HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-07 Business Meeting MinutesDeschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701 -1960
(541) 388 -6570 - Fax (541) 385 -3202 - www.deschutes.org
MINUTES OF BUSINESS MEETING
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
MONDAY, JANUARY 7, 2008
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
Present were Commissioners Dennis R. Luke, Michael M Daly and Tammy Baney.
Also present were Laurie Craghead, Legal Counsel; Catherine Morrow, George
Read, Will Groves, Anthony Raguine and Chris Bedsaul, Community Development
Department; and approximately a dozen other citizens.
Chair Luke opened the meeting at 10:00 a.m.
1. Before the Board was Citizen Input.
None was offered.
2. Before the Board was a Public Hearing and Consideration and First and
Second Readings and Adoption, by Emergency, of Ordinance No. 2008-
003, regarding a Zone Change (Applicant: Reid).
Will Groves explained the item, which was requested by the applicant. The
Hearings Officer concluded split zoning of property in 1992 was a mistake, as it
was based on a section line. She recommended approval under one type of
zoning. The applicant has asked for an emergency clause because it took an
inordinate period of time for the Hearings Officer to hear this case, and the
owner would like to proceed with other applications regarding the property.
Laurie Craghead stated that this is an individual case and not a legislative
change, and the Board often allows these to be handled on an emergency basis.
Chair Luke opened the public hearing, and read the opening statement.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 1 of 7 Pages
In regard to ex parte contact, prior hearing observations, bias or conflicts of
interest to declare, Commissioner Baney said there was a work session held on
this item previously. None of the Commissioners know the applicant. No
challenges were offered.
Liz Fancher, attorney for the applicant, said that the property was split along a
section line in error. The property would allow for a residence to be built under
normal circumstances, but with two different zones it is not allowed. With this
change, the property would fall under one subzone.
No other testimony was offered, and the hearing was closed.
DALY: Move first and second reading, by title only.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DALY: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
Chair Luke conducted the first and second readings by title only, declaring an
emergency.
DALY: Move adoption of Ordinance No. 2007 -003.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DALY: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
3. Before the Board was a Public Hearing on Ordinance No. 2008 -001,
Proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zone Map Changes to Change the
Harris Kimble Property from Surface Mine (SM) to Rural Residential 10
(RR -10).
Chair Luke asked Chris Bedsaul to read the opening statement. In regard to
bias, prejudgment or ex parte contacts, prior hearing observations, Chair Luke
said that the only thing that has taken place on this item is discussion at a work
session. The other two Commissioners agreed.
Chris Bedsaul gave an overview of the history of the item. Three conditions
were required by the Hearings Officer and all three have been met. The only
area of exception involves approximately 18 acres.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 2 of 7 Pages
Commissioner Luke said it is hard to find this type of resource land. Mr.
Bedsaul stated it is a smaller area than originally set aside for this purpose. He
referred to oversized maps at this time. Because of the nature of the appeal, a
de novo hearing is required on the one Ordinance; the other three do not require
a hearing. Laurie Craghead said there were some last minute changes and it
was decided it would be prudent to have four Ordinances instead of two. All
four Ordinances can be addressed at the next regular Board meeting.
Liz Fancher said there are two owners involved. There will ultimately be four
Ordinances; the two today relate to the de novo hearing. One of the parcels is
very small. The maps used to develop this information are old and no longer
reliable. She referred to the oversized maps at this time. The history of the
mapping has been confusing to the applicant, staff and the Hearings Officer. In
1979 a goal exception map was adopted by the County; it should have been
included as a rural residential area with no agricultural use. The County had a
problem with designating RR -10 with a goal exception in the 1980's. Putting
the two maps together became very confusing. A different boundary was used
and the zoning did not follow the boundaries at that time. Some is RR -10 and
some should be but there is no exception area noted.
RR -10 makes more sense as the adjacent properties are zoned RR -10 and the
City of Bend urban reserve area is also adjacent. A soils scientist has
determined most of the property is not appropriate for farm use or surface
mining. Revised zoning would require clustering to preserve open space for
wildlife, and this would compute to about one house per ten acres. DOGAMI's
reclamation plan has been followed.
Regan Scott testified in favor; he owns an adjacent property and feels their
request is compatible with his land. Greg Broderick also testified; he owns an
adjacent property as well, and is in favor of the rezone. He feels the request is
reasonable. He knows little about the UGB expansion process and feels that it
would be better to have this rezoned the same at the other properties instead of
as EFU, which would be harder to bring into the UGB when that time comes.
There was no further testimony either for or against the Ordinances. Chair
Luke closed the public hearing at this time.
Laurie Craghead stated that the four Ordinances would be brought before the
Board at the regular business meeting on January 23.
BANEY: Direct staff to write a decision approving the application.
DALY: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 3 of 7 Pages
VOTE: DALY: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
4. Before the Board was Consideration of Whether to Hear an Appeal (File
#A- 07 -21) of the Hearings Officer's Decision Revoking Land Use
Approvals for the Construction of a Dwelling (Applicant: Peery).
Anthony Raguine provided an overview of the item. He said there was a Code
complaint regarding retention of vegetation filed by a neighbor; it was
determined that a violation did occur, and there was a declaratory ruling to
revoke two of the permits issued in June 2007. In November the Hearings
Officer revoked all four permits, and this has been appealed. There is no time
constraint, and the appellant asked for a de novo review. The applicant has
been working with the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife on this issue.
