Table of Contents FOREWORD Page i Role of the Comprehensive Plan 1 Development Process 4 Rural-Urban Relationship 7 Air, Water and Land Resource Quality 22 Economics 25 Energy 30 CHAPTER II. DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE ? POPULATION PREDICTIONS Demographic Profile ? Population Predictions 35 CHAPTER III. LAND USE Agriculture 40 Forest Lands 47 Recreation 51 Industry 58 Rural Service Centers 65 Destination Resort 70 CHAPTER IV. TRANSPORTATION Alternate Transportation Modes 83 CHAPTER V. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES Public Facilities and Services 88 CHAPTER VI. NATURAL/SCENIC/BUFFER AREAS 99 CHAPTER VII. HISTORIC AREAS 112 CHAPTER IX. NATURAL RESOURCES/HAZARDS AND DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS Natural Hazards Policies 122 Water Resources 123 Floodplains 129 Geology Map Legend 175 Legend for Soils (Map Unit Morphology) and General Capability Map 178 Soil Type Capability Map Legend 184 Bear Creek Soil Survey (Excerpt) 186 Trout Creek Soil Survey (Excerpt) 187 Soils, Morphology, Depth, Slope 188 Vegetation/Land Use Map Legend 193 Review and Revision Processes 195 Map Resource Information ? Limitations 197 Common Abbreviations and Definitions of Terms 198 Page 1 of 1 i FOREWORD The Crook County Comprehensive Land Use Plan was adopted in 1978 and has been in use by the County since that time. Over the years, there have been 49 amendments to the maps and text and, in recent years, there have been minor amendments to the amendments? particularly in the Powell Butte area. This document represents a codified version of the County?s Comprehensive Plan. The purpose is to update the Plan to make it easier to use by the elected and appointed officials of Crook County and by the average citizen needing to glean information from it. The following table lists each amending Ordinance, the action, and where it appears in the planning text. Not all Plan amendments are text amendments and those modifying the Comprehensive Plan Map are not shown. This should be considered an edited version of the Comprehensive Plan. All of the Ordinances have been officially adopted by the Crook County Court, but do not necessarily appear in absolute ?word-for-word? basis as they were adopted. If the reader desires to follow the absolute language of the Ordinance, it is recommended he review the specific Ordinance in the Crook County Planning Department or the Crook County Clerk?s office. The Crook County Comprehensive Plan, as it was adopted in 1978, also included the City of Prineville. That City is now working on its own updated Plan. All of the material in the County Plan that was specific to Prineville has been removed from the main text and placed in a separate file in the Crook County Planning Department. Until the Crook County Plan is updated and the material officially deleted, it is still part of the Crook County Plan. For questions regarding the material, you should contact the Crook County Planning Department. ii CROOK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS ITEM # DATE ORDINANCE NO. ACTION PLACED IN TEXT 1 11/08/78 17 Adopts Comprehensive Plan 2 4/5/84 -- Adopts UGB Map Revisions ? Revises UGB Map revisions, includes 2 maps and legal descriptions No 3 12/28/88 -- Adopts EFU-2 Map Revisions ? Map revisions adds 35 acres of H-M ? Map difficult to read No 4 1/9/91 43 Adopts Goal 5 Mineral & Aggregate Resource Listing ? Major Amendment Pages 133-136 and Appendix ?A? 5 3/20/91 45 Adopts Exception Areas ? Major Amendment Policy, page 13; Policy, pages 39, 50, 65-66, 195 and Appendix ?B? 6 9/16/91 51 Adopts Mineral & Aggregate Amendments ? adds policies and Appendix ?A? Adds Policies, pages 137-139, and deletes Policy, page 109, and Appendix ?A? 7 2/26/92 55 Adopts More Mineral & Aggregate Amendments ? adds to Appendix ?A? Deletes several Policies, pages 137-139, adds Policy, page 196, and Appendix ?A? 8 2/28/92 59 Adopts Modified EFU-2 Exception ? amends 55 ? Map difficult to read Appendix ?B? 9 5/14/92 62 Adopts Airport Exception ? two maps No 10 5/14/92 65 Adopts Airport Master Plan (in total) ? only even numbered pages available Policies, pages 86-87 11 5/14/92 66 Adopts Airport Master Plan by Reference 12 5/14/92 64 Adopts Airport Layout Plan ? new ALP ? map not available 13 6/22/92 70 Adopts Additional Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Appendix ?A? Appendix ?A? 14 7/28/92 71 Goal 5 Periodic Review ? Inventory and policies Pages 31-33, 100-106, 108-111, 112-120, 124- 125, and 140-143 15 11/6/92 73 Map amendment ? agricultural to outlying commercial ? also amends UGB ? map difficult no read No 16 3/24/93 78 Rural Exception ? add to Appendix ?B? Appendix ?B? 17 6/23/93 80 UGB Amendment ? Map amendment ? no policies No 18 9/1/93 82 Rural Exception ? map amendment ? no policies ? adds to Powell Butte Exception Area Appendix ?B? 19 12/8/93 86 Additional Historic Sites ? add intro & permit requirements ? McCall Ranch Page 113 20 88 Amends Prineville UGB ? airport expansion map amendment ? no policies No iii ITEM # DATE ORDINANCE NO. ACTION PLACED IN TEXT 21 4/28/94 89 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Barnard Construction Appendix ?A? 22 4/27/94 91 Ordinance #88 re-recorded as 91 No 23 9/7/94 93 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Bend Aggregate Appendix ?A? 24 9/14/94 94 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Raasch Appendix ?A? 25 12/14/94 95 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Couch Add to Appendix ?A? 26 3/1/95 97 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Kendall Add to Appendix ?A? 27 3/8/95 98 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Breeze Add to Appendix ?A? 28 4/5/95 99 EFU to R-5 map amendment only ? no policies Add to Appendix ?B? 29 9/13/95 104 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? R & R Equipment Add to Appendix ?A? 30 9/13/95 105 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Williams Add to Appendix ?A? 31 10/4/95 106 Periodic Review ? Rural service centers -- Post, Paulina, E & W Powell Butte, amends Exception Appendix Appendix ?B? 32 10/11/95 107 PR Amendment ? Goal 14 analysis justifying nonresource zoning ? amends Exception Appendix ?B? Add to Appendix ?B? 33 10/11/95 108 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Schlosser Add to Appendix ?A? 34 10/11/95 109 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? UCON, Inc. Add to Appendix ?A? 35 11/22/95 111 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Fehrenbacher Add to Appendix ?A? 36 11/13/96 120 Add Mineral & Aggregate Site ? Kilpatrick Add to Appendix ?A? 37 6/25/97 122 Rural Land ? revises public facility policies Pages 88, 89 38 5/27/98 124 Sensitive Bird Habitat ? adds policy and inventory Pages 143-154 39 12/11/98 126 Powell Butte Area 2-3 ? added section to plan text Pages 66-69 40 12/11/98 127 Powell Butte Area 2-4 Pages 66-69 41 12/11/98 128 Powell Butte Area 2-1 Pages 66-69 42 2/3/99 130 Powell Butte Area 1-2 Pages 66-69 43 2/3/99 131 Powell Butte Area 1-1 Pages 66-69 44 2/3/99 132 Powell Butte Area 2-1 Pages 66-69 45 2/3/99 133 Powell Butte Area 3-1 Pages 66-69 46 2/3/99 134 Powell Butte Area 3-2 Pages 66-67 47 5/22/02 52 Destination Resort text and policies Pages 70-82 48 5/23/02 53 Destination Resort Maps ? 4 maps plus composite No 49 10/30/02 55 UGB Amendment ? map, no policies No - 1 - CROOK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Codified Edition ? January, 2003 ROLE OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The ethic of growth is increasingly being challenged; many people no longer accept it unquestioningly as a premise of progress. The effects of growth on quality of life are widely debated, and management and quality control of growth are seen as essential elements by many within a given community. More and more, the costs and benefits of continued and uncontrolled growth have emerged as a major issue. There is hesitation over accommodating further development with its attendant consequences of greater numbers of residents and the resultant higher density demands to minimize land consumption trends. Locally, these concerns were expressed throughout the citizen involvement program and are increasingly evident in testimony presented at public hearings involving development proposals. At the same time, this trend has not been without opposition; dissent over the implications of growth restrictions has been heard from various sectors of the business community. Frequently, the basis for opposition stems from the fact that the far-reaching re- percussions of growth controls are not adequately analyzed and, in those cases, the opposition is probably justified. However, more often than not, opposition is based on the individual?s claim of private property rights above that of the common good. We all have a stake in a community which is considerably greater than the property to which we legally claim title. That principle was recognized early in this country when the right to vote was not tied to the wealth of a man. Further, though the law has been sometimes slow to recognize it, legal title cannot morally convey the right to destroy the non-renewable resources that nature has formed, for as we engage in such destruction, we go beyond use and into the realm of preventing others from living (through the elimination of habitat). Quoting the late President John F. Kennedy, ?When the youngest child today has grown to the cares of manhood, our position in the world will be determined first of all by what provisions we make today--for his education, his health, and his opportunities for a good home and a good job and a good life.? We no longer live in a time when we are few and the land is wide and waiting for us. We have reached the point where we can no longer insulate ourselves from the punishment and pollution we visit upon the earth and the atmosphere, and where the natural resources we once regarded as so endlessly available and expendable are becoming increasingly hard to get. The spread patterns of settlement and development that characterize our past urban growth are the unfortunate legacy of our old illusion that we had endless acres of land to build upon and unlimited resources to enjoy and consume. - 2 - Not unlike nearly every other community in the nation, the concern of the people of Crook County over the possible degradation of environmental quality and its relationship to the quality of life and livability of the county has been increasing in the past years. The realization that land, forests, water and other resources are limited in their ability to support the needs and absorb wastes has led to a determination to guide such actions in a manner which is compatible with a livable environment. While the land surface area of the county remains constant over time, inevitably the population will continue to expand. There will resultantly be a greater demand and need for more land for urban or suburban type development, and the choices made in the use of land frequently reduce substantially the options for future use. For example, the decision to commit land to a subdivision precludes the use of that land for many other purposes for decades to come. Common resources, such as streams, lakes, and air are by their very nature subject to exploitation. Differing from land, such resources are difficult, if not impossible, to reduce to individual ownership; thus they are subject to overuse or congestion. All too often, land use policies formulated to address the foregoing concerns, problems, and situations take a totally negative view toward growth. In truth, such plans and regulations should only take a negative view toward unplanned or poorly planned growth which ultimately can cost the general public and the taxpayer uncalled for and unnecessary damage to their physical, social, economical and environmental situations. Commonly, when land use designations or policies are established, they set forth definitively those lands which cannot or should not be developed. There is, however, a lesser effort to set forth guidelines or policies as to which lands can or should be developed and standards for such development. This plan has been formulated under the constant realization that the population of the area is going to continue to expand and represents the culmination of more than two years effort on the part of numerous and various Citizen Advisory Committees, a technical Advisory Committee representing all appropriate local, state and federal agencies, public utilities and special districts, and the Planning Commissions for the City of Prineville and Crook County. Even though historically, as urban and suburban growth needs expand, there has been a gradual transition to higher density developments which are lower land area consumers, those involved realized the need for additional lands for such development would continue to expand (even with the transition). With this awareness, the objectives have been to develop a land use plan that will provide the basis for an orderly and efficient transition of current land use to more intensified uses within the parameters of an established set of guidelines, policies, standards and regulations; a document with which all involved parties are required to comply, regardless of the party's position. That is to say that those establishing the guidelines, policies and regulations must ?play the game? by the same rules as any applicant. Although compliance with the applicable Statewide Planning Goals as mandated by O.R.S. Chapter 197 has been a constant objective, the primary goal is to provide a plan for the people of the City and County which is based upon the best available facts, desires for the future - 3 - livability and economical-environmental balances, and to achieve to the greatest extent possible, a set of regulations which are reasonable and realistic. Growth is not to be discouraged, but managed in such manner that detrimental physical, social, economical and environmental factors are minimized. Implementing regulations have a measure of flexibility as commonly set forth in performance standard type regulations with the intent to provide maximum opportunity for efficient development. Those citizens directly involved in the planning process for the County have viewed the requirements set forth by O.R.S. Chapter 197, not as a mandate, but as an opportunity and a responsibility to consider the impact of their activities related to land and other resource use on the future and quality of life in the City and County. Their direction has been to seek a balance between the goals and needs of development and livability. In that sense, the plan is a unified document for the City and County, although there is within the document a distinctive Urban Element concerning the City of Prineville and surrounding urban area (i.e. that area within the boundaries of the Urban Growth Boundary). The planning program has not assumed that air, water, land and other natural resources are unlimited; it does recognize that the quality of these is relevant to the well-being of the people of the City and County, both present and future generations. There has been constant recognition that the situation in the county is serious in the sense that nearly every decision made during the next decade will greatly affect the future use of land and of other natural resources. The scope and level of background resource information is a reflection of a concern that such decisions not be made without adequate information, planning and consideration of the long-term consequences. The entire process and resultant plan is a sincere expression of the need for every citizen of the City and County to share in the responsibility for achieving and maintaining a high level of livability in the Crook County. Policies contained within the plan are clearly a reflection of an awareness that the City and County will always be faced with choices and compromises between various alternatives with each and every decision. We cannot have wood, paper, and building materials for homes and not cut trees. The problem of resource management is termed critical because of the difficulty in finding solutions. However, even though the task has appeared, at times, to be impossible, it has been present, it has been acknowledged and it has been dealt with; such is the essence of this plan. - 4 - DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The comprehensive planning process has been based upon citizen involvement in order that community wants and needs may be met in a final document, and in order that broad public support is gained for this document. The encouragement of an informed and enlightened public has been the basic premise of the program which has offered technical information as well as human and financial assistance to the planning endeavors of the citizens of Crook County. A broad and intensive program was implemented to provide citizens with information and opportunity for the best possible organization for citizen comprehensive planning. The program encouraged the public to be informed about the planning process and to be involved in the process in order to identify existing and potential problems and issues and to establish planning priorities for various areas of and various interests within Crook County. The final phases of the intensive citizen involvement program for comprehensive planning provided the opportunity for citizens to be heard at formal public hearings with the Planning Commissions, the City Council and County Court and established components of an ongoing involvement program with built-in feedback mechanisms from the citizens to the governing bodies and from governing bodies to the citizens. CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Based upon a citizen involvement program adopted by the Prineville City Council and the Crook County Court, the City and County Planning Commissions were assigned responsibility for the citizen involvement program through a twelve-member Citizen Advisory Committee representative of various areas of and various interests within Crook County, appointed for the purpose of advising upon, overseeing, and evaluating the processes and implementation of the citizen involvement program. This body held monthly public meetings and special meetings to review the ongoing citizen involvement program. Functioning with the committee was a Citizen Involvement Coordinator, a member of the Planning Department staff, hired for the purpose of assuring that the program laid out by the local governing bodies was followed, and that communications between citizens and the governing bodies remained open and active. PUBLIC AWARENESS AND PARTICIPATION Planning displays, paid advertisements, education/orientation meetings and presentations to clubs and civic groups throughout the county were initial methods of public education concerning planning processes and opportunities for involvement in planning. Eight (8) county areas were designated as county population centers to be considered study areas for citizen comprehensive planning meetings. Meetings for these areas were scheduled (through area contact people) and were advertised through media including area newspapers, area radio - 5 - stations, and the local television station. Posters placed in businesses and agencies within Prineville and rural centers notified the public of upcoming area meetings, while flyers informed Prineville people about Prineville area meetings. Subcommittees were formed to represent various interests within, the Prineville area, and members of these subcommittees met with the planning staff members to discuss concerns and desires for specific interests within the county. Subcommittee meetings were advertised in the same manner as the area committee meetings. The following are total numbers of citizen comprehensive planning meeting notifications from July, 1976 - July, 1977: Newspaper (public meeting notices) - 136 Posters (public meeting notices) - approx. 