33-312-Order Recorded 10/5/1979VOL
IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
FOR DESCHUTES COUNTY
In the Matter of CU-79-9, ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
Tumalo Irrigation District, ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Applicant. ) AND ORDER.
33 FACE 312
This matter came before the regular term of the Board of County Commissioners
on September 25, 1979, on an appeal pursuant to County Procedural Ordinance PL-9,
by the Tumalo Irrigation District, from the Decision of June 27, 1979, by the
Deschutes County Planning Commission, denying conditional use permit application
CU-79-9. The hearing was duly noticed. Monte Kennedy, Esq.represented the appli-
cant, and Max Merrill, Esq. represented parties in opposition to the application
within the zone of notification. Argument having been heard on the record,
Exhibits 1 through 9 having been received from the Planning Director, considered,
and Exhibits A through V having been received from the applicant and considered,
and the Board being fully advised, has found and decided as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts the Findings of Fact of the
Deschutes County Planning Commission dated July 25, 1979, attached hereto and incor-
ported herein by reference, and makes the following additional findings:
1. The site of the proposed surface mine is within 700 feet of the Tumalo
Grade School. The Board takes judicial notice that the sounds of the surface mine
and air pollution emanating therefrom, would in the natural course of events travel
to the Tumalo Grade School. The applicant has failed to show that the effects of
this noise and air pollution would be neutralized by the construction of the school,
its siting, or the natural features of the land between the proposed mining site and
the grade school.
Accordingly, it is concluded that the proposed mining activity would create
noise disrupting the operation of the grade school, and the air pollution generated
PAGE -1- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
'vol. 33 PAGE 313
thereby would create an unhealthful condition for students attending the school.
In addition, the applicant has not convinced the Board that it will prevent these
effects in the operation of its proposed surface mine.
2. The parties proposing the application presented information that the pro-
posed mining activity would harm them by creating dust, noise, and glare from the
lights that would illuminate the site during night operations, and an unsightly
condition that would substantially reduce the value of the surrounding property
for residential use. The applicant failed to establish that it had any program to
render the adverse impact of the use on property values, livability, and permiss-
ible development of the surrounding area to be minimal. In order to sustain its
burden of proof in this regard, the applicant would have to have shown how it
could muffle the sound of its machinery to a level not substantially greater than
the sounds produced by the traffic on Highway 20 as heard from the property within
the zone of notification; it would have to have shown the availability of water
and spray equipment sufficient to have prevented the drifting of dust from the site
and to neighboring residential neighborhoods, and would have to have shown how it
could screen the operation from view by all residences within the zone of notifica-
tion. Furthermore, it would have to have shown the ability to realize a security
system that would adequately protect the neighbors' children and pets from the
truck traffic generated by the operation, and which would make the work site inaccess-
ible to them.
3. Although the applicant expressed a willingness to reclaim the site after
mining in accordance with a state-approved reclamation plan, the finish grade
shown in Exhibit 6 of two to one would create a nuisance in respect to the surrounding
residential uses. Considering the proximity of the surrounding residential uses and
the accessibility of the site, the applicant would have to have shown a plan to
restore the surface to a slope not substantially different than that existing prior
to the mining, in order to have an acceptable reclamation plan.
PAGE -2- FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
s VOL `33 ?Au 314
4. It would be necessary to operate mining equipment on the site from 6:00 AM
to 10:00 PM almost every day for two years, in order to complete the proposed excava-
tion and reclamation. Considering the proximity of residential use, and taking
administrative notice of the level of noise generated by earth moving equipment,
and considering the failure of applicant to demonstrate any workable means for pro-
tecting surrounding residents from this noise, it is concluded that the proposed
mining would have a substantially disruptive effect on the surrounding residential
uses. This noise would constitute a nuisance as to the surrounding residential prop-
erty. It would interfere with the operation of Tumalo School during the day, and
the peace, rest, and repose of the neighbors in the morning and evening hours. The
applicant would have to have shown how it intended to neutralize the expected machin-
ery noise in order to have its application approved.