Mr. Raguine referred to an oversized map and explained where the dwelling
would have to be built. If approvals are revoked, they would have to build
where an old irrigation ditch was located, and the Oregon Department of Fish &
Wildlife does not want it built there due to the existence of a wildlife game trail
and corridor. Restoration would also need to be done.
The original approval includes a modification of conditions. The previous
owners had applied for a site away from Sisemore Road.
Ms. Craghead noted this was a violation of the original conditions of approval.
If the County revokes all permits, the owners can still build but the structure
might be where the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife does not want them
to be, and also mitigation with the County would not be required.
Mr. Raguine stated that originally Community Development revoked two
conditions; the Hearings Officer revoked all four. The County could require more
trees to be planted for screening, but there is no requirement to restore the site if
the permits are revoked. Staff agrees with the Hearings Officer in this case.
Laurie Craghead stated that this could be heard de novo, limited de novo or on
the record. Ms. Raguine advised that the applicant is working with the Oregon
Department of Fish & Wildlife. However, not hearing the appeal would send a
clear message that people are not to violate conditions, but on the other hand
this would not allow the County to require mitigation efforts.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 4 of 7 Pages
Commissioner Baney agreed that conditions of approval should be followed,
but thinks this one should be heard to have an opportunity to mitigation some
damage that has already been done. Commissioner Daly agreed, in an effort to
try to make the best of a bad situation.
Chair Luke noted that they took out material on the neighbor's lot as well. He
thinks their permits should be revoked. They will have to reapply and he feels
they can be made to mitigate some conditions at that time.
Commissioner Baney stated that she feels it should be punitive, but the County
may not be able to require mitigation if the four permits are revoked. Ms.
Craghead said it depends on where they plan to build. There might be a way to
get some mitigation. The house would also have to be screened. Commissioner
Luke said that ODF &W will have an opportunity to comment on a new
application.
Commissioner Daly stated that the applicant is working with the Oregon
Department of Fish & Wildlife now, and he would like to hear what they have
worked out.
DALY: Move that the Board hear this de novo.
BANEY: Second.
VOTE: DALY: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes no. (Split vote.)
5. Before the Board was Consideration of Whether to Hear an Appeal (File
#AD- 07 -12) of the Hearings Officer's Decision regarding a Utility Facility,
Including AM Radio Towers, in the EFU Zone (Appellant: Follansbee).
Dee Van Donselaar said there are fourteen appellants in this issue. There has
been no offer to extend the clock by the applicant.
Laurie Craghead said that a minimum of a week would be required to get a
decision finalized. The mailing takes ten days. Commissioner Luke stated that
it appears that there is not enough time to hear this in the amount of time
allowed, especially since some of the Commissioners will be out of the office
part of the time, so he feels it should be appealed to LUBA if the appellants so
desire.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 5 of 7 Pages
Ms. Van Donselaar said the Hearings Officer did approve the applicant's
proposal. Ms. Craghead stated that most of the arguments are not Code related,
per the Hearings Officer's decision. If the Board does not hear this appeal, the
Hearings Officer's decision is binding and the appellants would have to appeal
to LUBA.
Commissioner Baney said that she might be inclined to hear it if sufficient time
was available. However, it appears that there is not enough time to do so. She
has questions about who has jurisdiction about some of the aspects, the County
or the FAA. There are concerns about use of the airstrip for emergency
purposes. She will talk with staff about the issue.
Commissioner Daly said that he is not that interested in hearing this appeal,
either; he feels mitigation has been considered and is not concerned about the
use of the airstrip. He does not feel that hearing the appeal would make any
difference in the long run.
Commissioner Luke stated that he is not in favor of hearing this and it would
likely be a split vote even if schedules can be rearranged for two
Commissioners to be present at a hearing. The Board will talk about this briefly
at a posted meeting on Tuesday, January 8 at 11:30 a.m.
CONVENED AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE BLACK BUTTE
RANCH COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
6. Before the Board was Consideration of Board Review of Document No.
2008 -007, a Lease Agreement between the Black Butte Ranch County
Service District and the Black Butte Ranch Homeowners Association
regarding the Construction of a New Public Safety Building.
A representative of the Service District gave an overview of the item. He said
that the current building has been condemned by the State Fire Department.
The new building is completed, and they are ready to move in at any time.
Commissioner Baney disclosed that her mother and stepfather used to work for
the Black Butte Police Department, but it does not pose a conflict in her vote.
DALY: Move approval.
BANEY: Second.
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 6 of 7 Pages
VOTE: DALY: Yes.
BANEY: Yes.
LUKE: Chair votes yes.
7. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
None were offered.
Being no further items to come before the Board, Chair Luke adjourned the
meeting at 12:05 p.m.
DATED this 7th Day of January 2008 for the Deschutes County Board
of Commissioners.
ATTEST:
Recording Secretary
Dennis R. Luke, Chair
ikaati IPA
Tammaney, Vice Ch
OLA. id It.
Mi' ae M. Daly, Com ssioner
Minutes of Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 7 of 7 Pages
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT IN MATTERS BEFORE THE BOARD
I. INTRODUCTION
A. This is a de novo hearing on a proposed zone change from EFU -AL to
EFU -TRB. File number: ZC -07 -5
B. The applicant requests approval of a zone change from EFU -AL to EFU -
TRB for a 40 -acre portion of a 73.58 -acre parcel located northeast of
McGrath Road east of Bend.