342 Radio airings (public meeting notices) - approx. 576 Personal letter meeting notices (1st class) ? 1819 Records show direct involvement of approximately 225 citizens in the 63 meetings held, while news stories relating to the citizen comprehensive planning process totaled 40. Both Town Hall meetings were televised, and Town Hall meetings as well as Planning Commission hearings are recorded on tape and available at the Planning Department office. CITIZEN PROPOSALS Citizen concerns and desires were coordinated with factual resource data, existing Oregon Revised Statues and Statewide Planning Goals. Policy proposals were suggested, reviewed, and revised at area committee and subcommittee meetings. Two Town Hall meetings, one for the Prineville area, and one for Crook County, were held to allow for further input concerning proposed policies. Proposals were then submitted to the City and County Planning Commissions for review and revision and for public hearings concerning the proposals prior to City Council and County Court hearings. Citizen suggestions not reflected in proposals were also presented to these bodies at the hearings. Written records of all citizen involvement, Citizen Advisory Committee, Town Hall, and Planning Commission meetings are available for review at the Planning Department office. PUBLIC OPINION SURVEYS Another important aspect of the citizen planning process was the distribution, compilation, and incorporation of surveys and survey results into the program and its reflected proposals. These surveys were distributed at random, to specific groups, and to a11 citizens of Crook County. Returned surveys and compilations of such are also available for review at the Planning Department office. The following shows survey types, numbers distributed, and methods of distribution. - 6 - General Planning Survey - 500 (random mailing) General Planning Survey #2 - 19 (AAUG1) Transportation Survey - 800 (mill and Les Schwab production center employees) Walk-in, Drive-in Business Survey - 25 (Prineville area citizen committee) Powell Butte Farmer?s Club Survey - 373 (Powell Butte residents and property owners) Housing Survey - 715 (every 3rd household in the Prineville area) Citizen Planning Proposal Survey - 4720 (every household in Crook County) CONTINUING PROCESSES With the establishment of area and subject advisory committees to make recommendations to the City and County Planning Commissions, the process of citizen review and revision of the comprehensive plan will be a continuing one. The public must accept the responsibility of keeping informed about and participating in future planning processes to provide incentive for prioritization and implementation of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. It will be the responsibility of the governing bodies to make information available to the public and to respond to the desires of the people of Crook County. - 7 - RURAL - URBAN RELATIONSHIP The urban-rural relationship is based on providing for a smooth transition of rural to urban use and minimizing conflicts that might arise. The preservation of a maximum amount of the limited supply of agricultural land is necessary to the conservation of the county's economic resource base. The expansion of urban development into rural areas of the county is a matter of public concern due to increasing costs of community services, conflicts between farm and urban activities, and continuing loss of open space and natural beauty. The most productive croplands within the county are concentrated in the valley area surrounding the City of Prineville, in the lowlands along the Crooked River and its major tributaries, and in the Powell Butte and Lone Pine areas. Rural subdivisions and partitioning of lots ranging from two to ten acres encompassed in excess of 1,200 acres of class I through VI agricultural lands in the Prineville valley area during the 1971 to 1975 period. This trend of consuming prime agricultural lands by introducing part-time farming and rural non-farm residences on small parcels poses serious problems and conflicts. Some of the more important of the problems and conflicts are: 1. Increased demands for the use of irrigation and ground water supplies for domestic use. 2. Higher costs in the distribution of water for irrigation of small-subdivided acreages. 3. Difficulty in the control of weeds and rodents. 4. Higher operating costs and increased land assessments. 5. Restrictions on the use of farm, chemicals. 6. Complaints of odors, dust and noise, dogs and children vs. livestock increased. 7. Nuisance and costs of vandalism and trespass. It is, therefore, in the best interest of the public to preserve agricultural lands. The major portion of Crook County?s population growth shall be concentrated within the defined Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Prineville and low density development in rural areas shall be maintained. - 8 - Prineville has had a population increase of over 5% per year over the last seven years. If this rate continues, the county could have approximately 15,500 people in the urban area by the year 2009. Approximately 9,600 persons are presently living in Prineville and the valley area adjacent to the City of Prineville. This assumes a 6,000 person increase in a 23 year period. (See Demographic Profile-Population Predictions, Pg. 37). Policies set forth in this plan encourage a higher density for new housing developments within the urban area to provide for the increasing population. URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY Accompanying the population expansion of the Prineville valley will be a greater demand and need for more land for urban or suburban type development. Historically, as urban growth needs expand, there has been a gradual transition to higher density developments which are lower land area consumers, but even with this transition, additional lands for such development will continue to be needed. Accepting the fact that growth is going to occur, the goal must therefore be for such growth to occur as orderly and efficiently as possible. Such growth should be directly in a manner that detriments to physical, social, economical and environmental factors are minimized. The recognition of the need for the establishment of an Urban Growth Boundary is one of the means by which growth can be directed. Although the establishment of such a boundary is a primary tool for identifying an area within which urban type growth is most likely to occur and certainly the area within which such is most desirable, it must be realized that this tool alone will not ensure absolute ?orderly and efficient? development. Such an accomplishment utilizing said boundary singularly would only be possible if the boundary was strictly established to include only the city and existing adjoining developed areas. An action of such restrictive magnitude would effectively eliminate any flexibility or freedom in the market place and undoubtedly increase already ?high? development costs. An Urban Growth Boundary has been adopted to provide for the economic and efficient extension of public facilities and services, to maximize energy savings, and to assure that buffers occur between urban developments and agricultural land uses and practices. Buffers between agricultural and urban land uses may consist of open space and/or a general decrease in housing density as farm lands are approached. In order to maximize energy savings, subdivisions should be evaluated for lot size and compatibility with surrounding land uses, and carrying capacity of the air, land and water resources of the area. The Urban Growth Boundary marks the extent of area eligible for city services and facilities until the year 2000. City utilities and. services may not be available outside the Boundary. The Urban Growth Boundary is designed to accommodate a projected growth to the year 2000, and to provide sufficient area to provide some level of flexibility and freedom in the market place. To maximize the goal of ?orderly and efficient? growth over time, the need for a definitive set of criteria to evaluate development proposals and establish development priorities is deemed necessary. In an attempt to satisfy this need, a set of ?Urban Development Priority Factors? has been developed and is included in this document for the purpose of formulating growth policies by which all relevant factions will be guided. - 9 - The use of such a system in establishing growth priorities is not uncommon. For example, priority development #1 would be development which meets all of the factors set forth; priority #2 could be development which complies with 9 or 10 of the factors; priority #3 -or- development which would be of the least desirable might be that development which would be approvable only after meeting additional criteria such as public need, lack of available alternatives, etc. See Urban Development Priority Factors set forth in this Chapter, Pg. 13. An UGB is required to be established to identify and separate ?urbanizable land? from ?rural land? and may only include ?urban land? and urbanizable land as set forth in the following definitions: 1. Rural Land: Rural lands are those which are outside the UGB and are: (a) Non-urban agricultural, forest or open space lands or, (b) Other lands suitable for sparse settlement, small farms or acreage homesites with no or hardly any public services, and which are not suitable, necessary nor intended for urban use. 2. Urban Land: Urban areas are those places which must have an incorporated city. Such areas may include lands adjacent to and outside the incorporated city and may also: (a) Have concentrations of persons who generally reside and work in the area. (b) Have supporting public facilities and services. 3. Urbanizable Land: Urbanizable lands are those lands within the UGB and which are identified and: (a) Determined to be necessary and suitable for future urban uses. (b) May be served by urban services and facilities. (c) Are needed for the expansion of an urban area. Establishment and change of the boundaries shall be based upon consideration of the following factors: 1. Demonstrated need to accommodate long-range urban population growth requirements. 2. Need for housing, employment opportunities, and livability. 3. Orderly and economic provision for public facilities and services. - 10 - 4. Maximum efficiency of land uses within and on the fringe the existing urban area. 5. Environmental, energy, economic and social consequences. 6. Retention of agricultural land. 7. Compatibility of the proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural activities. Establishment and change of the boundaries shall be a cooperative process between a city and the county that surrounds it. Land within the boundaries separating urbanizable land from rural land shall be considered available over time for urban uses. Conversion of urbanizable land to urban uses shall be based upon consideration of: 1. Orderly, economic provision for public facilities and services. 2. Availability of sufficient land for the various uses to insure choices in the market place. 3. LCDC goals. 4. Encouragement of development within urban areas before conversion of urbanizable areas. PLANNING GUIDELINES 1. Plans should designate sufficient amounts of urbanizable land to accommodate the need for further urban expansion, taking into account (1) the growth policy of the area, (2) population needs (by the year 2000), (3) the carrying capacity of the planning area, and (4) open space and recreational needs. 2. The size of the parcels of urbanizable land that are converted to urban land should be of adequate dimension so as to maximize the utility of the land resources and enable the logical and efficient extension of services to such parcels. 3. Plans providing for the transition from rural to urban land use should take into consideration as a major determinant the carrying capacity of the air, land and water resources of the planning area. The land conservation and development actions provided for by such plans should not exceed the carrying capacity of such resources. - 11 - IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES 1. The type, location and phasing of public facilities and services are factors which should be utilized to direct urban expansion. 2. The type, design, phasing and location of major public transportation facilities (i.e. all modes: air, rail, mass transit, highways, bicycle and pedestrian) and improvements thereto are factors which should be utilized to support urban expansion into urbanizable areas and restrict it from rural areas. 3. Financial incentives should be provided to assist in maintaining the use and character of lands adjacent to urbanizable areas. 4. Local land use controls and ordinances should be mutually supporting, adopted and enforced to integrate the type, timing and location of public facilities and services in a manner to accommodate increased public demands as urbanizable lands become more urbanized. In summary, the UGB can best described as a limit (boundary) beyond which the urban growth of the area should not extend during a specified time period. The objectives of the UGB can be primarily implemented through zoning and public facilities programming, and basically provides a means of curbing urban sprawl, while at the same time, encouraging progress towards orderly and well-planned growth. The UGB is not an unchangeable boundary, but one which can be altered in accordance with the procedures followed for establishment. Development within the UGB (pursuant to County Planning Commission recommendation) should be subject to review by both the city and the county. As a policy, land outside of the UGB shall be preserved through the application of Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) Zoning. The UGB is a means of concentrating and planning urban expansion for the conservation of land, air and water, stopping urban sprawl, and providing for the efficient use of public facilities and funds. URBAN DEVELOPMENT PRIORITY FACTORS 1. Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan - Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan is required by ORS 197 for any type of development. 2. Location Within the Urban Growth Boundary - State Planning Goal No. 14 sets forth that the Urban Growth Boundary is to be considered a division between urban lands and rural lands; thus, it is clear that location within must be considered a mandatory criteria for urban development. 