Based upon the above findings of fact, the Board adopts the Planning Commission's
legal conclusions as follows:
1. The applicant has failed to sustain its burden of proof as required by
County Zoning Ordinance PL-5 to the effect that the proposed location, size, design,
and operating characteristics of the surface mine would have a minimal adverse impact
on the property value, livability, and permissible development of the surrounding
area.
2. That the applicant has failed to comply with Uniform Procedural Ordinance
PL-9 in that it has failed to show that the proposed use is in compliance with the
Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan, applicable County ordinances, and statewide planning
goals.
DECISION:
For the reasons set forth above, conditional use application CU-79-9 is
denied.
DATED and ENTERED October .5- , 1979.
Distribution:
County Counsel
Tumalo Irrigation District
Monte Kennedy, Esq.
Max Merrill, Esq.
Century West Engineering
Planning Director
PAGE -3- FINDINGS OF FACT
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
C f W"/
ROBERT C. PAULSON, JR., Commissioner
girl
VOL. tN WE 315
DESCHUTES COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
DECISION AND FINDINGS
Appeal. Hearing: June 27, 1979 File No: CU 79-9
Applicant : Tumalo Irrigation District
Request: Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of a Surface
mine excavation site in an A-1, Exclusive Agriculture zone.
Location: Approximately 1 mile northwest of Tumalo, 1,000 feet north
of Hwy 20, or more specifically Tax Lot 400, Township 16S,
Range 12 E, Section 30.
The following findings and conclusions are based on the exhibits and
evidence introduced at the Public Hearing held June 27, 1979.
Burden Of Proof: In order for the Planning Commission to approve a
Conditional Use request of the nature at hand,
the applicable provisions of PL-5, Article 7,
Section 7.015 must be considered.
1. That the location, size, design, and operating characteristics
of the proposed use are such that it will have minimal adverse
impact on the property value, livability and permissable
development of the surrounding area. Consideration shall
be given to compatibility in terms of size, coverage,•and
density of the proposed use; to the alteration of traffic
patterns and the capacity of surrounding streets and to
any other relevant impact of the proposed use.
2. That the site planning of the proposed use will, as far as
reasonably possible, provide an aesthetically pleasing and
functional environment to the highest degree consistent
with the nature of the use and the given setting.
3. If the use is permitted outright in another zone, that
there is substantial reason for locating the use in an
area where it is only conditionally allowed, as opposed
to the zone area where it is permitted outright.
4. That the proposed use will be consistent with the purposes
of the Deschutes County Zoning Ordinance, the Comprehensive
Plan, Statewide Goals, and any other statues, ordinances,
or policies that may be applicable.
The Planning Commission must further find that the applicable provisions
of PL-9, Uniform Procedure Ordinance, Section 6.000, Burden of Proof,
has been complied with:
If The applicant shall in all cases establish:
a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan;and
b. Conformance with all applicable statues; and
c. Conformance with all applicable ordinance provisions
setting forth the various criteria to be employed for
rezoning, conditional uses and variances, and
d. Conformance with statewide planning goals wherever the are
determined to be applicable.
! s
' Decisions and Findings r VOL
Tumalo Irrigation District
CU-79-9
Page 2
FTNDTNr,S
I. The Applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof set
forth in PL-5, that the location, size, design, and operating
characteristics would have minimal adverse impact on the
property value, livability, and permissable development of the
surrounding area.
The subject property is 50 acres in size, of which the proposed aggregate
excavation site will be located on the southwest 10 acres. To the south
west corner of the proposed excavation site is a horse training arena
and property to the northwest and east are aggregate excavation sites,
some current, and property to the north and west is vacant.
The property surrounding the proposed 50 acre tract is currently zoned
A-1, Exclusive Agriculture.
The subject property has Class V and VII soils along with an existing
excavation pit. The property is not on Farm Tax Deferral but is desig-
nated on the Deschutes County Comprehensive Plan as Intensive Agriculture.