II. BURDEN OF PROOF AND APPLICABLE CRITERIA
A. The applicant has the burden of proving that they are entitled to the and
use approval sought.
B. The standards applicable to the application before us are listed on
pages 1 and 2 of the Hearings Officer's decision dated November 14,
2007 and provided in the information packets near the door.
C. Testimony and evidence at this hearing must be directed toward the
criteria set forth in the decision of the Hearings Officer report, the staff
report as well as toward any other criteria in the comprehensive land use
plan of the County or land use regulations which any person believes
applies to this decision.
D. Failure on the part of any person to raise an issue with sufficient
specificity to afford the Board of County Commissioners and parties to
this proceeding an opportunity to respond to the issue precludes appeal
to the Land Use Board of Appeals on that issue. Additionally, failure of
the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to the
proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow the
Board to respond to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit
court.
III. HEARINGS PROCEDURE
Page 1 of 3- Chair's Opening Statement for Land Use Hearings
File: ZC -07 -5 Date of Hearing: 1/7/08
A. Evidence to be reviewed by the Board.
The Board's decision on this application will be based upon the record
before the Hearings Officer, the Hearings Officer's decision, the Staff Report
and the testimony and evidence presented at this hearing.
IV. ORDER OF PRESENTATION
A. The hearing will be conducted in the following order.
1. The staff will give a report.
2. The applicant will then have an opportunity to offer testimony and
evidence.
3. Proponents of the appeal will then be given a chance to testify and
present evidence. When all other proponents have testified,
opponents to the appeal will then be given a chance to testify and
present evidence.
4. After both proponents and opponents have testified, the applicants will
be allowed to present rebuttal testimony but may not present new
evidence.
5. At the Board's discretion, if the applicants presented new evidence on
rebuttal, opponents may be recognized for a rebuttal presentation.
6. At the conclusion of this hearing, the staff will be afforded an
opportunity to make any closing comments.
7. The Board may limit the time period for presentations.
B. Cross- examination of witnesses will not be allowed. A witness who
wishes, during that witness' testimony, however, to ask a question of a
previous witness may direct the question to the Chair. If a person has
already testified but wishes to ask a question of a subsequent witness,
that person may also direct the question to the Chair after all other
witnesses have testified but prior to the proponent's rebuttal. The
Chair is free to decide whether or not to ask such questions of the
witness.
Page 2 of 3- Chair's Opening Statement for Land Use Hearings
File: ZC -07 -5 Date of Hearing: 1/7/08
C. Continuances
1. The grant of a continuance or record extension shall be at the discretion
of the Board.
V. PRE - HEARING CONTACTS, BIASES, CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS
1. Do any of the Commissioners have any ex -parte contacts, prior
hearing observations; biases; or conflicts of interest to declare? If so,
please state the nature and extent of those.
2. Does any party wish to challenge any Commissioner based on ex-
parte contacts, biases or conflicts of interest?
(Hearing no challenges, I shall proceed.)
Page 3 of 3- Chair's Opening Statement for Land Use Hearings
File: ZC -07 -5 Date of Hearing: 1/7108
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS PRE - HEARING STATEMENT
Introduction
This is a hearing on the Hearings Officer's decision on application no. PA07 -2 and ZC-
07-2.
The applicant is requesting approval of a plan amendment from SM and Agriculture to
Rural Residential Exception Area, a goal exception to Statewide Planning Goal 3,
Agricultural Lands, and a zone change from SM to RR -10, for ten tax lots totaling 158.95
acres and located between Johnson Market Road and Tumalo Creek north of Buck
Drive west of Bend.
Burden of proof and Applicable criteria
The applicant has the burden of proving that they are entitled to the land use approval
sought. The standards applicable to the applications are listed on the copies of the
Hearings Officer's decision located at the table next to the entrance to this hearing room.
Failure on the part of any person to raise an issue, with sufficient specificity to afford the
Board of County Commissioners and parties to this proceeding an opportunity to
respond to the issue precludes, appeal to the Land Use Board of Appeals on that issue.
Additionally, failure of the applicant to raise constitutional or other issues relating to the
proposed conditions of approval with sufficient specificity to allow the Board to respond
to the issue precludes an action for damages in circuit court.
Hearings Procedure
The procedures applicable to this hearing provide that the Board of County
Commissioners will hear testimony, receive evidence and consider the testimony,
evidence and information submitted into the record, and will be the basis for their
decision. The record as developed to this point is available for public review at this
hearing and placed before the Board.
Order of Presentation
The hearing will be conducted in the following order. The staff will give a staff report of
the prior proceedings and the issues raised by the applicant/appellant. The applicant will
then have an opportunity to make a presentation and offer testimony and evidence.
Proponents of the appeal will then be given a chance to testify. When all other
proponents have testified, opponents will then be given a chance to testify and present
evidence. After both proponents and opponents have testified, the applicant will be
allowed to present rebuttal testimony, but may not present new evidence. At the Board's
discretion, if the applicant presented new evidence on rebuttal, opponents may be
recognized for a rebuttal presentation. At the conclusion of this hearing, the staff will be
afforded an opportunity to make any closing comments. The Board may limit the time
period for presentations.
Cross - examination of witnesses will not be allowed. A witness, who wishes, during that
witness' testimony, however, to ask a question of a previous witness may direct the
question to the Chair. If a person has already testified but wishes to ask a question of a
subsequent witness, that person may also direct the question to the Chair after all other
witnesses have testified, but prior to the proponent's rebuttal. The Chair is free to decide
whether or not to ask such questions of the witness.