3. Adjacent to City or Existing Adjoining Urban Development - Urban sprawl is recognized as a major contributor to higher public service and facility costs and higher local taxes, and to poor and inefficient land use patterns. Therefore, development which occurs as an extension to existing development is a method of minimizing such costs. - 12 - 4. Area Served by Public Sewer, Water Utilities & Transportation - Sewage disposal and domestic water supply have emerged as critical factors in urban development. Increasing dangers of underground water pollution and increasing withdrawals of underground water sources lead to an increasing demand for central systems, and the most efficient means of providing such. The balancing of supply and demand, and costs vs. revenues relating to utilities and transportation facilities have also emerged as a prime factors. Urban development criteria must, therefore, take into account the problems and costs associated with development which is not an immediate extension of these factors, and provide for efficient extension. 5. Located on Non-Agricultural Lands; Physically or Due to External Factors - State Statute and State Planning Goals both emphasize the need and positive factors of Agricultural Lands preservation and protection. Such preservation and protection is also considered vital at the local level as exhibited in related policies and findings related to economical, social and physical considerations. The location of urban development relative to such lands must be considered a prime factor. 6. Access to Existing Improved Arterial or Collector - Although the relationship to transportation has been referenced hereinbefore in Item #4, it is imperative that the need for development to have access to an existing improved arterial or collector be emphasized. Such need is supported by the fact that most major access routes are maintained by the public and therefore provide the most efficient means of access if expansion is limited. In the case of development not having immediate access to an existing improved arterial or collector, such access, must be established and the initial cost therefore should be assumed by the effecting development. 7. Location Relative to Fire Protection Facilities - The location of development relative to base fire protection facilities is directly related to the effective response time by said service, and is therefore a determinant factor in relation to the effectiveness of such protection, the public costs for provision of such, and to private costs related thereto. It is therefore imperative that the location of development within two (2) miles of base fire protection facilities be a priority factor. 8. Location in Relation to Schools or Existing School Bus Routes - Bussing is expensive, and to many people, undesirable; however, in many cases necessary and less costly than additional school facility construction. It is therefore important economically and socially that development be located within walking distance of either an existing elementary school facility or school bus route (or logical extension thereof). 9. Location Relative to Floodplain and Other Natural Hazards - From the standpoint of public safety, welfare and costs, it is vitally important that development not be permitted to locate within identified floodplains or other natural hazard areas. - 13 - 10. Development Design - A number of State Planning Goals and findings set forth by the local planning program emphasize the need to be concerned about the designs of developments, particularly in relation to recreational and open space needs, public services and facilities vs. the costs therefore, livability, needs of the young, elderly and handicapped, and the need for a variety of housing types and environments. It is concluded that developments of a Planned Unit Development concept and design should be encouraged. 11. Rural development shall occur based upon the Crook County Exception Area document and controlled by the appropriate rural zone identified in the document. (Ordinance No. 45; 3/20/91) - 14 - Table I COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ? 1972 BOUNDARY VS. 1978 BOUNDARY 1972 VS. 1978 SUBJECT 1972 UGB TOTAL ACRES % OF TOTAL 1978 UGB TOTAL ACRES % OF TOTAL DECREASE IN ACRES PERCENT DECREASE Total Acreage 17,180 100.0% 5,375 100.0% 11,805 68.7% Acres Inside City 1,375 8.0 1,375 25.6 - 0 - - 0 - Acres outside City 15,805 92.0 4,000 74.4 11,805 74.4 Acres ? Present Use (Developed) Agriculture 6,315 36.8 (47.6) 1,178 21.9 (27.6) 5,137 81.3 Residential 3,037 17.7 (22.9) 1,956 36.4 (45.9) 1,081 35.6 Industrial 803 4.7 (6.0) 516 9.6 (12.1) 287 35.7 Commercial 312 1.8 (2.3) 281 5.2 (6.6) 31 9.9 Public 2,810 16.4 (21.2) 331 6.2 (7.8) 2,479 88.2 Total: 13,277 77.3 (100%) 4,262 79.3 (100%) 9.015 67.9 Inside City: 1,250 7.3 (9.4) 1,250 23.2 (29.3) - 0 - - 0- Outside City: 12,027 70.0 (90.6) 3,012 56.1 (70.7) 9,015 74.9 Acres Undvlped 3,903 22.7 (100%) 1,113 20.7 (100%) 2,790 71.5% Inside City 125 0.7 (3.2) 125 2.3 (11.2) - 0 - - 0 - Outside City 3,778 22.0 (96.8) 988 18.4 (88.8) 2,790 73.8 Acres Urbanized 6,962 40.5 (52.4) 3,084 57.4 (72.4) 3,878 55.7 (R, I, C, P) Acres Urbanizable 10,218 59.5 2,291 42.6 7,927 77.6 (Ag. & Undvlp.) Percentages in ( ) are % of total for relevant subcategories - 15 - Table II ANALYSIS ? 1978 URBAN GROWTH AREA TOTAL AREA INSIDE CITY OUTSIDE CITY SUBJECT ACRES % OF TOTAL ACRES % OF TOTAL ACRES % OF TOTAL Total Acreage 5,375 100.0% 1,375 100.0% (25.6) 4,000 100.0% (74.4) Acres-Present Use (Developed) Residential 1,956 36.4 (45.9)(63.4) 753 54.8 (62.2) 1,203 30.1 (64.2) Industrial 516 9.6 (12.1)(16.7) 109 7.9 (9.0) 407 10.2 (21.7) Commercial 281 5.2 (6.6)(9.1) 180 13.1 (14.9) 101 2.5 (5.4) Public 331 6.2 (7.8)(10.7) 168 12.2 (13.9) 163 4.1 (8.7) Subtotal 3,084 57.4 (72.4)(100.0) 1,210 88.0 (100.0) 1,874 46.9 (100.0) Agriculture 1,178 21.9 (27.6) 40 2.9 1,138 28.4 Total 4,262 79.3 (100.0) 1,250 90.9 (29.3) 3,012 75.3 (70.7) Acres Undvlped 1,113 20.7 (100.0) 125 9.1 (11.2) 988 24.7 (88.8) Expansion Use Designation Industrial 284 5.3 (25.5) 25 1.8 (20.0) 259 6.5 (26.2) Commercial 60 1.1 (5.4) 12 0.9 (9.6) 48 1.2 (4.8) Residential 639 11.9 (57.4) 88 6.4 (70.4) 551 13.8 (55.8) Public 130 2.4 (11.7) -0- -0- 130 3.2 (13.2) Note: Percentages in ( ) are % of totals for relevant subcategories URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY - SUMMARY ANALYSIS (Population figures derived from Population Predictions of the Bureau of Census of the Bureau of Census; see pg. 40.) 1. RESIDENTIAL DENSITY FACTORS (a) County Area with UGB (outside city) 1) 1977 Population: 3,920 ? 2.33 persons/hshld. = 1,682 D.U.?s. 2) 1,682 D.U.?s ? 1,203 acres resid. use = 1.4 D.U.?s/acre residential density. 3) 1,682 D.U.?s ? 1,874 acres developed = 0.9 D.U.?s/acre overall density. (b) Total UGB Area 1) 1977 Population: 9,610 ? 2.33 persons/hshld. = 4,124 D.U.?s. 2) 4,124 D.U.?s ? 1,956 acres resid. use = 2.1 D.U.?s/acre residential density. 3) 4,124 D.U.?s ? 3,084 acres developed = l.3 D.U.?s/acre overall developed density. 4) 4,124 D.U.?s ? 5,375 acres total UGB = 0.8 D.U.?s/acre overall density. - 16 - 2. PROJECTED UGB AREA NEEDS (a) Projected population ? year 2000: 15,540 ? 2.33 persons/hshld. = 6,670 D.U.?s. 1) 6,670 D.U.?s @ 3.2 D.U./acre = 2,084 acres residential use (additional 128 areas needed). 2) 6,670 D.U.?s @ 2.0 D.U./acre = 3,335 acres overall (additional 251 acres needed). 3) 6,670 D.U.?s @ 1.4 D.U./acre = 4,764 acres residential use (additional 2,808 acres needed). 4) 6,670 D.U.?s @ 0.9 D.U./acre = 7,411 acres overall (additional 4,327 acres needed). 5) 6,670 D.U.?s @ 2.1 D.U.?s/acre = 3,176 acres residential use (additional 1,220 acres needed). 6) 6,670 D.U.?s @ 1.3 D.U.?s/acre = 5,130 acres overall (additional 2,046 acres needed). 3. ACCEPTED UGB AREA VS. PROJECTED NEEDS (a) Utilization of total UGB area, excepting agricultural land; i.e. 4,197 acres. 1) 6,670 D.U.?s f/exist. & designated residential acres of 2,595 acres = 2.6 D.U.?s/acre residential density. 2) 6,670 D.U.?s for exist. & designated developed areas of 4,197 acres = 1.6 D.U.?s/acre overall density. (b) Utilization of undeveloped lands only; i.e. 1,113 acres. 1) Projected 6,670 total hshlds. minus existing 4,124 D. U.?s = 2,546 D.U.?s. a. 2,546 D.U.?s f/designated residential acres of 639 acres = 4.0 D.U./acre residential density. b. 2,546 D.U.?s f/total undeveloped acres of 1,113 = 2.3 D.U./acre overall density. - 17 - (c) Utilization of undeveloped & agricultural lands; i.e. 2,291 acres. 1) 2,546 D.U.?s f/designated residential acres of 639 + 1,178 acres ag. lands (total-1,817) = 1.4 D.U.?s/ acre residential density. 2) 2,546 D.U.?s f /total 2,291 acres = l. 1 D.U.?s/acre overall density. 4. CONCLUSIONS OF URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY ANALYSIS (a) Adequacy of the UGB (with maximum preservation of agricultural lands) is dependent on the following factors: 1) Achieving an overall density of 2.6 D.U.?s/acre for all residentially developed lands; such will require the following: a. Encouraging additional development within existing residentially developed areas. b. Expanding urban services; particularly public sewer and water. c. Encouraging higher densities than presently permitted or encouraged. 2) Incentives through zoning and other development regulations for replacement of existing lower standard housing with new, higher quality and higher density housing. 3) Alternatives to present single-family, large-lot residential developments. 4) Provision of adequate public services and attainment of financing therefore. Map Existing Metro Land Use and Urban Growth Boundaries Drawing Existing Land Use: Prineville Area Drawing Physical Development Plan: Prineville Area Drawing Rural Residential Subdivisions - 22 - AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCE QUALITY Natural resource policies are based upon the following three goals for the protection and preservation of Crook County's natural resources. 1. To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the county. 2. To minimize the impact of developments on the surrounding environment. 3. To direct growth in the most environmentally capable and satisfactory areas. Upon investigation of resource quality problems in and around the City of Prineville, the following seven situations were identified as ongoing or potential pollution problems. 1. The city sewage lagoon is insufficiently handling the amount of waste that passes through the system resulting in odor and overflow in the summer. The location of the lagoon, in the midst of residential area, compounds sanitation problems associated with the sewage lagoon. 2. Logging mill operations pose threats to air and water quality and are closely monitored by the State Department of Environmental Quality. 3. The Ochoco Pellet Plant has ongoing problems with particle emissions and noise, both of which are subject to restrictions of the State Department of Environmental Quality. 4. The county landfill could pose threats to the operations of the airport, unless continued as a sanitary landfill (dust, smoke, odor, attraction of birds). 5. Feed lots pose possible odor and sanitation problems. 6. Prineville?s geographic setting (wind direction from the northwest and heavy industrial activity in the northwest and lying in a valley bounded on three sides by rimrocks with two natural escape routes) subjects Prineville to potential pollution problems, and the Crooked River and Ochoco Creek which passes through the city of Prineville may collect and carry wastes. 7. Environmental problems associated with urbanization are not always discovered in reviewing proposed developments (i.e. low or high water table, sewage leakage, etc.). - 23 - Maintaining and improving natural resources involves many governmental agencies, including but not limited to the City and County Planning Department, the State Department of Environmental Quality, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Federal Forestry Department, and the Bureau of Land Management. The goal of DEQ is to preserve and enhance water and air quality by: 1. Establishing air and water quality standards. 2. Protecting existing air and water quality which is higher than established standards. 3. Guiding planning for waste treatment. 4. Identifying air and water quality deficiencies. The State DEQ has identified three points of source discharge that are inspected and monitored to ascertain the level of pollutants being discharged. These include the Ochoco Lumber log pond, the City of Prineville sewage lagoon, and the irrigation return at the base of Round Butte. The Bureau of Reclamation, Federal Forestry Department and Bureau of Land Management are concerned with management and maintenance of nearly 50% of the county land area. Each of these agencies is heavily regulated to preserve a high level of resource quality and each is compelled to file detailed environmental impact statements regularly. The Crook County Health Department administers state and county health regulations and the City-County Building Official administers state housing and engineering codes to ensure continuity and competence in design and construction of new buildings. AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCE POLICIES 1. Encourage nonpollutant industries to locate in Crook County (Industrial Element, Chapter III). 2. Provide available industrial sites downwind from town (Industrial Element, Chapter III). 3. Adopt and enforce an effective nuisance abatement ordinance (Housing Element, Chapter VIII). 4. Encourage ?design with nature? considerations in the design and engineering of all development proposals (Housing, Industrial, Commercial and Transportation Elements, Chapters VIII, III, III, and IV). - 24 - 5. Evaluate development proposals according to available scientific data pertaining to potential impact on the environment, including but not limited to: (a) Depth of soil (b) Slope (c) Septic tank suitability (d) Agricultural suitability (e) Hazards (f) Unique species or habitats (g) Water availability and impact (Housing Element and Natural Resources Element, Chapters VIII and IX). 6. Provide for bicycling and walking as viable transportation alternatives and provide facilities for such (Transportation Element, Chapter IV ). 7. Maintain air and water quality through enforcement of DEQ regulations (Crook County Health Department). 8. Maintain and improve the handling and disposal of solid waste consistent with DEQ requirements. - 25 - ECONOMICS The scope of the context of this plan relative to economics is limited within this section. There is, however, extensive consideration of economic factors in nearly every major topic section in the document. Further, as set forth by reference, there is extensive background information, objectives, and resource information basis for planning decisions relative to economics set forth in the County?s Overall Economic Development Plan and the Crook County Input-Output Study (I.O. Study). In fact, the primary objective set forth at the outset of the planning process for the county, and the one primary objective set forth throughout this document, is for all planning decisions to achieve an economic-environmental balance. FINDINGS 1. General Description of the Economy: Reflecting the economy of all the eastern portion of the state, the county?s economic base is almost totally dependent on its natural resources, with agriculture, forestry and recreation being the primary enterprises. Agriculture contributes to the economy of the county in two ways--by providing income to the agriculturist, the farm and ranch workers, and as a predominate factor of the county?s tax base. Agriculture in the county consists of two main types--intensive cash crop farming and the production of livestock. Beef cattle dominate the livestock industry, and potatoes, hay, grain and mint comprise the largest cash crops. From a wage and salary worker standpoint and considering value of exports, the lumber and woods product industry is the single most important sector of the county?s economy. Slightly more than half of all wage and salary workers are employed in this industry. Thereof, the timber resource base is of vital importance to the county?s total economic base, and the ownership of forest lands is predominately (80%+) under public ownership and management. The above-referenced forest lands, together with the two major reservoirs in the county (Ochoco and Prineville), are the primary basis for an emerging prominent recreation sector of the economy. The county and its recreation resources have become a prime attraction for both out-of-state visitors and Oregonians from all over the state. In-depth data on the recreation and tourism industry of the county is set forth in the above referenced County OEDP and I.O. Study, and Greater Prineville Area Open Space-Recreation Study, and the Central Oregon Open Space-Recreation Study. - 26 - The county?s I.O. Study reveals that the three major contributors to the county?s economy are forest products, government and agriculture. To a total economic output of $264 million in 1975, these three sectors contributed $164 million, $27.4 million and $19.1 million respectively, or 80% of the total. 2. As early in the planning process as 1974, it became evident that additional information was necessary for planning decisions to be made on a sound economic basis. Such recognition was the basis for the initiation of the County?s Input-Output Study. The objective of the study was to portray the current economy of the county and project the impact of specific changes in that economy. As anticipated, the study confirmed that the county?s economy was strongly natural resource oriented, and that forestry and forest products have the greatest influence on the economy, followed by government and agriculture. 