Loading...
2007-1248-Minutes for Meeting December 12,1984 Recorded 6/21/2007COUNTY OFFICIAL NANCYUBLANKENSHIP, COUNTY CLERKDS 0J 200NN COMMISSIONERS' JOURNAL 0612112007 09;02;06 AM 11111111111111111111111111 II III 2007-1248 Do not remove this page from original document. Deschutes County Clerk Certificate Page If this instrument is being re-recorded, please complete the following statement, in accordance with ORS 205.244: Re-recorded to correct [give reason] previously recorded in Book or as Fee Number and Page V-1L)2_ DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DECEMBER 12, 1984-MEETING MINUTES Chairman Young called the meeting to order at 10:00 A.M. Commissioner Tuttle and Commissioner Prante were also in attendance. Amendments to Chairman Young read aloud the amendments. the Agenda Consideration of Chairma Replat Request to have for Redmond Mem- waived. orial Cemetery MOTION: VOTE: n Young explained that this is a request the $315 cemetery replat application fee PRANTE moved to waive that $315 application fee. TUTTLE: Second. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Consideration Dave Hoerning, County Engineer, explained that they of Forest Dev- have an agreement with the Deschutes National elopment Agree- Forest for an exchange of road maintenance respons- ment ibilities. MOTION: PRANTE moved that the sign the forest development agreements between the Forest Service and Deschutes County as presented. TUTTLE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Request for In- Commissioner Tuttle explained that the Governor's clusion on Office has developed this group composed of various Strategic Water members to do a water basin plan. The letter is a Planning Group request to Pat Amadeo, of Governor Atiyeh's staff, for the Deschutes River basin to be included in the Strategic Water Planning Group's study, which will be conducted no earlier than 1986. MOTION: TUTTLE moved to sign the letter making a request for inclusion for water planning in the Deschutes River basin. PRANTE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Appointments to Chairman Young read aloud a memo to-the Board from Bend Urban Area Craig Smith, Planning Department, requesting that Planning Commis- Marilyn Waak, Norm Schultz and Mike Connell be sion reappointed to four year terms on the Bend Urban Area Planning Commission. MOTION: PRANTE so moved. TUTTLE: Second. VOTE: APPROVAL; YOUNG ABSTAINED. DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 1 Discussion re- County Counsel Rick Isham explained that the Comm- garding Commun- ittee is requesting the transfer of $6,000 from the ity Corrections training fund into the alcohol program for Advisory Commit- purchasing bed space. This would purchase 83 bed tee days for alcohol treatment. They are also recommending that the Board delay any action or involvement in their planning process until after the legislature adjourns, so they will know how much money the program is working with. They will continue the present program for at least another year, through December, 1985, with the current plan. After than they can develop a new plan knowing how much money they have to work with. MOTION: TUTTLE moved that they delay making any changes in the Community Corrections relationship until the legislature has met and adjourned. PRANTE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. MOTION: PRANTE moved to approve the transfer of $6,000. TUTTLE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Order 84-291, This is an order transferring $126,100 from and Budgeted Cash within various funds of the budget and directing Transfer entries. Chairman Young read aloud the funds and the respective transfers as listed in the order. MOTION: PRANTE moved to adopt the order. TUTTLE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Order 84-290, MOTION: PRANTE moved to adopt the order. Appropriations TUTTLE: Second. Transfers VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Continuation of Chairman Young outlined the the rules of the Geothermal hearing, allowing 45 minutes for testimony from Amendment to each side. He then called for the staff report. Comprehensive Plan John Andersen, Community Development Director., submitted to the record letters they had received in regard to the proposed ordinance. He then introduced Elliot Allen, of Elliot Allen & Associates, Salem, the consulting firm retained to develop the Geothermal Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Allen came forward to deliver staff comments on the proposed amendment. Mr. Allen showed slides of various geothermal plants in other areas. He noted that the industry DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 2 trend is to make the plants smaller; moving away from the larger plants seen in the slides. Some plants are using sites as small as five acres. He noted that low temp direct utilization is being used in Klamath Falls, and that may be something that is used in Deschutes County. He stated that the proposed geothermal element has three purposes: (1) to serve as a local guideline for planning and development;_(2) BPA wants an estimate of how many resources are available in the County, and the element contains estimates prepared for BPA; and (3) it is intended to comply with LCDC and other land use statutes in the state. Through the proposed geothermal element, the County will provide advisory rules to other agencies such as the Forest Service and BLM. It will also regulate the use of private and state owned lands in the county. Mr. Allen stated that the element is generally supportive of geothermal resources in the County. There is notable potential for both low and high temp geothermal resources in the County. He felt that development