The Applicant proposes access to the property from Highway 20 and
plans a reclamation project after the excavation and processing has been
completed. The Applicant proposes to submit a plan to be approved by the
State Department of Geology and Mineral Industries and which will include
the planting of grass.
The Applicant's represents1tive, Century West Engineering Company,
indicated the depth of the excavation would be approximately 12' in
the entire 10 acre piece and would replace the topsoil and such initially
removed to the level of the site after excavation and it is upon this
that the grass was to be planted.
The Applicant proposed to have the operating hours from 6:00 AM in the
morning to 10:00 PM in the evening and would endeavor to control the
noise and dust emission, the latter to be pursuant to the requirements
of the DEQ. The Applicant also requested the stockpiling of the pro-
cessed aggregate for a period of one year after the excavation was
completed.
In its opening statement, the Applicant's representative, Century West
Engineering Company, stated that the Applicant had contacted the people
affected and within the radius of noticfication and that there was approval
of the excavation was completed.
There was ample evidence of the adverse impact the 6:00 AM to 10:00 PM
operation would have by the noise and dust upon their livability and
lifestyle. There was no refutation of this by property owners who
purportedly gave their approval to the proposed use to the Applicant
prior to the Public Hearing. The absence of their names and appearance
at the Public Hearing added nothing to the Applicant's cause.
Decisions and Findings
Tumalo Irrigation District kVOL 33 w 317
CU-79-9
Page 3
It appeared to be the Planning Commission that the Tumalo Irrigation
District, being a public corporation, took too much for granted and
further complicated itsdoings by incurring an engineering expense
and in effect letting a contract for the removal and processing before
any Public Hearing.
The uncontradicted statements of two of the property owners were that the
District had in effect acquiesced in granting the right to a contractor
to sell and commit himself prior to any Public Hearing. To have known
or even acknowledged what was an obvious commitment by the contractor
to sell the aggregate for a sum of many thousands of dollars is inex-
cusable and makes a mockery of the hearings process.
The mere planting of grass after the excavation of 10 to 12 feet of
aggregate upon the floor, without any landscaping, shrubs, or trees
as part of the reclamation project is such a very bare minimum that is
almost in the same vein as initially stated by the Applicant's represent-
ative namely, he believed there would be no probliiael in the approval
of the requested use and consequently did not concern himself with the
minutiae of a presentation.
II. The
ance PL-9
ning Depar
applicable
applicant
in the at
tment's xep
Ordinances
d Statew
ly with the Uniform
utely nothing subse
ompliance with the
de Planninq Goals.
Procedure Ordin-
uent to the Plan-
omprehensive Plan,
The only written material submitted by the Applicant was a brief one-
page letter dated February 23, 1979, explaining the nature of the request
and the steps to reduce "objectionable effects from the site" by
limiting the hours of operation from 6:OOAM to 10:00PM and requiring
the excavation and processing to be completed in one year with the
stockpiling of the processed aggregate on the site for an additional
period of one year; also the reclamation plan approval by the State
Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, and some self-serving
declaration that the proposed use was in conformance with the Comp-
rehensive Plan and the Statewide Planning Goals.
No written material whatsoever was submitted
of the Planning Department, March 14, nor pr
on April 24.
This is not in compliance with the Ordinance
to the Tumalo Irrigation District because it
would not be in the public interest and good
after the Staff Report
for to the Public Hearing
and to ma_- an exception
is a public use corporation
of the County.
SUMMARIZATION: The burden of proof criteria for the requested Conditional
Use Permit for the operation of a surface mine excavation site has not
been sustained by the Applicant nor has there been compliance with the
Uniform Procedure Ordinance relating to written briefs showing compliance
with the Comprehensive Plan and Statewide Planning Goals.
failed to com
there is abso
ort showing
Decisions and Findings fVOL
Tumalo Irrigation District
CU 79-9
Page 4
DECISION : The request is denied for the reasons aforesaid.
DATED July l~'_ 1979
Respec ly Submitted
Ted m h
Deschutes County Planning Commission Chairman
GC/ep
cc: File
Tumalo Irrigation District
Century West Engineering
Mr. Martin Winch
j %E318