3. It is recognized that good planning requires analysis of each situation and the establishment of facts associated with the program being considered. One absolutely necessary set of facts concerns the economic relationships of the present economy. From these facts, the economic consequences of different development programs can be projected. Various alternatives must be economically evaluated and decisions made concerning the direction economic growth should take. Economic facts must also be considered to answer such questions as how income and employment will be affected by the expansion or contraction of existing businesses, or by the introduction of new industry into the local economy and who will receive the economic benefits and losses. Planning must take into account which economic growth policies will contribute most to the economic well being of local residents and what type of economic growth will contribute least. 4. For an effective planning process, it is important to disclose the nature, interactions and the interdependencies of all economic sectors within the county?s economy and to provide a factual basis for decisions relating to project increases or decreases within the more important sectors of the economy and to analyze this impact on the remainder of the economy. 5. Crook County, like most Eastern Oregon counties, has an economy that is dependent on the lumber industry, agriculture, government agencies and recreation. Commercial and service activities also contribute to the economy, but are dependent on the basic industries listed hereinbefore. 6. Because of the importance of the forest products industry and the ownership pattern of the base resource therefore, federal policies and land management practices are extremely important to the economic well being of the county. For example, reductions in the annual allowable cut (amount of timber harvested) or available forage has significant economic implications. Important items to be considered are: a) reduced income to the county?s economy; b) probable increases in taxes on private property to maintain current levels of public services; - 27 - c) reduced revenue to federal and local government agencies; and d) quality of living environment. 7. Federal government policies play a prominent role in the county?s economy also because a large part (49.5%) of the land area of the county is federally owned. The effects of this are influential in policies relating to natural resource allocation and transfer payments. Locally, the planning process has little impact on transfer payments in the form of social security, welfare payments, etc.; however, there can be some influence on revenue sharing, grants for sewage, water and other public facilities, etc. The effects of government land management policies and resource allocations are perhaps more important. Such resource decisions are not limited to forest, range, soil and water, but also include other values such as wild- life, scenic views, watersheds, and associated vegetation. Recent controversy and changing government policies concerning land use and natural resource allocation has increased the need for related economic information and consideration thereof. This does not suggest all natural resource uses or environmental considerations can be economically evaluated, but the economic information available should be utilized in making rational decisions relative to future uses and the impact such uses will have on the county. 8. Changes in the economic structure of an area usually result in gains or benefits in some segments and losses to other segments of the economy. It is therefore important to identify the ?gainers and losers? and to evaluate the total effect of any major changes or developments on the county?s economy. 9. The apparent predominate reliance on the forest product?s industry makes it clear that there is a need for stabilization of that sector of the economy and a need for industrial diversification. 10. Relative to the need for industrial diversification, there is a need for improvement of labor force capabilities and for other industrial development incentives. 11. As noted in the agricultural and recreational elements, the quantity and quality of water is important economically; resource management and allocation decisions must be coordinated and evaluated by all levels of planning agencies. Such is particularly true when related to stabilization and growth of the agricultural sector, industrial growth and the related housing need generated thereby. 12. Policies set forth in the Commercial and Industrial sections of the Urban Element of this Plan must be re-emphasized in this element. 13. The need for a balancing of economic-environmental concerns in resource management and allocation decisions cannot be over-emphasized. - 28 - OBJECTIVES 1. To provide planning, economic and regulatory incentives relative to the stabilization of existing important sectors of the economy; including, but not limited to, forestry, agriculture, government, and recreation. 2. To emphasize those resource related policies which are supportive to economic stabilization and growth; particularly as related to the primary natural resources upon which the existing economy is dependent. 3. To utilize the County?s Input-Output Study for evaluating the differing economic consequences of development programs whereas such information will provide a substantial informational base relative to these consequences. 4. To emphasize the importance of the various sectors of the county?s economy, and to insure that resource management and allocation decisions are not made without thoroughly evaluating the effect on such decisions. 5. To expand coordination activities concerning planning decisions involving those resources which are the base of the county?s economy. 6. To emphasize the protection of existing industries, provide opportunities for growth thereof, and to provide incentives for industrial growth and diversified production. 7. To increase communications and coordination between industry and education to assist in the development and maintenance of a quality labor force. 8. To insure that public facilities and services, and other supportive services and facilities (including housing) are available at such levels to support existing industry and growth thereof. Such includes the provision of available land area and sites for expansion and development of industry. 9. To develop a cultural and financial climate that will encourage industrial growth and development. 10. To insure through the planning process that economic and environmental considerations are balanced. 11. To continue participation in the OEDP Program to insure updated economic information, maximum opportunity for economic development financial assistance, and to maintain an economically active community. - 29 - ECONOMIC POLICIES 1. To diversify, stabilize and improve the economy of the county. 2. To coordinate all planning programs and decisions concerning economical base resources in the county and to maintain an economic-environmental balance in all resource management and allocation decisions. 3. To require that development plans are based on the best economic information available and to take into account areas suitable for economic development, the effects on the existing economy, available resources, labor market factors, transportation and livability. 4. To require an economic analysis of all major development proposals, resource management proposals, and allocation decisions. 5. To insure implementation of policies set forth in the commercial and industrial sections of the Land Use element of this Plan (Chapter III). 6. To implement programs and policies which provide economic and regulatory incentives for industrial stabilization and development. 7. To insure that implementing regulations provide maximum protection for existing industry and for expansion thereof, and to provide ample land area for additional industrial growth. 8. To insure that implementing regulations provide maximum protection for all existing economic developed areas and for expansion thereof. 9. To continue participation in the OEDP Program to insure maximum opportunity for economic development assistance and financing. - 30 - ENERGY The following principles may be used as a basis for policies which maximize energy conservation and efficiency with the intent of alleviating potential energy shortages. 1. Prineville and Crook County receive about 300 days of sunshine per year. Solar energy will be a very feasible source of energy. 2. There is not an abundance of water in Crook County. Hydroelectric dam sites are, at best, minimal. 3. Geothermal, oil and gas sites are located in the southeastern portion of the county. These sites are quite distant from storage and market areas. Their potential will not be known until it becomes socially and economically feasible to drill. Known sites are within an Exclusive Farm Use Zone and are subject to a Conditional Use. Permit pursuant thereto. 4. Local forest product mills currently use most wastes. Most of the waste is sold or used to produce steam heat. Utilization of slash in the woods is not a big income item or economically feasible at present, but could be in the future. 5. At present, it is not economically feasible (nor are there any on-going projects in Oregon) to generate fuel from animal wastes. 6. Crook County is part of the DEQ approved Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council Solid Waste Management Plan. Projections in the plan indicate mechanical methods of resource recovery would not be feasible until about 1990. There is an ongoing private effort in collecting newspapers for recycling in Portland. 7. There may be the possibility of some wind power sites in the county. Sites would most likely be found on higher elevation ridge tops in a saddle and would need an annual average minimum wind speed in the neighborhood of 12 miles per hour. Testing would be required to begin to see where, and if, there are any locations in Crook County. 8. Fuel from local bulk plants is delivered to service stations by small trucks. The use of larger trucks lowers the number of deliveries and thus saves fuel. In the Core Area of the City of Prineville are concentrations of people and service stations. If a fire from a tanker were to occur, the hazard would be compounded - 31 - by the fact that Prineville Fire Department does not have the capability to put out such a fire. The present annual consumption of energy expressed in BTU?s *(British Thermal Units) is as follows: 1. Total annual consumption of Crook County according to individual energy suppliers = 1,138,561,936,000 BTU?s; per capita = 94,486,464 BTU?s. 2. Total annual consumption of Crook County using Oregon per capita figures = 2,299,149,595,550 BTU?s; per capita = 148,302,860 BTU?s. 3. Total annual consumption of Prineville using Oregon per capita figures = 836,873,101,053 BTU?s; per capita = 148,302,870 BTU?s. 4. Total annual consumption of the Metro Area using Oregon per capita figures = 1,018,395,815,157 BTU?s; per capita = 148,302,860 BTU?s. 5. Amount of energy consumed derived from renewable energy sources (using 1975 Oregon average of 44% for P.P.&L.) = 286,776,000,000 BTU?s. 6. Percentage of energy consumed from renewable resources in Crook County: (a) Using energy suppliers figures = 25% (b) Using Oregon per capita figures = 12% (c) Information not available for Prineville or the Metro Area. *A British Thermal Unit may be defined as an amount of energy approximately equal to the amount of heat produce by burning one kitchen match or the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of one pound of water one degree in Fahrenheit. GEOTHERMAL RESOURCES (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) The County?s prior submittal listed the following potential geothermal sites in the County. No other information on quality or quantity is available. - 32 - POTENTIAL GEOTHERMAL SITES Location Quality Rhode Well 14-17-33 22? Powell Butte Sys. 15-16-14 20? 15-16-15 Martin Well 16-15-26 21? Shumway Windmill Well 16-15-29 21? Bowen Well 17-15-20 26? Glover Well 17-16-32 20? Camp Creek Well 19-21-5 23? Gilchrist Valley Well 20-22-25 31? 20-22-26 The Department of Energy indicated in a telephone conversation on June 25, 1992, that the County?s geothermal resources are of such a low quality (that is to say, low temperature) that they are best used as irrigation water rather than an energy source. Based on that information, the County designates these resources as 1-A. The resource sites are not important and no further action is required. POTENTIAL HYDROPOWER SITES The County?s prior submittals listed the following hydropower sites in the County. No information on quality or quantity is available. POTENTIAL HYDROPOWER SITES Basin 5 Crooked River No. 8579 Basin 5 Ochoco Creek No. 3378 Basin 5 Ochoco Creek No. 3532 Basin 5 Ochoco Creek No. 4176 Basin 5 Crooked River No. 3381 Basin 5 Crooked River No. 4004 Basin 5 Crooked River, No. 3513 Prineville Dam - 33 - The Northwest Power Planning Council was contacted by phone on June 25, 1992. It was learned that only one active permit is currently on file. The permit was issued to Ochoco Irrigation District for a retrofit to provide a 1.7 megawatt facility on the existing Bowman Dam of the Crooked River. Because this is an existing facility on an existing dam, no further analysis is necessary. The dam is owned and operated by the Bureau of Reclamation. As such, no conflicting uses are identified. Under the federal ownership, the County finds hydropower as a 2-1 resource that is protected by existing programs with federal rules and regulations. GAS AND OIL SITES The five sites listed in a prior submittal, and shown below, have been researched and all that can be gleaned is that five sites are on private lands in Crook County. Since no further information is available, these five sites are designated as a 1-B resource. The County final action is a policy to complete the Goal 5 process as information becomes available on each. POTENTIAL OIL AND GAS SITES Gray, Lona OG 19-18- Berna 1, 1951 NE32 Standard Oil OG 20-20- Co. California, NE36 Pexco State 1 1955 Sunray Mid- OG 17-19- Continent, E30 Creek Unit 1, 1958 Texaco, Inc. OG 17-23- Federal 1, 1971 SW31 Texaco, Inc. OG 19-20- Well 17-1, 1981 NE17 The Department of Energy recommended that the Bureau of Land Management in Prineville be contacted to glean additional information regarding gas and oil exploration well sites in Crook County. In a phone conversation with the Bureau of Land Management office in Prineville on June 25, 1992, it was learned there are a total of six sites on BLM lands within Crook County. Two of the site leases will expire on July 1, 1992. The remaining four sites cover 4,828 acres of BLM land. As it is public ownership, no conflicting uses are identified and these sites are designated 2-A. - 34 - ENERGY POLICIES 1. To encourage renewable and/or efficient energy systems design, siting and construction materials in all new development and improvements in the county. 2. To provide building permit discounts relative to the value of energy conservation practices. 3. To prohibit moving or flashing signs. 4. To regulate any object from casting a shadow on an existing solar collecting unit. 5. To allow truck and trailer delivery of oil and gas products from bulk plants to local service stations in designated ?strip commercial? areas. 6. To encourage high density residential development in close and/or convenient proximity to high employment areas and commercial areas. 7. To encourage all systems and efforts for the collection, reuse and recycling of metallic and non-metallic wastes. 