should be able to occur without creating adverse impacts. They need more resource data in order to be more specific about the impacts. They don't know enough about where the resource is, and what type of resource it is, and as a result, they don't have specific impact data compiled. There is a broad range of potential impacts. The Planning Commission did feel that there were serious potential impacts, both environmentally and economically, in the County where the resources occur in areas highly used for recreation and tourism. They have received a considerable amount of cooperation and information from the industry, but the information was limited, and minimal site specific impacts are in the document. The policies are advisory to the Federal and State governments, but directly applicable to the privately owned lands. The policies and standards are reasonable and well-suited to the County. The data issue would be resolved through the site specific application of the policies and standards. The only site that has received concern is Newberry Crater. It had been felt that the recreational uses in the crater area are too important to allow them to be jeopardized by geothermal development. The question is where to draw the line where development should be excluded. There are 160 DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 3 acres of privately owned land in the caldera. The rest of the land is owned by the Forest Service. The Forest Service will be amending their plan in January, 1985. They have asked for the County's recommendation as early as possible. There was some further discussion on where to draw the line around the crater, delineating where geothermal development could and could not occur. Mr. Allen strongly recommended a line less restrictive than that recommended by the Planning department, which he showed on the map. That line was represented on the map in red. It is at the 7000 foot level, outside the lip of the caldera and down the edge of it. This would allow the utilization of more of the resource, but would not affect any area of heavy recreational use, nor affect any critical wildlife habitat. Development there would not cause visual impact to the area. It joins or includes land that has been logged; or is going to be logged (according to the Forest Service five-year plan). It was noted that the Board of Commissioners received a letter from Dwight and Maryanne Newton that will be submitted to the record. John Andersen, Planning Director, then showed the videotape he had made of the Newberry Crater area. Chairman Young then called for challenges of the hearings body. There were none. He then opened the public hearing. He limited each side to 45 minutes to present their testimony. Michael Cale, Geothermal Resources International, Santa Rosa, CA, came forward. They are the company that will be the operator that Mr. Allen had mentioned. They have reviewed and support the element. They support the red boundary line. Jane Poor, 415 NW Newport, Bend, urged the Board to accept the recommendations as submitted by Elliot Allen regarding the boundaries and geothermal development. She opposes geothermal development within the caldera. She read aloud a letter which states opposition to development within that certain area. Anna Carter., California Energy Corporation, came forward. They are in favor of the ordinance as recommended by John Andersen, including the red DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 4 boundary. She urged that when they develop language that they be extremely careful about the way it is written. There were no further comments in favor of the ordinance. Chairman Young then called for comments in opposition. Myer. Avedovech, 315 NW Greenwood, Bend, came forward. He is the attorney representing LaPine Pumice Co. He handed each Board member a packet of written testimony. LaPine Pumice Company owns land in the core of the crater. Mr. Avedovech showed this property on maps he had put up on the wall. He then explained the contents of the packets. There was some information that relates to the geothermal potential of the area. They have a pumice area that are currently being worked in the area. There were also maps showing Newberry Crater put out by the Deschutes National Forest, and a map indicating elevation of the existing roads into the crater itself. There was also a picture of what a plant in that area could look like. This would include buildings and power lines. Dave Brown, Pinacle Geotechnical, came forward. He is presently working in Washington, Idaho, California, Oregon and Nevada on geothermal development. He said that he would have liked to have seen a slide'of the Lakeview project in the slides shown earlier by Mr. Allen. That is the plant that LaPine Pumice would like to put on their site. The plants are very small and non-impacting. It takes about a five-acre site. The cooling pool takes half of the site. It will be taken out and normal towers put in. He noted that impacts vary from site to site. There have been almost no blowouts in the last 10 to 15 years. He only knew of one such incident which occured about one year ago. He stated that he is currently working on a plant that takes only three acres, but it is not a modular design plant. He also noted that the picture provided in Mr. Avedovech's packet is not a plant designed by the company that would design the proposed Newberry Crater plant. He then spoke about the crater itself. He asked that the Board look at some photos of the pumice cone. They type of cooling that will be used at the pumice cone will not be the same as at the geysers. They would be air cooled, much the same as an air conditioner on the top of a building, condensing existing