meet the Goal and the Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance.
9 - ESEE FINDINGS AND DECISION - SITE NO. 404
014'7-0641
EXHIBIT B
TO ORDINANCE 95-042
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
The Southeast One-quarter of the Southwest One-quarter
(SEI/4SW1/4) and the Southwest One-quarter of the Southeast
One-quarter (SW1/4SE1/4) of Section One (1), and the
Northeast One-quarter (NE1/4) of Section Twelve (12), all in
Township Nineteen (19) South, Range Fourteen (14), East of
the Willamette Meridian, Deschutes County, Oregon.
1
®tel
.IU j,;
ISARI
COUNTY PIT NO. 404
f STATE OF OREGON PIT NO. 09-0149
r
—�--' ayes `" e :_
A
Exh* bi 4- L
ro oYaln.,�«. qs-b4Z
0147-0642
�-""�� w ter'— ;; • / /1 3�sao
n
It
4 ... 0: s +„ N;.� r /-'• EXISTING 200 AC.
oa " . �---' a % SURFACE M NE •
.+ + �' : Moon
r
Property \ `�
g0� 440 Acres
��O o y'd. ''— .� l..�iiArR•
EXPANDED S M AREA
3639 urt� � i i
. Z40 AC.
'fl+
% \�
6 �1 AREA MA.P
J MOON MINING OPERATION
PORTION OF \�
iW
i
0
W
N SECTION 1,2 & 12, T 19S, R 14E, W.M. I
1 \1 111 DESCHUMS COUNTY, OREGON(11
I
i 11
n
FIGURE 3
•.moi