8. To comply with, and periodically update, according to new and appropriate technology and legislation, the County?s Solid Waste Management Plan. II. Demographic Profile ? Population Predictions - 35 - DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE - POPULATION PREDICTIONS DESCRIPTION Crook County, population 12,100, is the most centrally located of all the counties in the state. Prineville, the only incorporated city in the county, is nearly equidistant from Portland, Salem, Corvallis and Eugene, a distance of 150 miles or 3-1/2 hours traveling time. The geographic setting is characterized as typically high desert, with natural vegetation consisting primarily of sagebrush and juniper trees. Timber, agriculture, recreation and government comprise the main economic enterprises in the county. Prineville is located in the western third of the county in the southern portion of the Crooked River Valley. This valley area contains the most productive agricultural lands in the county, which combined with a growing urban populace poses serious urban-rural conflicts. Approximately three-fourths of the county population lives within a four-mile radius of the city, identified in total as the Prineville Metropolitan Area. Other areas of concentrated population in the county are the Prineville Reservoir, Paulina and Powell Butte areas. FAMILY INCOME PROFILE Crook County?s per capita income was $5,444 in 1975, 13th among Oregon counties. Per capita income in 1975 for the State of Oregon was $5,752. According to the 1976 Socio Economic Report from Portland State University, the median family income for 1975 in Crook County was $12,430. In order to determine family poverty levels, a table is designed based upon the median income of the county, and family size. As of June, 1977, the poverty levels in Crook County for various family sizes were as follows: Table III POVERTY GUIDELINES FAMILY SIZE NON-FARM FARM One $ 2,970 $ 2,550 Two 3,930 3,360 Three 4,890 4,170 Four 5,850 4,980 Five 6,810 5,790 Six 7,770 6,600 Additional Members + $ 960 + $ 810 - 36 - Approximately 400 households in the county (10.9%) were below the poverty level in 1976. The same Socio Economic Report from Portland State University presented the income breakdown for Crook County, based on 1975 state tax returns. Table IV CROOK COUNTY 1976 FAMILY INCOME BREAKDOWN INCOME GROUP HOUSEHOLD PERCENTAGE 0 - $2,000 16.0% $2,000 - $2,999 6.9% $3,000 - $4,999 11.6% $5,000 - $7,999 16.5% $8,000 - $9,999 10.0% $10,000 - $14,999 22.0% $15,000 - $19,999 10.6% $20,000 - $50,000 6.4% EMPLOYMENT Total employment for Crook County in May, 1977, was 4,600 people, of which approximately 1,800 (39.1%) were women. The 1970 census for the City of Prineville showed the labor force to be 1,659, including people 16 years of age and older. An occupational breakdown of the Prineville labor force follows: Manufacturing (largely lumber & wood products) 32% Wholesale/retail trade 17% Professional 17% Other industry 11% Finance 8% Construction 6% Other 8% Unemployment has been high the past three years with the average annual rates being 10.6% for 1974, 15.5% for 1975, and 13% for 1976. Throughout a nine month period in 1975, Crook County ranked either 1st, 2nd or 3rd for unemployment in the State of Oregon. The largest unemployment period occurs between December and April. This results primarily from seasonal cutbacks in the forest and wood products industry (snow in the mountains). A decrease in retail trade also results from fewer tourists, hunters, and fishermen passing through the area. In May, 1977, the Oregon Employment Division reported that the serious unemployment problem in Crook County was continuing although a slow, steady decline in the unemployment rate was also occurring. Total unemployment was down by 140 from May 1976 - May 1977, causing the unemployment rate to fall from 16.7% to 14.0%. - 37 - Crook County maintained a high level of per capita income despite sharp unemployment losses in the 1974-75 period. This can be explained by the fact that most job losses occurred in millwork, where wages are significantly lower than in the predominant lumber milling industry. With unemployment largely due to the loss of jobs at the lower end of the local industrial wage spectrum, and income bolstered by unemployment insurance, per capita income in Crook County was not seriously affected. There have been no major firms, i.e. employing 25 or more people, that have opened or closed shop during the past five years. It is difficult to predict which or how many new industries will be attracted to the area to bolster the economy, but it is probable that economic development will occur in recreation and in support of a retirement community. In the winter of 1976, Crook County was awarded a grant for the construction of an indoor arena and improvements to the fairgrounds. This development project was designed to help alleviate the high unemployment pressures of the county and provide a recreational attraction to bolster the local economy. POPULATION PROFILE AND FORECAST According to the Portland State Center for Population Research and Services, Crook County?s population has increased steadily over the past 20 years due to immigration and a change in birth-death ratio. From 1970 - 1976, the county has had an average population increase of about 3% per year, the city has had an increase of nearly 6% per year largely due to annexations. Table V POPULATION INCREASES 1970 ? 1977 PRINEVILLE CROOK COUNTY POPULATION YEARLY INCREASE POPULATION YEARLY INCREASE 1970 ? 4,101 ----- 9,985 ----- 1971 ? 4,380 6.8% 10,090 1.1% 1972 ? 4,505 2.8% 10,610 5.1% 1973 ? 4,600 2.1% 11,400 7.4% 1974 ? 4,980 8.3% 11,460 0.5% 1975 ? 5,275 5.9% 11,800 3.0% 1976 ? 5,590 6.0% 11,950 1.3% 1977 ? 5,830 4.3% 12,100 1.2% Analysis of the population by age since 1960 (figures derived from Portland State as referenced above) reveals some interesting trends in population composition. Crook County has been experiencing a steady decline in the 0-14 age bracket and a significant increase in those 65 years or older. - 38 - Table VI CROOK COUNTY AGE TRENDS 1960 ? 1976 AGE GROUPS 0 ? 14 15 ? 24 25 ? 44 45 ? 64 65+ 1960 35.5% 10.9% 25.3% 21.1% 7.2% 1968 33.6% 12.1% 22.9% 22.9% 8.4% 1976 24.5% 16.7% 24.8% 22.6% 10.7% In April of 1977, a door to door housing survey in the Prineville Metro Area broke down demographic characteristics according to head of households age groups as follows: 0 ? 15 16 ? 24 25 ? 34 35 ? 54 55 ? 61 62+ 0.4% 6.9% 17.7% 30.7% 12.4% 32% According to that same study, 76% of the households were headed by a married couple, 4% by single males, and 18% by single females. The survey also revealed a great degree of stability in the length of residency of the majority of households. Fifty-seven percent have lived in the Prineville Metro Area over ten years and forty-three percent of the total have retained their present residence since 1970. The Bureau of Census Statistics for 1970 show the sex ratio evenly distributed with 50.3% male and 49.7% female. The county racial profile shows 99% Caucasian, with the remaining population being made up largely of Indian and Spanish-American people. The education profile indicates 37.6% of the total population has received high school diplomas, and 5.9% are college graduates. Population predictions show a continuing population increase at approximately the same slow steady rate which occurred in the past. The figures used here were devised by PNW Bell forecaster?s office in April of 1977. Their population predictions are bases upon the following assumptions: 1. Employment growth in the lumber and wood products industries will be very low. 2. New industries in the area will be of the types to utilize the existing pool of low skilled labor and will attract very little outside labor force. 3. Retirees will come primarily from the Willamette Valley and California and will settle in or very near the city limits of Prineville. - 39 - Table VII POPULATION GROWTH ? YEAR 2000 DATE CITY URBAN COUNTY 12/31/76 5,590 9,400 11,920 77 5,690 9,610 12,160 78 5,970* 9,820 12,400 79 6,080 10,040 12,650 80 6,240* 10,260 12,900 85 6,820 11,380 14,160 90 7,460 12,630 15,550 95 8,160 14,010 17,080 00 8,290 15,540 18,770 *Assumes annexations; 1978 = 180; 1980 = 50 By 1992, Crook County will evaluate U.S. Census Data and make any changes, if necessary, to the existing year 2000 population projection set forth in the plan. The County?s population projection will be coordinated with the City of Prineville?s projected growth and projected to the year 2012. (Ordinance No. 45; 3/20/91) III. Land Use - 40 - AGRICULTURE FINDINGS 1. Open lands used for agricultural and forestry purposes are an efficient means of conserving natural resources that constitute important physical, social, aesthetic, and economic assets to all of the people living in rural, suburban and urban areas of the county. 2. The preservation of a maximum amount of the limited supply of agricultural and forestry land is necessary to the conservation of the county?s economic resource base, and the preservation of such land in large blocks is necessary in maintaining the economy of the county and for the assurance of adequate, healthful, and nutritious food and forest products for the people of this county, state and nation. 3. Expansion of urban and suburban development and non-farm rural residential and recreational subdivisions into the rural areas of the county outside the Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Prineville is a matter of public concern because of unnecessary increases in costs of public and community services including police, fire, education, transportation, health and welfare; conflicts between agricultural and non-agricultural activities; increasing costs and liabilities to agriculture; loss of open space, natural beauty and unrenewable resources; detrimental effects on wildlife habitats and migration patterns; increased fire hazards, limits to carrying capacities of air, water and land resources; and conflicts with the conservation of energy. 4. The most productive croplands within the county are concentrated in the valley area surrounding the City of Prineville, in the lowlands along the Crooked River and its major tributaries, and in the Powell Butte and Lone Pine areas. These areas have been under a transition of being consumed by the introduction of part-time farming and rural non-farm residences on small parcels. Rural subdivisions and partitionings with lots ranging from two (2) to ten (10) acres have encompassed in excess of 1,200 acres of class I through IV lands during the period of 1971 to 1975 in the Prineville valley area, 500 acres in the Powell Butte area, and 40 acres in the Lone Pine area. This trend poses serious problems and conflicts to the continuation of commercial farming operations in the area as more and more lands are broken up into smaller non-farm parcels. Some of these problems and conflicts include: - 41 - (a) Increased demands for the use of irrigation and ground water supplies for domestic use. (b) Higher costs in the distribution of water for irrigation. (c) Difficulty in the control of weeds and rodents. (d) Higher operating costs and increased land assessments. (e) Restrictions on the use of farm chemicals. (f) Complaints of odors, dust and noise, dogs and children vs. livestock, increased liabilities, increased traffic, etc. (g) The nuisance and costs of vandalism and trespass. 5. Recreational subdivisions with lots ranging from five (5) to twenty (20) acres have encompassed in excess of 18,000 acres since 1962 in the Post-Paulina area of the county alone, and for the entire county have consumed more than 28,000 acres. Such developments have generally only been successful and beneficial for the developer, leaving lot purchasers with little or no provisions for public utilities and services, access, domestic water, sewage or solid waste disposal, or employment opportunities. The term ?recreational? attached to these developments is quite relative if not non-existent in fact. In most cases, the developments have destroyed existing recreational values, have taken lands out of historical rural productive capacities and have made a return to the former state impossible. The semi-arid clay origin soils of the area are fragile and development destroys ground cover beyond repair, causes serious erosion hazards, changes patterns of wildlife, alters stream courses, and destroys aquifer recharge areas. The aesthetic values of the area are literally ?raped? with forests of overhead utility poles, and substandard, dilapidated, abandoned structures. The encroachment of such developments affect agriculture practices and operations, hunting, fishing, and all the pleasures people take in open land. They preclude future cultivation, grazing, timbering, open space, wildlife habitats, ecological and economical balances, and energy conservation practices. Publicly, such developments are difficult and costly to service, and normally the local government cost-benefit ratio is a deficit. 6. Goal No. 3 of the Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines adopted by the State Land Conservation and Development Commission pursuant to ORS 197, requires that ?Agricultural lands shall be preserved and maintained for agricultural products, forest and open space. These lands shall be inventoried and preserved by adopting exclusive farm use zones pursuant to ORS Chapter 215. Such minimum lot sizes as are utilized for any farm use zones shall be appropriate for the continuation of the existing agricultural enterprises within the area....... Agricultural Land. ..... in Eastern Oregon is land of predominately class I, II, III, - 42 - IV, V and VI soils as identified in the Soil Capability Classification System of the United States Soil Conservation Service, and other lands which are suitable for farm use, taking into consideration soil fertility, suitability for grazing, climatic conditions, existing and future availability of water for farm irrigation purposes, existing land use patterns, technological and energy inputs required, or accepted farming practices......? Although these referenced guidelines are substantial in scope and afford considerable protection for intensive cropland agricultural practices, such is determined not adequate to insure the desired and necessary preservation and protection of the large-scale range livestock operation and base resources common and important to the county, and particularly to the Ochoco and Post-Paulina areas of the county. The full recognition is that the mere preservation of ?all? irrigated and cultivatable lands in the area ?will not? preserve the ?total? agricultural economy. Neither will such minimize the detrimental effects on agriculture from increased property value assessments, land use conflicts, trespass, and numerous other problems derived from the mixing of non-compatible farm and non-farm uses in the Post-Paulina and Ochoco areas of the county. Therefore, realizing that present regulations realistically only afford protection to certain ?Agricultural Lands? identifiable by the standard Soil Conservation Classification, it is imperative that agricultural lands preservation policies, for the Post-Paulina area primarily, include a range, and preservation goal. 7. As defined in the afore-referenced guidelines, ?Agricultural Lands? involve a large part of the total county area, but only a relatively small portion, approximately 5% are classified as agricultural cropland of which only 60% are under irrigation, the remaining cropland being dry land farming. Agricultural cropland in the county is restricted generally by soil capabilities, a short growing season, and limited sources and supplies of water for irrigation. Despite these general limitations, however, agriculture is an important and substantial part of the county?s total economy. 8. As set forth by Oregon Revised Statutes, Chapter 215.253, the application of Exclusive Farm Use Zoning pursuant to ORS 215.203 prohibits any state agency, city, county or political subdivision of the state from exercising any powers to enact local laws or ordinances or impose restrictions or regulations within said EFU Zones in a manner that would unreasonably restrict or regulate farm structures or that would unreasonably restrict or regulate accepted farming practices because of noise, dust, odor or other materials carried in the air or other conditions arising therefrom if such conditions do not extend beyond the boundaries of the established EFU Zone. 9. It is recognized that a limited amount of land division is necessary when directly associated with the predominate and accepted agricultural practices of the area and specifically when directly attributable to the continuance of the ?family farm?. ORS 215 also provides for the allowance of farm accessory structures and uses and frequently construction financing of such mandates minor land divisions - 43 - for that specific purpose. Although it is recognized that a limited amount of land division is necessary even in areas designated for maximum agricultural protection and preservation and thereof zoned EFU, ORS 215.263 does set forth some limitations. Any proposed division of land in an EFU Zone resulting in the creation of one or more parcels of land of less than 10 acres in size must be reviewed, and approved or disapproved by the county ORS 215.263(2). Further, any such divisions creating one or more parcels of 10 acres or more may require county review, and approval or disapproval. ORS 215.263(l). These approvals are deemed necessary by Crook County in the interest of promoting orderly growth and efficient land use. 10. The provisions of ORS 215 also recognize and set forth certain non-farm uses which may be conditionally carried out with little or no conflict with area agricultural uses. Such uses may be established separately or in conjunction with farm use, are primarily commercially, industrially, or recreationally oriented, and in many cases may provide a means for secondary economic benefits to an agricultural enterprise. ORS 215.213. 11. Public lands and resources managed by the U. S. Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) are vital to the economic base and assets of the county, and relative hereto, specifically to the range-livestock sector and the Post-Paulina areas of the county. Thereof, said agencies? resource management programs and policies are directly effective. Further, unlike USFS lands in the county which are held in large contiguous units, BLM lands are more scattered and isolated in small tracts. This sporadic pattern of ownership poses problems, both publicly and privately, to effective management and public vs. private uses. 12. To a semi-arid county like Crook County, water resources are a primary base factor and surface water resources the major supplier of needs. Agriculture and recreation are the two prime users in the county, both highly dependent upon quality and quantity. Agriculturally, water is a necessary factor for intensive cash crops like potatoes, mint and alfalfa, and for the range-livestock sector. The production of winter forages is governed by available irrigation waters and managed summer grazing is dependent upon water availability and distribution. Further, whereas most of the cash crop areas can rely heavily on storage from the Ochoco and Prineville Reservoirs, the majority of the range-livestock sector, particularly the Post-Paulina and upper Ochoco areas, must rely on natural sources. Recreationally, surface water qualities and quantities are the basis for fishing and other outdoor activities. Relative hereto, it is recognized that problems of water quality and quantity are inseparable; problems of water pollution are not restricted to urban areas; and improved land use and resource planning and management are an essential ingredient to the maintenance and improvement of water quality and quantity. It is inevitable that demand will undoubtedly exceed the available supply, and that the competition among users will reach critical levels. Recognition of two possible courses of action is noted; develop additional sources or more efficiently utilize sources. There is an urgency to take steps - 44 - which will ensure adequate supplies of high quality water for primary users at the least possible cost. 13. Exclusive Farm Use Zoning (referenced hereinbefore), as provided by law, substantially limits alternatives to the use of rural lands (particularly agricultural lands), and with the importance of such lands to the public and the county, incentives and privileges offered to encourage owners of these lands to hold such in EFU Zones are justified. Thereof, State Planning Goal No. 3 provides that services that need to pass through agricultural lands should not be connected with any use that is not allowed under EFU Zoning, should not be assessed as part of the farm unit, and should be limited in capacity to serve specific service areas and identified needs. OBJECTIVES To maintain a viable agricultural base, preserve agricultural lands for agriculture, and to protect agriculture as a commercial enterprise. In order to maintain a viable agricultural economic base and develop and adopt realistic land development policies, it is necessary to recognize a distinction between rural development (which includes those area outside the Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Prineville) and urban and suburban development (which includes those areas lying within the adopted Urban Growth Boundary of the City of Prineville). To conserve natural resources constituting important physical, social, aesthetic and economic assets through the development and adoption of realistic land use and development policies intended to achieve an economic-environmental balance, minimize public costs, and maximize energy conservation. To minimize detrimental effects of land use and development relative to wildlife, natural hazards, public costs, resource carrying capacities, and livability. To minimize and actually prevent conflicts between farm and non-farm uses and resultant increased economical costs to the agricultural sector. To provide maximum opportunity for optimum management and operational practices, and provide adequately efficient supportive resources and services. To encourage development of rural lands in a proper and orderly manner as need necessitates only in the best public interest of the people of each planning area and the county as a whole with the preservation of as much agricultural land as possible, and with absolute ?low? densities in the rural areas of the county. To ensure that: (1) The goals, policies and proposals of the County?s Comprehensive Plan be complied with; (2) The provisions of State Planning Goal No. 3 and other relevant goals are adhered to; and (3) The provisions of ORS Chapter 215 are implemented. To achieve a balance between energy, environmental and economical considerations. - 45 - To encourage a proper balance between the needs for agriculture, residences and open space. To develop and implement a realistic and comprehensive criteria for use and development of the rural areas of the county. To maintain a program of citizen involvement in the planning program at a level commensurate with the need and desires in each planning area of the county. AGRICULTURAL POLICIES It shall be the policy of Crook County, Oregon, to preserve agricultural lands, to protect agriculture as an economic enterprise, to balance economic and environmental considerations, to limit non-agricultural development, to maintain a ?low? population density, and to maintain a high level of livability in the county. It shall be the policy of Crook County to concentrate the major portion of the county?s population growth within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) of the City of Prineville. Development outside the UGB will be permitted only where conflicts with productive agricultural areas are minimal and only when in compliance with the factors set forth in ORS 215.213 and the Comprehensive Plan. Subdivision developments in rural areas shall be directed to non-productive agricultural land and such conversion shall be based upon the factors set forth in Goal No. 3 of the Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines, and other applicable policies, and developments with a Planned Unit Development concept and design are preferred over ?standard? subdivision designs. The county, subject to proper zoning (exclusive farm use zoning) and in compliance with this policy, the county?s Comprehensive Plan, State Planning Goal No. 3, and ORS Chapter 215, may permit subdivisions, land partitionings, and orderly development in rural areas on non-productive agricultural lands. In order to encourage flexibility and diversity in lot size and arrangement and the highest level of improvements and services, the county shall encourage a Planned Unit Development concept where it is demonstrated to be necessary, appropriate, in the best public interest, in balance with resource carrying capacities and in compliance with this policy and the overall Comprehensive Plan. It shall further be the policy of the county that nonagricultural development in the rural areas shall be based, whenever possible, upon a demonstrated public need; and in all cases, such development shall avoid conflicts with the agricultural community. Therefore, the county shall not permit subdivisions on agriculturally productive lands; and in the case of such developments on non-agricultural lands in close proximity to said lands shall require setbacks, restrictions, and minimum lot sizes as deemed necessary to afford the greatest protection for said agricultural lands. It shall be the policy of the county to develop and implement a comprehensive and definitive criteria for the evaluation of all non-farm developments to ensure that all objectives and policies set forth herein are complied with to the maximum level possible. - 46 - In order to afford maximum economical and regulatory incentives for agriculture, Exclusive Farm Use (EFU) Zoning pursuant to ORS Chapters 215.203 and 215.213 shall be applied to all agricultural areas of the county; such includes all of the county except those areas identified as the Ochoco and Prineville Reservoir areas and those areas constituting the three developed Rural Service Centers of Post, Paulina and Powell Butte (See page 75). Those areas associated with the two major reservoirs in the county cannot be considered agricultural because of the following factors: 1) Predominance of soil types with SCS Classification Ratings of VII and VIII relative to soil depth, slope, rock content and fertility; 2) Areas have not historically been agriculturally productive; 3) Relationship to and reliance on major recreational resources relative to the Recreation Goal; 4) Unavailability of water for irrigation either from surface or ground water sources, present and future; and 5) Said areas are already 30 percent developed in recreational-residential uses. Those areas identified as Rural Service Centers are presently more than 90 percent developed, are limited to the existing platted areas, and are essential to the agricultural areas that each serves. It shall further be the policy of the county to encourage private and public land exchanges where such is deemed to be in the best interest of resource management and development, and it shall be the policy of the county to encourage coordinated resource management development to achieve maximum efficient benefits under a multiple use concept. It shall be the policy of the county to encourage the establishment of a standing advisory committee of a cross-section of local residents in each planning area to advise the County Planning Commission in planning and development proposals applicable to each respective planning area. RANGELAND POLICIES Rangelands shall be preserved and maintained for rangeland uses compatible with multiple resource management. These lands shall be inventoried and preserved by adopting exclusive rangeland zones consistent with this goal's guidelines. Conversion of rangeland to urban land shall follow the procedures and requirements set forth in the Land Use Planning Goal (Goal No. 2) for goal exceptions. In addition to criteria in Goal No. 2, such conversion must be consistent with multiple resource management. Development of commercial or public facilities to support rangeland uses, such as rural service centers, resorts, fish hatcheries and organizational camps, should be located to minimize interference with other rangeland uses and maintain the geographic and productive integrity of the resource. - 47 - FOREST LANDS FINDINGS 1. Forest lands in Crook County are lands composed of existing and potential forest lands which are suitable for commercial forest uses and other forested lands needed for watershed protection, wildlife and fisheries habitat and recreation. 2. Primary forest land uses in the county include the production of trees and the processing of forest products, the provision of open space, watershed protection and wildlife and fisheries habitat, soil protection from wind and water, outdoor recreational activities and related support services and wilderness values compat- ible with these uses, and grazing for livestock. 3. The forest land base of the county comprises a total of approximately 1,016,870 acres of which 100,000 acres is classified as commercial timber land in private ownership, 600 acres is State owned commercial timber land, 352,630 acres are Federally owned commercial timber land, and 563,590 acres are classified as non- productive timber lands of which the majority are juniper scablands. 4. The production of timber for the utilization in the forest products industry is vital to the economy of the county. Such production presently occurs on approximately 453,000 acres of which the majority, 353,280 acres, is in public ownership and is the primary contributor to the Annual Allowable Cut set forth by the U.S. Forest Service and B.L.M. Said allowable cut is approximately 94,000,000 board feet and is considered less than adequate to sustain the total forest products industry of the county at ?full production?. 5. The grazing of livestock currently exists on the majority of all forest lands and is a vital key to the continued existence of the county?s livestock operations. Such is particularly true relative to those livestock operations relying on grazing permits on public lands. 6. Forest lands in the county are the primary source for the production of more than 360,000 acre feet of surface water that is utilized largely for irrigation, domestic, industrial, and recreational purposes. 7. On those forest lands owned and managed by the U. S. Forest Service, 443,870 acres, there exists one (1) Research Natural Area (Ochoco Divide), Streamside management units are established along all major drainages encompassing 34,812 - 48 - acres, there are 26 developed recreation sites and three (3) water impoundments. Visual management areas are established along all major roads to protect the scenic quality, totaling 50,920 acres, and there are many well established Rockbound sites which are available for public use, many of which are on claims held by the Prineville-Crook County Chamber of Commerce. 8. On those forest lands owned and managed by the U. S. Forest Service, there are major items, which by law or Forest Service policy must supercede any other use of the land. These constraints include the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Wild Horse and Burro Act, Forest Service Snag Policies, the En- dangered and Threatened Species Act of 1973, water quality management policies and regulations, and soil conservation policies. 9. Forest lands in the county support a variety of habitat for wildlife from which more than 488 thousand visitor days are spent annually in hunting, fishing, trapping, and viewing wildlife. 10. The forest lands of the county contain more than 200 miles of Class I streams which support a cold water fishery, primarily trout. There are also more than 600 miles of Class II streams that directly influence Class I streams. 11. Recreational opportunities on the forest lands of the county vary from rockhounding to snowmobiling and include such things as horseback riding, driving for pleasure, camping, fishing and hunting. OBJECTIVES 1. To conserve the forest land base in the county to provide for the continued availability of these lands for forest uses. 2. To encourage the application of management practices that maximize the continued productivity of timber lands, such as addressed by the Oregon Forest Practices Act. 3. To ensure that there is an economic-environmental balance in decisions affecting the utilization of forest lands in the county. 4. To encourage forest land use practices which are not detrimental to the vitally important watershed protection and fish and wildlife habitats. 5. To encourage forest land uses in such a manner as to maximize soil conservation and protection from wind and water erosion hazards. 6. To maintain a high level of recreational opportunities on forest lands in the county as an integral part of the total management framework, but that such usage be kept in a proper perspective. - 49 - 7. To ensure that management and development decisions and actions relative to forest lands do not exceed the carrying capacities of such resources. 8. To ensure that developments that are allowable under forest land zoning and other regulations be limited to those activities for forest production and protection and other land management uses that are compatible with forest production. 9. To encourage forestation or reforestation on forest lands determined suitable for such purpose. 10. To encourage and support management practices which support existing use levels, particularly as related to the forest products industry, the dependent live- stock sector, and the dispersed recreational user. 11. To support resource management practices directed at achieving a balance of forest uses as set forth in Multiple Use concepts. FOREST LAND POLICIES It shall be the policy of Crook County, Oregon, to conserve forest lands for forest uses. Multi-use, rather than single use, shall be stressed on all forest lands. Forest uses such as timber production, fish and wildlife habitat, livestock grazing, dispersed recreation, and the production of high quality water for agriculture and domestic use shall be stressed. It shall be the policy of the county to emphasize the development and maintenance of a full stocking and high growth rate of commercial timber species on all available commercial forest land. Such practices as prompt reforestation, development and use of genetically superior planting stock, pre-commercial and commercial thinning, and protection from fire, insect, disease, and animal damage shall be encouraged. It shall be the policy of the county to support the harvest of trees in a manner which protects the long-term productivity of the land, and to the maximum extent possible, utilizes all wood fiber and minimizes the short-term adverse environmental impacts such as air, water and other pollution. It shall be the policy of the county to ensure that before forest lands are changed to another use the productivity of the land shall be considered and evaluated. It shall be the policy of the county to support forest land use and management decisions which maximize the present level of benefiting uses; specific emphasis shall be on timber production to sustain the existing forest products industry, forage production to maintain at least the existing levels of livestock and wildlife habitats, protection of water quantities and quality and to maintain existing dispersed recreation level in coordination with USFS planning and management programs. - 50 - Crook County will map the cubic foot site class of forest lands when the soil survey for the County is completed. (Ordinance No. 45; 3/20/91) - 51 - RECREATION It is the goal of Crook County to satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of Crook County and visitors by providing for human development and enrichment with recreation areas, facilities, and opportunities. These include, but are not limited to, open space and scenic landscapes; recreational lands; historical, archeology and natural science resources; scenic roads and travelways; sports and cultural events; camping, picnicking and recreational lodging; tourist facilities and accommodations; trails; waterway use facilities; hunting; angling; winter sports; mineral resources; active and passive games and activities. ?Recreation needs? refers to existing and future needs by citizens and visitors for recreation areas, facilities and opportunities. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES The Federal Government has two major roles: 1. To provide technical, financial and other forms of assistance for state and local recreation projects. 