Continuances: The grant of a continuance or record extension shall be at the discretion
of the Board.
If the Board grants a continuance, it shall continue the public hearing to a date certain at
least seven days from the date of this hearing or leave the written record open for at
least seven days for additional written evidence.
If at the conclusion of the hearing the Board leaves the record open for additional written
evidence or testimony, the record shall be left open for at least seven days for submittal
of new written evidence or testimony and at least seven additional days for response to
the evidence received while the record was held open. Written evidence or testimony
submitted during the period the record is held open shall be limited to evidence or
testimony that rebuts previously submitted evidence or testimony.
If the hearing is continued or the record left open, the applicant shall also be allowed at
least seven days after the record is closed to all other parties to submit final written
arguments but no new evidence in support of the application.
Pre - hearing Contacts, Biases, Conflicts of Interests
Do any of the Commissioners have any ex -parte contacts, prior hearing observations,
biases, or conflicts of interest to declare? If so, please state the nature and extent of
those.
Does any party wish to challenge any Commissioner based on ex -parte contacts, biases
or conflicts of interest?
(Hearing no challenges, I shall proceed.)
Memorandum
To: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
CC: Laurie Craghead, Deschutes County Assistant County Counsel;
Chris Bedsaul, Associate Planner, Community Development Department
From: Liz Fancher, Attorney for applicant
Date: 1/4/2008
Re: PA -07 -2, ZC -07 -2
Attached are 3 maps illustrating the following:
1. Map illustrating surface mining zoning area — highlighted in green.
2. Map illustrating the CLR, Inc. property and Harris Kimble property.
a. The CLR, Inc. property is highlighted in pink.
b. The Kimble property is highlighted in yellow.
3. Map illustrating the portion of the property to be designated RREA through approval
of a goal exception. The proposed goal exception area is highlighted in blue. The
portion of the subject property that does not need approval of a goal exception
because it is already included in a goal exception area is highlighted in orange.
PA -07 -2, ZC -07 -2 1
Land Zoned Surface
Mining (SM)
LANDS TO BE RE -ZONED TO RR -10
7'11"E SECTION 12
SECTION 13
4 N76* 32'E
BASIS OF BEARINGS
N693rrr T 2625.39'
No957'172• '_ 58947 "t
SECTION 12
SECTION 13
Sooi.4i0'E 67.
N7J
4696546965 5'W 17461'
24
SS9'07'
54476'46.r 205;
N7116'0416 111.75'
50672.4,6,16‘,23463.
N7ft4' IP Jr. 66'
50796'Ir'* 1q.
517J9'06"W MI6'
CENIER OF SECOON :3
S47761716 16353'
S1673291W 3404'
S089r40'F 6446'
51021'41'W 39.16'
541710J'W 62.05'
561'4171V 6232'
7606'W 12461'
79'5J'W 22'
c
' I NOB 39 56 f 241.33'
I
NI I
1
`\N
53'56"E 281.65'
N 936
5462723 166.22'
YUMALO
54093 23'W 12.60'
52436'23'W 44.06'
56951'
53977'22V 7357'
55795'13'W 3175'
5455625'W 2.166'
56376'446'W 397989'
47' Z"WW11''54.97
549x732 69.23'
'02'12'W 88.97
5262759'W 76.99'
55359'11"W 22.55'
655528'W 220.93'
N2255'23'E 211117'
14 1.3
23 24
1 Map1
24
NORTH
SCALE 1=400'
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
ND SURVEY
JULY 10, 2007
PATRICK GAGE COLE
79157 LS
RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/07
1 z /z•D7V7
11015 MO AS PREPARED T041
'ASSESSMENT PLOPOSE OAT •
REVISED, 0110512001
SECTION 13 T.17S. R.11E. W.M.
DESCHUTES COUNTY
. 400
17 11 13
CLR Inc. Pro er
Kimble Property
50001
501111
13
'• 601111
:• 700 1hrm 707
701301
17041
;t11:71
• ' 700411
• 001
• , 002
•
114
•
1115
• 1100
. •
-1200
jr0LI 130501
• 1301 Ihnd 1305
1401
11:137
1100 1hrw 2200
• 2800 1074 4000
PA07-2 and ZCO7-2
17 11 13
Map 3
Lands currently in
exception area
PO
1
11 12N89 7'»T
8
BASIS OF BEARINGS
N8957111' 2625.39'
SECTION 12
SECTION 13
N6957'11 "F
1' SECTION 12
SECTION 13
. '32
N6154 56 E
250.00'
V6516
N73
178.61'
210.10
C
(...) I VN
580 • 031Y 39.44'
5956'W 20380'
S0572'40 W 232
'J4'W 117.68'
sevirom
Lands to be
designated RREA
5477677'W 16355'
S187J'29'W 38.04'
S08v7'401- 84,46'
S107/ 41'W 39.16'
54171 .0.116 62.05'
561'4131V 8232'
6'06'W 128.61'
1083936"E 241.35'
N I I
NIi
Nd45J36T 281.65'
8930 W
NMALO
Lands to be
desi nated RREA
51017373"W1 1260'
524'36.2.3'W 44.06'
5.591722'W 7.15;7'
5571159J'W 3175
56'251v 236¢'
56.319 4611 39.99
9
47'32"WW 54 97
5895.332 69.23'
'0272'W 86.97'
5287759"W 76.99'
55359'111W 22.55'
85'S528'W 220.93'
14 ,4 13
N2255231" 211117'
J
23 24
Lands currently in
exception area
13
24
NORTH
SCALE 1=400'
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
ND SURVEY
•- • . E -r
JULY 10. 2007
PATRICK GAGE COLE
79157 LS
RENEWAL DATE: 12/31/07
1Z/y4107
Memorandum
To: Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
CC: Laurie Craghead, Deschutes County Assistant County Counsel;
Chris Bedsaul, Associate Planner, Community Development Department
From: Liz Fancher, Attorney for applicant
Date: 1/4/2008
Re: PA -07 -2, ZC -07 -2
The County authorized only two mining areas that totaled about 65 acres on Mine site 294.