air. LaPine Pumice Co. proposes to suspend their full-scale mining plans and put in a science park similar to that at Lava Butte. It will be paid for DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 5 and maintained by the power plant. They feel that this would augment the recreation inside the crater. They will leave the Board with a set of ster.eopairs under the stereoscope as evidence for the record. Gary Hickman, Century West Engineering, Bend, came forward. Century west provides local engineers for LaPine Pumice Co. He has visited the site, which is very unique. When visiting the site, one appreciates the topography and unusual aspect of the site. One would not realize there was a pumice mine at that site. The reason there is private property is that the government issued a mining claim on that site. They are proposing a small plant with minimal impacts. He stated that the site inside the red boundary is probably one of the finest sites in the US today. He asked that the Board consider this in their decision. Mr. Avedovech said that there is only really one part of the element that they take exception to, and that is the development boundary. They would like to have the 160 acres that LaPine Pumice Co. owns in the middle of the caldera included in the land allowed for development. They also don't want the part that prohibits them (page 99, Policy 10.A.1.) from exploring the area for geothermal potential. There are a number of palces in the element that need to be highlighted. On page 26, under Newberry Volcano, High Temp Resources, page 27, states that additional drilling will be necessary to find out what the potential is. They are asking for an amendment to the element that will allow them to explore the potential. On page 57, they will not have to construct new power lines to the site because they are already there. Page 57 also says that one problem is that they will have to put in power lines. It is in the middle of a recreational area but it will have no visual impact unless they walk into the area. They will have no more knowledge than they will of the pumice mine that is there now. They strongly disagree that simply by having this they have an industrialization of the area. The basis for Section 10 of Article 7 on page 100 is that they are relying on potential conflicts. They feel that the high-temp resources conflicts contained in table 4-1, will paralyze the potentialities that might be there. Table 4-2 has the same disclaimer. Section 5 of the element can only be discussed in broad terms because of the lack of site specific information. On page 73, under Environmental Imacts, they are asking that they have an DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 6 opportunity to prove that there are or are not negative impacts on the site. On page 86, on the conclusion of Section 5, they agree, but want the opportunity to be able to do that. He did not feel that it was fair to prohibit this project by the general statements made in the element. On page 99, the land use section, is where they have the largest problem. He read aloud Section 10. It says they need to explore, but then goes on to prohibit exploration in Newberry Crater. They ask that 10.1.A.1. and maybe 10.1.A.2. be excluded from the element, the part which prohibits exploration in the crater area. The data in the element suggests that there is not specific data to make this decision on. There is a potential here for the county to develop one of the finest geothermal areas in the United States, along with the science park that may not interfere with, but enhance, the recreational area. They also-do not want to create an adverse impact on the area. This is a plan amendment that has not met the OAR process of Goal 5 of LCDC. He did not feel that this was sufficient to meet that. This is a very unique site. The roads and power lines are already there. The site would not be visible from recreational areas. He asked that they modify the red line and exclude the Newberry Crater core area for the 160 acres, and prohibit the portion of Section 10 on page 99 that excludes the area. Mr. James Miller, 12918 SW 63rd, Portland, OR, owner of LaPine Pumice Co., showed pictures of the well site. The government has this set aside for intense recreational use, and he read aloud a letter he had written to the Forest Service saying that geothermal is a geologic activity with very important scientific and economic interest. He noted that PG&E gets 300 people a year that want to tour the geysers located near the Bay area. This is not open to the public, the 300 visitors were either from the industry or scientists. The proposed Newberry Crater plant would be unique in that the lakes are at right angles from the North side of the cone. The site is not visible from the viewpoint, because of the angle of the viewpoint. Mr. Miller also stated that he had never been invited to any of the work sessions on this element. They received the patent to their land in 1980. He stated that geothermal energy is very clean and renewable. He also noted that the site could be restored after development by capping the well. He asked that the Board encourage exploration. DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 7 Dale Miller, Redmond, Oregon, stated that the red boundary would take away all drilling. He stated that the Board had only heard from big outfits, and there is a potential for the lodges to put in small low temp wells for their own use. He is a well driller and they drilled the Sandia well not far from Newberry Crater. That site at that point is in a valley that cannot be seen from any of the roads inside the red boundary. Sandia capped the well at the request of local authorities. He stated that great