2. To develop and manage outstanding natural, cultural and historic resources of national importance. Bureau of Land Management (Dept. of the Interior) - Owns 493,290 acres or 26% of the total county. The only active area that the bureau manages for recreational use is the Chimney Rock area of the Crooked River Gorge down stream from the Bowman Memorial Dam. Picnic tables, garbage cans, wastewater sumps and basic restroom facilities are provided with emphasis on day use. Nevertheless, overnight camping is allowed. Rather than expand these basic facilities in the future, the policy will be to reduce recreational facilities in Crook County. Bureau of Outdoor Recreation (Dept. of the Interior) - Since 1967, the City of Prineville has matched BOR monies for the acquisition of five parcels of land for park use and has developed restrooms, tennis courts, basketball courts, a picnic shelter and automatic sprinkler irrigation on its park system, plus the purchase of benches and picnic tables. The next priority is to use BOR funds for the development of softball fields on the newly acquired Boston land. It appears that BOR monies will be available in greater quantities to city and county recreation departments in the future. Bureau of Reclamation (Dept. of the Interior) - Owns 15,960 acres around the perimeters of Prineville Reservoir. Its responsibilities involve flood control and allocation of storage water, - 52 - preservation of fish and wildlife, outdoor recreation and water quality control. The Bureau of Reclamation shares the responsibility of fish and wildlife management with the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission on the upstream half of the reservoir and shares jurisdiction of the downstream half with Crook County for recreational management purposes. The Bureau assisted with the installation of a drinking water system at a county designated boat ramp area. Department of Housing and Urban Development - Assists the City and County for funding comprehensive planning studies regarding parks, recreation and open space. Economic Development Administration (Dept. of Commerce) - Currently recreational facilities are being designed for the Crook County Fairgrounds, funded by a grant awarded by this administration. This project was selected in order to spur economic and social growth because of Crook County?s record of high unemployment and low family incomes. U.S. Forest Service (Dept. of Agriculture) - Owns 434,792 acres in Crook County, 22.8 percent of the total county. The greatest recreational impacts on the Ochoco National Forest stem from hunting, fishing, rockhounding and camping; but due to the lack of lakes, large streams and wilderness areas, this forest does not compete with heavy recreational uses as in the Winema and Deschutes National Forests. Their planning objectives are to maintain inventories of potential recreational sites and to develop them as demand increases. The State Government has two major roles: 1. To coordinate and assist local, regional, and to some degree private recreational efforts. 2. To direct the development and preservation of large-scale recreation facilities, trails and waterways of statewide significance. Fish and Wildlife Department - The primary responsibility is preserving habitat for game and non-game mammals, birds and fish on all lands within the county and state. Policies and programs are developed in cooperation with public agencies and private ownerships alike. Hunting/fishing season regulations are administered by the commission as a means of maintaining a balance between game population and recreation demand. A special management area unique to Crook County is an upstream portion of Prineville Reservoir. Programs have been developed there to improve geese nesting sites, bass reefs and crucial deer winter range. Additional fish and wildlife programs are road closures during deer hunting season in the Marks Creek burn area (approximately 4,500 acres) and the Paulina Ranger District (approximately 225,000 acres). Angler access points along Crooked River between Prineville and Stearns Dam have been negotiated with private land owners. Oregon State Parks - Owns 871 acres in Crook County, including Prineville Reservoir State Park, Ochoco Reservoir State Park and Ochoco Wayside Viewpoint. There is a great demand for more overnight camping facilities, especially at Prineville Reservoir. Thirty additional camp sites have been designed for Prineville Reservoir State Park, but cutbacks in the state budget have placed the priority on maintenance and upgrading present facilities. - 53 - City and County Parks - Refer to Parks and Recreation and Open Space Study regarding the city park system. Within the Crook County Planning Department are plans for a forty (40) camp site development at Prineville Reservoir near the boat ramp areas where the Bureau of Reclamation assisted in the installation of a drinking water system. However, a questionnaire survey conducted during Memorial Day weekend, 1975, at this camping area demonstrated that over eighty (80) percent of the users were from outside the county. Because of this low percentage of local participant use and because users appreciate the park in its present state, the county presently cannot justify local tax money for recreational development. Outdoor Games - The following facilities are located within the City: Tennis courts 6 All purpose courts 1 Ball Tot lot area 1 The total of 53.31 acres of city park land represents largely open field acres for outdoor games. One facility in short supply is ball fields. The city league consists of 16 men?s, 12 women?s and 16 little league teams. The recent acquisition of twenty acres, formerly belonging to Boston Ranches, Inc. is planned for ball field expansion. Four public schools in Prineville along with the Crook County Fairgrounds also contain open space area for outdoor games. For further detail refer to Parks and Recreation and Open Space Study. Angling - The inventory of streams (table C-17) of the Central Oregon Open Space Recreation Study indicates that Crooked River is 82 miles long. Thirty-four additional trout streams feed the Crooked River; a total stream mileage of 477.6. Not all of the stream banks are accessible to the public. In fact, the only sections of the Crooked River with public access points are between Prineville and Bowman Dam; the major portion of remaining river flows through private property, as do most of the other streams. However, the National Forest and BLM lands, which comprise about 50 percent of the county, provide public access to streams flowing through such lands. Four lakes and reservoirs provide active angling opportunity; Prineville Reservoir, Ochoco Reservoir, Walton Lake and Antelope Reservoir offer a total surface acreage of 4,297 for such activity. Winter Sports - Crook County has no ski lift facilities; however, the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Plan lists 100 trail miles available for snowmobile recreation and 100 trail miles available for cross-country snowshoe and ski activity. Actually no designated trails exist because these are low intensity uses in the Ochocos. Forest Service roads and the open timber environment facilitate easy access. Picnic Areas - The primary picnic areas are city parks (20 tables), BLM recreation area on upper Crooked River (46 tables), Prineville Reservoir State Park (50 tables) and forest service picnic areas (34 tables). Total picnic tables for all campground and day use areas in the county - 54 - are 239. The greatest need for picnic areas is in the Prineville vicinity where there is a special need for picnic shelter facilities. Camping - Two state parks in the county are the most popular campgrounds. Prineville Reservoir State Park has 48 tent sites and 22 trailer sites with the latter including utility hook- ups. The Ochoco Reservoir State Park has 22 camp sites without sewage disposal. Another popular campground is Jasper Point Resort located on Prineville Reservoir. It has 50 trailer sites and 25 tent sites, and is privately operated. The U.S.F.S. has 19 designated campgrounds in the county; the BLM has ten areas along upper Crooked River below Bowman Dam; the county has jurisdiction over 16 camp areas around Prineville Reservoir, one served by a well and five water faucets. Prineville Reservoir has the greatest apparent need for developed campgrounds, but only on the three major summer holidays Memorial Day weekend, the 4th of July, and Labor Day weekend. However, research relative to area carrying capacities is deemed necessary prior to additional development. Rockhounding - A recreational activity unique to most Oregon counties, rockhounding, is widespread in Crook County. Some twenty-one (21) designated areas for digging gemstones are available, most of which are Chamber of Commerce free claims. (See recreation appendix.) Bike Paths, Scenic Highways and Trails - The City of Prineville has about three (3) miles of designated bike path. It extends from the intersection of Knowledge and Third Streets west along Ochoco Creek to Ochoco Grade School and then north along the Madras Highway for a distance of a quarter (1/4) mile. The Trans America Bikeway crosses 48 miles of Crook County entering along the O?Neil Highway and exiting along Highway 26 to Mitchell. It is currently in the second year of active use. A total of 132.94 miles of highway in Crook County are designated Oregon Scenic Highways. They are as follows:1 OR-27 37.92 mi. US 26 5.73 mi. OR-126/US 26 36.80 mi. Paulina Hwy. 52.49 mi. The Ochoco National Forest Service actively maintains six (6) trails in Crook County totaling 40.7 miles. These trails were constructed in the 1930?s by the Y.C.C. boys for fire fighting purposes. Therefore, they were built the shortest distance from point A to point B and have steeper grades than backpacking trails. They do not pass the most scenic areas. About forty- one (41) miles of the proposed east-west Oregon Recreation Trail connecting the Pacific Crest Trail and Desert Trail pass through the Ochoco National Forest. However, a short 1.5 mile trail that would give hikers access to Stein?s Pillar is the most immediate priority.2 1Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. 2Pete Harkey, Ochoco National Forest, personal interview, Prineville, Oregon, June 1, 1977. - 55 - The greatest need in this category is more bicycle paths in the greater Prineville area as referenced in the Parks and Recreation and Open Space Study and in the Transportation chapter of this document. Off-Road Vehicle Use - The U.S.F.S. developed an Off-Road Vehicle Use Management Plan for the Ochoco National Forest and Crooked River National Grasslands in January, 1977. The primary restrictions include the following: 1) Prohibit any off-road use of vehicles within the 600 acre Antelope Reservoir recreation area; 2) Prohibit any wheeled motor vehicle in the 10,000 acre Mill Creek Roadless Area except for trail vehicles under 40 inches wide along the eastern boundary trail; 3) Prohibit motor vehicles over 40 inches wide along all other U.S.F.S. designated trails; and 4) Restrict all ORV travel to designated travel routes from three days prior to deer hunting and through the end of elk hunting seasons within the 4,500 acre Marks Creek Burn Area and the 225,000 acre Paulina Ranger District. Fourteen non-designated sites distributed throughout the forest (totaling 2,160 acres) will be closely monitored to ensure that disturbance will not exceed acceptable levels. Guidelines that help the user recognize sensitive situations or conditions were also adopted by the management plan. The Bureau of Land Management is currently inventorying existing situations and analyzing desirability of various physical features. The BLM plans to complete a management plan for off road vehicle use in Crook County by winter of 1978-79. Until then, they have no authority to legally close or regulate existing ORV sites. The County shall coordinate with this planning activity. RECREATION POLICIES 1. Energy consequences shall be considered by all recreation plans to the extent that non-motorized types of recreational activities shall be preferred over motorized activities. Facilities directly serving the recreational needs of Prineville shall be built as close to the population center as possible in order to conserve energy of transportation to the site. 2. Planning for recreation facilities and opportunities shall also give priority to meeting the needs of the Prineville metro area and all Crook County citizens, persons of limited mobility, and handicapped individuals. 3. Unique areas and potential recreation sites capable of meeting specific recreational needs shall be protected or acquired. In addition to fee acquisition, easements, cluster developments, preferential assessments, development rights acquisition, subdivision park land dedication, land leases and tax relief shall be considered as ways of-protecting or acquiring these areas. See NATURAL/ SCENIC AND HISTORICAL chapters for reference to specific areas in Crook County. 4. The City-County Planning Department shall be responsible for coordinating local, state and federal agency recreation plans. - 56 - 5. The development of recreation facilities by private enterprise shall be encouraged and governmental recreation plans coordinated with private developments. 6. That section of the Crooked River between the Palisades and the Bowman Memorial Dam should be recognized as a natural reserve area. Other sections of the Crooked River, the North Fork of Crooked River from the head at Big Summit Prairie to the intersection with the South Fork at the L.S. Ranch (47 miles), and the South Fork of Crooked River from the head at G.I. Ranch to the intersection with Beaver Creek (40 miles), should be evaluated for feasibility of natural and scenic designation. 7. No recreational use shall be allowed to exceed the carrying capacity of the air, water and land resources of a recreational area. All recreational uses, including ORV uses specifically shall minimize environmental deterioration. Insert Map Recreation : Historical : Natural : Scenic - 58 - INDUSTRY The goal in providing for industrial use in Crook County and the City of Prineville is to provide for the needs of existing industries and to direct future industrial growth to concentrated areas away from residential neighborhoods through zoning and other planning regulation. Two of the greatest industrial needs in Crook County are a diversified economy and greater employment opportunities. The timber industry employs more than half of the total labor force of the area. Seasonal lay-offs of the work force due to snow in the mountains and limited forest resources cause an unstable economy. The absence of new industrial developments the past 10-20 years has created record high unemployment for a gradually expanding population. Because there are few employment opportunities for young people, many migrate out of the community. Industries (other than timber processing industries) have not developed in Crook County due to a lack of diversified raw materials and isolation from active markets. The community has in the past been reluctant to entice interested business through incentives such as special rail service to markets, low cost financial assistance, or preliminary site development. Current development of recreational facilities at the Crook County Fairgrounds is expected to boost the economy of existing retail outlets and may inadvertently attract new industry to the community. Past delays to expand the city?s sewage treatment facilities (in order to satisfy DES and EPA standards) may force a moratorium on all new construction, including industrial development. HEAVY INDUSTRIAL USE Utilizes the railroad, highway or airport for distribution of raw materials and/or finished products. Stores wholesale and retail merchandise transported by rail, highway or air. Includes chemical and petroleum storage and auto wrecking yards. Processes wood, metal, chemical, agriculture or animal products, including compounding and packaging. Manufactures building components, machinery, concrete ready mix, or asphalt paving. Excavates raw material from the earth?s surface or its depth. Generates power and super structures used for transmission of utilities and communications. Recycles waste products. - 59 - LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE Is compatible with commercial and residential uses. Low impacts from noise, smell, vehicular traffic and machinery. INDUSTRIAL SITE Includes a general area with arbitrary boundaries selected on the basis of the following criteria: 1. Has available undeveloped or under-developed land in the vicinity to allow industrial expansion. 2. Does not infringe upon the expansion or modification of an existing residential, commercial or transportation use that is vital to the community. 3. Is economically feasible to extend public utilities and services to the area or in some other way satisfy requirements for water, sewage and other waste disposal, plus energy service and fire protection. 4. Is economically feasible to develop the site so that its value will be competitive with other industrial sites in the community and neighboring communities. 5. Is accessible to at least one major transportation link, either railroad, airport, state highway or local arterial. 