The subject property is identified as Mine Site No. 294 on the Deschutes County Goal 5
inventory. The site is commonly known as the "Klippel Pit." Mine Site 294 totals is
about 160 acres in size. About 65 acres of the property was approved for mining in two
specific areas of the property.
The Klippel Pit was placed on the County's Goal 5 inventory by Ordinance Nos. 90 -025
and 90 -029. Ordinance No. 90 -029 adopted the ESEE determinations and zoning
decisions of the Board of Commissioners on certain surface mining sites in the County,
such as the Klippel Pit.
Exhibit B of Ordinance 90 -029 shows the two areas approved for mining. A copy of
this exhibit is included for your convenience as Exhibit M -1 to this memorandum. The
two mining areas are highlighted in green and orange respectively. The portion of the
subject property not authorized for mining is highlighted in yellow.
This map is not the current tax lot map for the property. At the time the County
authorized mining on the property it was held in single ownership and identified as Tax
Lot 817 on Assessor's Map 17- 11 -13.
Area 1
This area is located in the northeastern portion of the subject property and totals
18 acres in size. The County approved this area for mining based upon "test pit
excavations, material identification and assessment, and quantity calculations."
Findings, Decision, And Program to Implement Goal 5 of the Board of County
Commissioners for Deschutes County In the Matter of* * * Inventory Site No.
294, the ` Klippel Site ' For Surface Mining, page 4. ( "The "ESEE Findings "). A
copy of this page is attached for your convenience as Exhibit M -2. Specifically
PA -07 -2, ZZC -07 -2 1
January 4, 2008
relating to Area 1, the County found that good sources of aggregate resource were
located in the northern and northeastern 18 acres of the site and referred to this
area as "Area 1." The ESEE Findings, page 4.
Area 2
This area is located in the southern half of the property and totals 47 acres in size.
The County authorized mining in this area of the property based upon the Century
West report documenting results from several test pits showing good aggregate
resource located in the 47 -acre area in the south and central part of the site
referred to as "Area 2." The ESEE Findings, page 5. A copy of this page is
attached to this memorandum as Exhibit M -3.
The Klippel Pit has been fully mined and no longer contains significant mineral and
aggregate resources.
The County placed the Klippel Pit on its Goal 5 inventory as Mine Site 294 through the
adoption of Ordinance No. 90 -025. The County supported the placement of the site on
the Goal 5 inventory with "technical information * * * submitted for the inventory at
Site No. 294 regarding the location of the aggregate resource, its quantity and its
quality." The ESEE Findings, page 3. A copy of this page is attached for your
convenience as Exhibit M -4 to this memorandum. The technical information
submitted to the County was prepared by Century West. Century West estimated that
the two mining areas contained 777,600 cubic yards of resource "based on site - specific
evaluation of test pits conducted in areas to be mined." The ESEE Findings, page 5. The
County recognized that a greater volume of aggregate may be available from the mining
areas based upon reports from Robert S. Deacon who the County retained. The ESEE
Findings, page 5. However, the County accepted the Century West estimate and
included Mine Site 294 on the County's Goal 5 inventory, in Section 23.100.070 of the
Comprehensive Plan as follows:
SITE
NO.
LEGAL
DESC.
NAME
TYPE
QUANTITY
*
QUALITY
ACCESS/
LOCATION
294
171113 -00-
Bend
S &G
777,000
Excellent
Klippel
00817
Aggregate
Acres /Bend
From 1993 through 2004 approximately 1,320,192 cubic yards of material were
extracted from the Klippel Pit's two areas authorized for mining. This number is
supported by the mine operator production records filed with DOGAMI. Copies of
these reports were included as Exhibits Q through AA of the applicant's burden of proof
statement. The reports are summarized in the following table:
PA -07 -2, ZZC -07 -2 2
January 4, 2008
Year of Permit
Amount extracted
6/30/93 — 6/30/94
23,000 cubic yards
6/30/94 — 6/30/95
122,000 cubic yards
6/30/95 — 6/30/96
125,000 cubic yards
6/30/96 — 6/30/97
8,000 tons (17, 280 cubic yards)
6/1/97 — 5/31/98
33,400 cubic yards
6/1/98 — 5/31/99
75,000 tons (162,000 cubic yards)
6/1/99 — 5/31/00
100,000 tons (216,000 cubic yards)
6/1/00 — 5/31/01
50,000 tons (108,000 cubic yards)
6/1/01 — 5/31/02
80,000 tons (172, 800 cubic yards)
6/1/02 — 5/31/03
98,200 tons (212,112 cubic yards)
6/1/03 — 5/31/04
75,000 tons (162,000 cubic yards)
TOTAL _
1,320,192 cubic yards
From 1978 through 1996 the production figures were listed in tons. Ben Mundie of
DOGAMI provided the conversion factor for the Klippel pit in a letter dated 12 -13 -06
that is included as Exhibit BB of the applicant's burden of proof statement. The
amounts extracted in the above table are based upon the conversion figure supplied by
Ben Mundie — one ton of material equals 2.16 cubic yards.