potential is there for any size operation. They could put in a few small plants that could be covered. He feels that if he has to look at the fishermen, they can look at geothermal plants. Ken Travis, 16221 North Drive, LaPine, stated that with the criteria the County has for site plans, plants could be installed in such a way as to enhance tourism and industry in the area. Anna Carter asked that they give full consideration to allowing whatever is compatible on a site specific basis. Dale Miller stated that some of the proposed projects can be piped out of the area to another site and there would be nothing visible at the well site. James Miller stated that there is an article from Iceland that says that pumice is an ideal medium for burying this pipe. Chairman Young called for rebuttal comments. Elliot Allen wanted to clarify a point made by James Miller, relating to citizen involvement. There were newspaper stories and notices given to industrial trade groups. They also mailed notices to every geothermal leaseholder in the county. In response to Myer. Avedovech's comments about the exclusion of all activity inside either the red or green line, the thinking on the part of the Planning Commission was that the resource potential was not an issue. There is a significant resource there. He also noted that he had pointed out the lack of site specific data available. This must be a continuing process. Given the amount of information available to the Planning Commission, they felt that recreation and tourism would be too greatly jeopardized by these exploration and plant activities. They are only talking about withdrawing about 15% of the resource area. DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 8 Considerable access to the resource remains. Lastly, he is confused by the comment that LCDC is not satisfied. He said that the LCDC complimented the Goal 5 element and the period of objection passed about two months ago, and there were no objections. Mr. Avedovech suggested that excluding this 15%, which is the heart of the geothermal development, is inappropriate. There is still no data which would indicate that by allowing exploration any negative impact would happen in the area. He stated that the County is losing nothing in allowing their request, they want the opportunity to provide the County the evidence necessary on a site specific application. They need more data from a site specific exploration. Chairman Young called for questions from the Commissioners. Commissioner Tuttle asked about the Goal 5 process. He also asked if there was a signed power contract of some nature. Mr. Miller responded that they don't have one, but BPA is very interested. There is a market for a 10 megawatt plant. This power would be sold to the BPA grid system so Deschutes County would still be a deficit power county. Commissioner Prante asked Dan Brown about the power lines. There would be three additional lines if the plant were operating at peak capacity. Commissioner Prante indicated that she would like to opportunity to make a site visit to the Lakeview plant. It was the Board's consensus to continue the hearing until after that visit takes place, allowing opportunity for testimony relating to the site visit at a later time. MOTION: PRANTE moved to continue the hearing to January 9 for a site visit. TUTTLE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Request for. Before the Board were requests for refund from the Refunds/ CDD Community Development Department. They were as follows: to Jim Pritchard in the amount of $52.00; to L. M. Ross in the amount of $18.20; to R. A. Howells in the amount of $20.80. These were approved. Other. Staff/ There were none. Public Concerns DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 9 Signature of MOTION: PRANTE moved to approve the lease for. Lease for Red- the Redmond Sheriff's Substation. mond Sheriff's TUTTLE: Second. Substation VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Approval of It was noted that this must be done in a p ublic two-year leave meeting according to the Personnel Rules. This had of Absence for been do ne earlier, but not in a meeting. They will Brian Fagan be appr oving this nunc pro tunc. MOTION: PRANTE moved to sign.the letter authorizing the two year leave of absence for Brian Fagan. TUTTLE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Personal Ser- This is for removal of asbestos from the Greenwood vices Contract Building prior to remodeling. with EJ Bartelli MOTION: PRANTE moved to sign the Personal Services Contract with E J Bartelli and Co. TUTTLE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. The contract is in the amount of $6,592. Being no further business, the meeting adjourned. DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Albert A. Young,/Chair Lo' Bristow Prante, Commissioner Laurence A.'Tuttle, Commissioner /ss DECEMBER 12, 1984 MEETING MINUTES: PAGE 10 SEVENTH MOUNTAIN COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING DECEMBER 12, 1984 Chairman Abe Young called to order the meeting of the Deschutes County Board of Commissioners acting as the Board of Directors for the Seventh Mountain County Service District immediately following the regular Commission meeting. Commissioner Lois Prante and Commissioner. Larry Tuttle were also present. The purpose of this meeting is to redesignate the District's registered agent. Chairman Young read aloud the resolution before them. MOTION: TUTTLE moved to adopt Resolution 84-058 and direct the Chairman to sign the Notice of Registered Agent. PRANTE: Second. VOTE: UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Albert A. Young 4Chairmari'1 L i Bristow Prante, Commissioner Laurence A. Tuttle, Commissioner /ss