The production reports summarized in the above table demonstrates that the Klippel Pit
has been fully mined because the quantity of resource material extracted from the pit far
exceeds the estimated amount available for extraction that the County adopted in its
Goal 5 inventory. The amount extracted also exceeds the estimated amount available
for extraction from Robert S. Deacon described in the ESEE Findings at page 5. Thus,
the facts show that there is not a significant amount of aggregate resource remaining in
the Klippel Pit's two approved mining areas and further mining on the property would
be futile.
PA -07 -2, ZZC -07 -2 3
c
A00 __-
1:70
,2.0 �� —•..i
K4.014E 111 11
be at
[-LEI pgigx3
N OY'T'h
DE; (ES COUNTY
•'• 1•.400'
� � J 113
LOCA'rlorJ 01p4i'
4 a. Nab (Po ED
$uR rAt6 fr tM I P4
AT" Ku PP t. ACRES11
M AREA s 1 e
- 1308
resources can be commercially usable. Based on the cost of
transportation, the Board finds that it is appropriate to consider
market location factors in determining relative significance given
that, unlike other Goal 5 resources, the significance of aggregate
resource is measured largely by its commercial value. Market
location factors include proximity to urban areas and to
transportation corridors. The close proximity of Site No. 294 to
the resource's major market area, and its adequate access to a
transportation corridor, is a important positive factor in the
determination of the site's significance.
7 With respect to the location of the resource on site,
the Board accepts the expert testimony of Century West Engineering
Corporation ( "Century West ") which documented an on -site technical
investigation of the location of the resource on site as well as
the resource's quantity and quality. Century West's expert
analysis included test pit excavations, material identification and
assessment, and quantity calculations.
The Board accepts and believes the Century West reports
of January 25, 1988 and February 2, 1988 which document the
location and quantity of the resource at Site No. 294. The
location of the resource is substantiated by numerous test pits
which were excavated on the site to explore the subsurface
conditions. Twenty separate test pits were excavated over the
surface mining site. The location of the test pits and excavation
depths are documented in the Century West reports. The subsurface
investigation was completed in two separate steps. The first
investigation (January 25, 1988 report) explored the subsurface
conditions in the northern and northeastern part of the site to be
mined, consisting of 18 acres (Area 1). Thirteen separate test
pits were excavated to a depth of 8.5 feet to 16.5 feet below the
ground surface. The Board finds that Century West's analysis was
a comprehensive review of the subsurface conditions found in
Area 1. The Board finds that beneath an overburden of silty sand
averaging 2.2 feet, a gravel strata exists below the surface which
extends to depths of 7 feet to 11.5 feet with the average thickness
of the gravel strata being 7.7 feet. Beneath the gravel strata,
there exists a cemented silty sandy gravel or gravelly silty sand.
8 The Board accepts Century West's determination that the
gravel strata is a good source of aggregate resource including
gravel, cobbles and sand. The Board further accepts Century West's
estimate of the quantity of the aggregate in its January 25, 1988
report which was calculated on the basis of the average thickness
of aggregate at 7.7 feet and an average overburden thickness of 2.2
feet, resulting in an aggregate resource estimate of 223,600 cubic
yards of aggregate resource including 157,000 cubic yards of gravel
and 66,600 cubic yards of sand. The Board agrees with the Hearings
Officer's finding that Century West's quantity estimates are
conservative because the entire thickness depth of the subsurface
aggregate strata in Area 1 could not be reached in all the test
pits due to the limited reach of the back hoe, and that it is
4
Exhibit M -2
4.01 -, 1309
likely that more aggregate is available than estimated by Century
West.
9 In its February 2, 1988 report Century West documented
a subsurface evaluation of an area consisting of 47 acres in the
south and central part of the site (Area 2). The Century West
report for Area 2 is accepted by the Board. This investigation
included the excavation of seven test pits to depths ranging from
5.5 feet to 13.0 feet below the ground surface. The Boards finds
that beneath an overburden of silty sand averaging 2.5 feet in
thickness, a gravel strata is the primary unit throughout the test
pit depth. The gravel strata begins at a depth of 1.5 feet to 3.5
feet below the surface and extends to depths of 5 feet to 12.5
feet. The Board finds that the average thickness of the gravel
strata is 7.3 feet. The Board accepts Century West's conclusion
that the subsurface gravel strata is a good locational source for
aggregate resource. The Board further accepts Century West's
estimate of the quantity of the aggregate in Area 2 which was
calculated on the basis of the average thickness of gravel of 7.3
feet and an average overburden thickness of 2.5 feet, resulting in
an aggregate resource estimate of 554,000 cubic yards of aggregate
material including 443,000 cubic yards of gravel and 111,000 cubic
yards of sand. The Board accepts the Hearings Officer's finding
that the total aggregate quantity in Area 2 may exceed Century
West's estimate because the total thickness of the gravel strata
was not determined in every test hole due to the limited reach of
the backhoe. On the basis of the documentation of Century West's
subsurface evaluation, the Board accepts Century West's report as
a comprehensive review of the subsurface conditions and accepts its
expert estimate that Area 2 contains 554,000 cubic yards of
aggregate.
10 The Board recognizes that the County's consulting
geologist Robert S. Deacon, retained by the County to review
specific aggregate sites, concluded that Site No. 294 contained a
greater volume of aggregate resource than that estimated by Century
West. On the basis of his review of the expert reports and a site
visit, consulting geologist Deacon estimates a total aggregate
resource quantity of 922,000 cubic yards at Site No. 294. Mr.
Deacon's calculation of a higher estimate of total aggregate
resource is based on planimeter survey results of photograph of the
surface area using the average thickness of the aggregate strata
from the Century West reports.
11 The Board finds that Century West's estimate of 777,600
cubic yards is based on site - specific evaluation of test pits
conducted in the areas to be mined. While the planimeter survey
results from Mr. Deacon suggest a higher estimate of aggregate
resource, the Board accepts the results of the on -site technical
evaluation completed by Century West which resulted in a quantity
estimate of 777,600 cubic yards. By this reference the Board
incorporates the Hearings Officer's report and findings herein.
5
Exhibit M -3
1 t) 1307
2 At the hearings on Site No. 294, testimony was received
from the owner /operator as well as from other interested members
of the public. Expert testimony was received on the location,
quality and quantity of the aggregate resource, as well as on the
ESEE consequences associated with the protection of the aggregate
resource and the conflicting resources and uses. A list of the
contents of the record is appended hereto as Exhibit A.
3 The owner /operator submitted a surface mining plan
detailing the operation, extraction and reclamation of the
aggregate resource at Site No. 294.
4. Inventory
1 By Ordinance No. 90 -025, Site No. 294 was placed on the
County's Goal 5 Inventory for aggregate and mineral resources. By
this reference, the Board incorporates the record, the Hearings
Officer's report and the findings related to the inventory
determination in Ordinance No. 90 -025 of the County's Goal 5
aggregate resources. (Ordinance No. 90 -025 is also incorporated
by this reference).
2 Expert site - specific technical information was submitted
for the inventory at Site No. 294 regarding the location of the
aggregate resource, its quantity and its quality.
3 Based on that site - specific expert technical information
on location, quantity and quality as detailed in this Section 4 and
the findings for the overall inventory adopted in Ordinance No. 90-
025, the Board accepts the Hearings Officer's determination that
Site No. 294 is a very significant site in the County's resource
inventory.
4 The Board finds that the location component of the Goal 5
inventory decision includes a determination of the physical
location of the resource on site, i.e., the area and dimensions of
the resource location at the site and the location of the resource
vis -a -vis its market destination. The latter is principally
included in the determination of the site's significance.
5 The Board finds that Site No. 294 is located 5.8 miles
from the City of Bend and 4.7 miles from Tumalo. It consists of
approximately 162.4 acres. The site has access to Johnson Road,
a county rural arterial. The property is generally flat upland
pasture with aggregate material existing under a soil layer.
6 Site No. 294's geographic location places it in close
proximity to the County's major aggregate market area, i.e. the
Bend urban area. The Board finds that the cost of transporting
the aggregate resource is an important component in its overall
cost. The Board finds that the cost of transporting aggregate is
approximately .25 per ton mile and that a haulage distance of 10 -15
miles from the market area is the maximum area for which these
3
Exhibit M -4
William H. Carson
P.O. Box 8146
70235 Hylesium
Black Butte Ranch, Oregon 97759
January 3, 2008
Mark Pilliod
Deschutes County Attorney
1300 NW Wall St., Suite 200
Bend, Or 97701
Dear Mark,
1 ' M
?(FOR
Enclosed please find a copy of the Resolution that was adopted by the Black
Butte Ranch Special Services District Board on January 3, 2008. If you would
like a copy of the formal minutes once they are typed up, please let me know.
Best Regards,
Ph & Fax: (541)595 -2488
bcarson@bendbroadband.com
IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY
Please complete this card & turn
it in to a County staff person.
Name: 1164,4w Scoff
Mailing Address: 4ytios
r/p, o+i ' ?? v/
Phone #: f,Qro _3E
E -mail Address:
Date:
Subject: k„ 40 roSoloimm
IF YOU WISH TO TESTIFY
Please complete this card & turn
it in to a County staff person.
Name: �z�� � 6,e- ,
Mailing Address:
Phone #:
E -mail Address:
Date: 7/4z?
Subject: /4777______
DES
0
Deschutes County Board of Commissioners
1300 NW Wall St., Bend, OR 97701 -1960
(541) 388 -6570 - Fax (541) 385 -3202 - www.deschutes.org
BUSINESS MEETING AGENDA
DESCHUTES COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
10:00 A.M., MONDAY, JANUARY 7, 2008
Commissioners' Hearing Room - Administration Building - 1300 NW Wall St., Bend
1. CITIZEN INPUT
This is the time provided for individuals wishing to address the Board, at the Board's
discretion, regarding issues that are not already on the agenda. Citizens who wish to speak
should sign up prior to the beginning of the meeting on the sign -up card provided. Please
use the microphone and also state your name and address at the time the Board calls on you
to speak. PLEASE NOTE: Citizen input regarding matters that are or have been the subject
of a public hearing will NOT be included in the record of that hearing.
2. PUBLIC HEARING and First and Second Readings and Adoption, by
Emergency, of Ordinance No. 2008 -003, regarding a Zone Change (Applicant:
Reid) — Will Groves, Community Development Department
3. PUBLIC HEARING on Ordinance No. 2008 -001, Proposed Comprehensive
Plan and Zone Map Changes to Change the Harris Kimble Property from
Surface Mine (SM) to Rural Residential 10 (RR -10) — Chris Bedsaul,
Community Development Department
4. CONSIDERATION of Whether to Hear an Appeal (File #A- 07 -21) of the
Hearings Officer's Decision Revoking Land Use Approvals for the
Construction of a Dwelling (Applicant: Peery) — Anthony Raguine, Community
Development Department
5. CONSIDERATION of Whether to Hear an Appeal (File #AD- 07 -12) of the
Hearings Officer's Decision regarding a Utility Facility, Including AM Radio
Towers, in the EFU Zone (Appellant: Follansbee) — Dee Van Donselaar,
Community Development Department
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 1 of 8 Pages
CONVENE AS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE BLACK BUTTE
RANCH COUNTY SERVICE DISTRICT
6. CONSIDERATION of Board Review of Document No. 2008 -007, a Lease
Agreement between the Black Butte Ranch County Service District and the
Black Butte Ranch Homeowners Association regarding the Construction of a
New Public Safety Building — Mark Pilliod, Legal Counsel
7. ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA
Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible.
Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7 -1 -1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY.
Please call (541) 388 -6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information.
FUTURE MEETINGS:
(Please note: Meeting dates and times are subject to change. All meetings take place in the Board of
Commissioners' meeting rooms at 1300 NW Wall St., Bend, unless otherwise indicated. If you have questions
regarding a meeting, please call 388 - 6572.)
Monday, January 7, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
5:30 p.m. Joint Work Session with the City of Bend Council, at City Hall
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
11:30 a.m. Budget Overview and Update
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
8:00 a.m. Budget Committee Interviews
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 2 of 8 Pages
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee
Thursday, January 17, 2008
7:00 a.m. Meeting with Bend Chamber of Commerce — Legislative Policy Council
Monday, January 21, 2008
Most County offices will be closed to observe Martin Luther King Jr. Day
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Monday, January 28, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
1:00 p.m. Commission on Children & Families' Update
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
5:30 p.m. Meeting with DEQ and DLCD regarding South County Groundwater Issues
Thursday, January 31, 2008
8:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Goal Setting Meeting
Monday, February 4, 2008
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 3 of 8 Pages
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Monday, February 11, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
12:00 noon Regular Meeting of Board and Department Directors
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
9:00 a.m. Ore -Star Training
1:00 p.m. Drug Court Graduation (tentative), at Courthouse
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
9:00 a.m. Meeting with Students at Redmond High School
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting, at Redmond High School
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Friday, February 15, 2008
12:00 noon Community Affairs Council Town Hall Luncheon, at Mt. Bachelor/Touchmark
Monday, February 181, 2008
Most County offices will be closed to observe Presidents' Day
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 4 of 8 Pages
Monday, February 25, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Monday, March 3, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 6, 2008
10:00 a.m. Regular Department Update — District Attorney
11:00 a.m. Regular Department Update — Community Development
1:30 p.m. Regular Department Update — Road Department
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 13, 2008
7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Redmond Council, Redmond Council Chambers
10:00 a.m. Regular Department Update — Mental Health Department
1:00 p.m. Regular Department Update — Health Department
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 7, 2008
Page 5 of 8 Pages
Monday, March 17, 2008
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 20, 2008
10:00 a.m. Regular Department Update — Community Justice
Friday, March 21, 2008
12:00 noon Community Affairs Council Town Hall Luncheon, at Mt. Bachelor/Touchmark
Monday, March 24, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, March 27, 2008
9:00 a.m. Regular Department Update — Fair & Expo
11:00 a.m. Regular Department Update — Commission on Children & Families
Monday, March 31, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 7, 200f,
Page 6 of 8 Pages
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, April 3, 2008
8:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with Sisters City Council, at Sisters City Hall
Monday, April 7, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, April 10, 2008
12:00 noon Audit Committee Meeting
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
10:00 a.m. Regular Meeting of the Employee Benefits Advisory Committee
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Friday, April 18, 2008
12:00 noon Community Affairs Council Town Hall Luncheon, at Mt. Bachelor/Touchmark
Monday, April 21, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 7, 200X;
Page 7 of 8 Pages
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
7:00 a.m. Bend Chamber of Commerce Forecast Breakfast, Bend Country Club
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Monday, April 28, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Monday, May 5, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
3:30 p.m. Regular Meeting of LPSCC (Local Public Safety Coordinating Council)
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
10:00 a.m. Board of Commissioners' Meeting
1:30 p.m. Administrative Work Session — could include executive session(s)
Thursday, May 8, 2008
7:00 a.m. Regular Meeting with the City of Redmond Council, Redmond Council Chambers
Deschutes County meeting locations are wheelchair accessible.
Deschutes County provides reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
For deaf, hearing impaired or speech disabled, dial 7 -1 -1 to access the state transfer relay service for TTY.
Please call (541) 388 -6571 regarding alternative formats or for further information.
Board of Commissioners' Business Meeting Agenda Monday, January 7, 200
Page 8 of 8 Pages