6. Will not create major traffic problems on existing streets or roads resulting from increased employee, customer and service traffic unless it is located near a proposed collector or arterial street. INDUSTRIAL SITE ALTERNATIVES Pros and cons of development of the Railroad Industrial Site and five other industrial sites are as follows: 1. Prineville Railroad Industrial Site - This site has a severe physical limitation of unstable, super saturated soil which may cause it to be an expensive site to develop. Other problems with this site are that it lies within the Ochoco Creek flood plain and has no city water or sewer, roads or railroad spurs developed on the site. In spite of these minuses, its location along the railroad and Lamonta Road and its proximity to existing industrial concentration and the Terrace site make it a high priority site for development. - 60 - 2. Terrace North of Lamonta Road - High Priority - Reasons for: access by railroad, direct access to the Madras Highway via Lamonta Road, adjoins existing industry and there is room for expansion. Reasons against: upwind from the population center and slope may cause erosion problems. 3. Pine Products Vicinity - High Priority - Reasons for: located between the Madras Highway and the railroad, facilitating prime access, adjacent to present industry and industrial zoning and small existing fields not economical to farm. Reasons against: upwind from population center and isolated from city services. 4. Les Schwab Vicinity - Medium Priority - Reasons for: available water and proximity to the sewage lagoon would facilitate sewer expansion, good access to the Madras and Redmond Highways and present industrial uses exist in the area. Reasons against: encroachment upon existing dwellings (most tax lots recording low improvement assessments), and separation from the railroad. 5. American Forest Products Vicinity - Medium Priority - Reasons for: stable soil, connections with existing railway spur, near city water and sewer and is adjacent to existing industry. Reasons against: displacement of agricultural land, encroachment on residential neighborhood and isolated from state highway. 6. Ochoco Lumber Vicinity - Low Priority - Reasons for: access to the end of railroad, near a city water well, down wind from population center, access to Highway 26 and Combs Flat Road, high alkaline content make land undesirable for agriculture use and adjacent to existing industry. Reasons against: encroachment upon residences along Willowdale Drive and resultant increase in truck-train transport through the city core, causing congestion. Table VIII AREA COMPUTATION OF INDUSTRIAL SITES (Approximations) AREA PRESENTLY ZONED INDUSTRIAL AREA NOT PRESENTLY ZONED INDUSTRIAL SITE TOTAL ACRES % UNDVLP UNDVLP ACRES TOTAL ACRES % UNDVLP UNDVLP ACRES Ochoco Lumber 80 20 16 40 20 8 American Forest Products 120 80 96 Terrace 140 80 112 Pine Products 344 75 258 340 80 272 Les Schwab 180 33 59 Airport 1000 33 59 Railroad Ind. 54 100 54 Other 380 30 114 TOTAL 858 442 1820 606 - 61 - Table IX AREA AVAILABLE FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY (Approximations) SITE AREA PRESENTLY ZONED INDUSTRIAL (ACRES) AREAS NOT PRESENTLY ZONED INDUSTRIAL (ACRES) Ochoco Lumber 16 8 American Forest Products 96 Terrace 112 Les Schwab 59 Railroad Ind. 54 Other 114 Total 184 275 GRAND TOTAL 459 INDUSTRIAL PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Some light industrial uses are compatible with commercial and residential uses. In order for greater flexibility of land use to occur, performance standards may be a tool for evaluating the compatibility of light industry with other uses. Performance standards quantitatively measure impacts of noise, smell, dust traffic congestion and overall appearance of proposed uses. Recommendations for industrial performance standards for purposes of limiting heavy industrial locations, ensuring high density, ensuring access safety, screening parking and open storage, eliminating nuisances, preserving natural character, preventing erosion and isolating heavy industry are as follows: 1. Industry shall not locate on any lot or adjoining lots within a commercial or residential neighborhood that are greater than 9,000 square feet in area. 2. Industry that generates more than 20 auto-truck trips to and from the premise during the busiest hours of the day shall not locate in a residential neighborhood. 3. Industry located within commercial and residential neighborhoods shall use at least half the lot for parking, service area, landscaping or other open space. 4. Off street parking shall be provided for every employee. The parking layout shall permit cars and/or trucks to turn around or drive through so that all streets may be approached head-on rather than forcing vehicles to back out onto the street. - 62 - 5. All outdoor parking, storage, loading and service areas shall be screened from view of all arterial streets and highways, plus adjacent commercial and residential lots. 6. There will be no odor, dust, fumes, glare, flashing lights or noise which is perceptible (without instruments) more than 200 feet from any industrial lot boundary located within a commercial or residential area. Major pollutant industries shall locate at industrial sites south or east of the city. 7. Where possible, the site design shall preserve and enhance existing trees greater than 12-inch caliper, water courses, hills and other natural features. 8. The industrial use shall not cause continued erosion of the land nor increase surface drainage from the lot. 9. Industry that exceeds any of the following standards shall locate on a designated heavy industrial site: (a) Occupies one acre of land. (b) Generates thirty (30) truck-trailer or other heavy equipment trips per day, including to and from the site. (c) Emits odor, dust, fumes, glare, flashing lights or noise that is perceptible 500 feet from the property line. The feasibility of establishment of a dry land port district for the purpose of developing an industrial park should be investigated. Formation of a dry land port district is regulated by Oregon Revised Statutes, but must be approved by the County Court with voter approval preferable. Such a district would be autonomous, separate from city and county governments, and administered by a five member commission. This district would be eligible to levy taxes and to receive low cost loans and grants the same as any municipality. INDUSTRIAL POLICIES 1. Protect existing industrial development and establish the Airport and Railroad Industrial Sites as a high priority for industrial expansion. 2. Direct future industrial growth to the following designated sites: (a) Terrace across Lamonta Road from Consolidated Pine, west of Buckaroo Acres, including Crooked River Meat Company. (b) Pine Products vicinity between the railway and Madras Highway and from McKay Creek to the railroad trestle. - 63 - (c) Airport vicinity between Houston Lake Road and the Redmond Highway. (d) American Forest Products vicinity, primarily north and east of present mill facilities. (e) Les Schwab vicinity between the Madras Highway and O?Neil Highway and from the Crooked River Bridge to and including the sewer lagoon. (f) Ochoco Lumber vicinity north and east of present mill facilities as is practical. 3. Allow heavy and light industry on these sites, except for the Les Schwab site which shall be limited to light industrial uses only. 4. Prohibit new residential and commercial development on these sites with the exception of Les Schwab, Ochoco Lumber, Airport and American Forest Products sites which shall allow commercial development in fringe areas. 5. Facilitate industrial development on designated sites by reducing permit procedure, delaying site improvement requirements and providing public utilities in advance. 6. Encourage the concept of an industrial park complete with platted streets, railroad spur and lots, and with utility hook-ups for development on at least one designated site by local government, private enterprise or dry land port district. 7. Preserve buffer zones between industrial sites and residential and commercial neighborhoods. (See Natural/Scenic/Buffer Areas, Chapter VI). 8. Allow light industrial development outside designated industrial sites if in accordance with strict development standards and compatible with pre-existing uses. 9. Prohibit non-railroad users from locating adjacent to a railroad right-of-way. 10. Give preference to industries hiring from the local labor force over those importing large numbers of employees. 11. Give preference to diversified industry that is non-competitive with existing businesses. 12. Limit industrial development by available resources and public utilities and service capabilities. 13. Encourage clean industry having low pollution impact on air, water and land. Insert Map Industrial Sites: Prineville Metro Area and Prineville Valley - 65 - RURAL SERVICE CENTERS The communities of Powell Butte, Post and Paulina are shown on the plan as rural service centers in recognition of their primary functions of service to surrounding agricultural areas. It is anticipated that the economic forces which are responsible for their existence today will, with little change, remain the primary cause for their continued existence. At the present time, little basis can be found to anticipate additional population and urban growth of these rural service centers and therefore to warrant the immediate preparation of plans for its accommodation. The principal planning task for these areas is to seek and develop ways to overcome existing problems within these centers in order to provide the best possible environment for their residents. But while plans in detail for these communities may not be warranted at this time, it should be recognized that the relationship of Powell Butte to the urban communities of Bend, Redmond and Prineville has increased its attractiveness as an area of permanent residential development. Existing problems of the rural service centers largely concern inadequate public facilities and services and incompatible land use arrangements. Their solutions will require a sensitive approach by county government and will not be possible without the organized interest of local residents. Through its continuing planning program, the county should develop plans for these and the other rural service centers which will be in scale with current problems and limitations on economic and physical growth, while retaining flexibility to accommodate additional permanent residential development which may be generated by employment opportunities in the cities of the area. Development of rural service centers shall be as described in the rural service centers as contained in the Crook County Exception Areas (attached as Appendix ?B?). The document is by reference made part of the Comprehensive Plan. (Ordinance No. 45; 3/20/91) Ordinance No. 45 adopted a number of exception areas in addition to the Rural Service Centers listed above. Because of the voluminous nature of the material, Ordinance No. 45 and subsequent exceptions, including Ordinances No. 73, 78, 82, 106, and 107, are contained in Appendix ?B?. Ordinance No. 45 describes the following exception areas: - 66 - 1. Powell Butte #1 13. Lofton/Turner Creek 2. Powell Butte #2 14. McKay Development 3. East Powell Butte Rural Service Center 15. Airport Development Zone 4. Twin Lakes 16. Northwest Prineville Industrial Zone 5. Rockview III 17. Post Rural Service Center 6. Grimes Flat/Lamonta 18. West Powell Butte Rural Service 7. O?Neil Highway Center 8. Westwood Rimrock Area 19. Paulina Rural Service Center 9. McKay Acres 20. Ochoco Reservoir Recreation 10. Ochoco West Residential Area 11. Ochoco/Johnson Creek 21. RR (M-2) Zoned Land 12. Marks Creek 22. Park Reserve Subsequent Amendments include: ?? Ordinance No. 59 modifies the area in the exception taken for Ochoco/Johnson Creek by removing Tax Lots 500 and 600 in Township 15 South, Range 16 East, Willamette Meridian, Section 1. Further, it amends some of the language within the exception statement which has been done in Appendix ?B?. ?? Ordinance No. 73 adds Crook County fairgrounds parking to the City of Prineville?s Urban Growth Boundary. ?? Ordinance No. 78 adds additional lands to Powell Butte #1. ?? Ordinance No. 82 adds more lands to Powell Butte #1. ?? Ordinance No. 99 takes an exception to the agricultural goal to establish an R-5 Zone to approximately 310 acres of property lying south of the O?Neil Highway. ?? Ordinance No. 106 is a State required analysis of existing Rural Service Centers and provides a Goal 14 analysis of Post, Paulina, and East and West Powell Butte Rural Service Centers. ?? Ordinance No. 107 completes a Goal 14 analysis of the remaining 18 exceptions areas adopted by Ordinance No. 45. The Goal 14 worksheets are simply placed in the appropriate exception area of Ordinance No. 45. POWELL BUTTE In 1997 and 1998, the County commissioned a general study of the Powell Butte area in southwestern Crook County. The result of that study was the adoption of a series of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan in Ordinances No. 126, 127, 128, 130, 131, 132, 133, and 134, as individual sections of the Powell Butte area were redesignated from Exclusive Farm Use to other land uses through the exceptions process. These amendments were challenged in the Land Use Board of Appeals by interested parties and the Land Use - 67 - Board of Appeals remanded a number of the ordinances back to the County for further work. This resulted in a number of minor amendments, including Ordinance No. 127, Amendment #1; Ordinance No. 131, Amendment #1; Ordinance No. 132, Amendment No. 1; Ordinance No. 133, Amendment #1, which resulted in the outright appeal of Ordinances No. 131, 133, and 134, and some modified policies governing the Powell Butte area which are reproduced below. The following policies are adopted as a part of the Crook County Comprehensive Plan. These policies supplement and amend the Powell Butte Study to the extent that the Study is inconsistent with these policies and the Agreement. To the extend that there is any conflict between the Study and these policies or the Agreement, the Study shall automatically be modified to the extent necessary to conform the Study with these policies and the Agreement. 1. The Comprehensive Plan as amended provides that rural residential and nonresource development shall occur south of Highway 126 and generally north of Powell Buttes, and west of Stillman Road and east of Study Area 2- 2. The specific areas to be reclassified and rezoned are those areas designated as Areas 1-2, 2-1 (as amended), 2-2 (as amended), 2-3 (as amended), and 2-4 (as amended). These areas are specifically described in Ordinances 126 (Area 2-3); 127 (Area 2-4); 128 (Area 2-1); 130 (Area 1-2); and 132 (Area 2- 2). The land contained within these areas is hereinafter referred to as ?the Area to be rezoned.? Except of uses permitted outright and by conditional use in the EFU-3 Zone, other lands shall be maintained as exclusive farm uses consistent with Policy 2 below. Rezonings of land other than ?the Area to be rezoned? are inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In this regard, Ordinances 131 (Area 1-1) and Ordinance 133 (Area 3-1) are repealed by separate ordinances because the rezoning of that land is inconsistent with this provision of the Comprehensive Plan. Ordinance No. 134 which pertains to Area 3-2 is being repealed as that area is being reserved for the City of Prineville?s future industrial growth. 2. The County will not initiate additional exceptions or nonresource designations within the Powell Butte Study Area until the next periodic review. The foregoing does not create an expectation that rezonings will necessarily occur at the next periodic plan review and does not create an obligation on the part of the County to rezone any EFU land at any time. The County may, however, consider a proposal(s) to expand the urban growth boundary of the City of Prineville in conjunction with an annexation into Area 3-2 for the purpose of providing an adequate supply of industrial land prior to the next periodic review. - 68 - 3. The land north of Highway 126 shall be retained as exclusive farm use as that land is composed of large parcels and contains less rural residential development than the area south of the highway. For the purpose of this policy, all of Area 1-2 is deemed to be located south of the Highway 126, notwithstanding that a small portion of Area 1-2 is physically located to the north of that Highway. 4. The County shall adopt a new rural residential zoning district for Area 2-3 which imposes a minimum lot size and density consistent with Section Two of this Ordinance. 5. The zoning ordinance for Area 2-3 shall contain a 250-foot setback requirement from adjacent exclusive farm use zoned land. This setback shall not apply when the adjacent land is owned by a governmental entity, e.g. the Bureau of Land Management, or is adjacent to land already approved for non-farm use. In those cases, the minimum setback shall be the setback already established for dwellings in an EFU zone or if no such setback has been established, then the setback shall be and hereby is established as one hundred (100) feet. The 250 foot setback shall be adopted simultaneously with adopting the new zoning ordinance. If the imposition of this setback makes land undevelopable, then Crook County shall require the maximum achievable setback. The County shall investigate declaring an ordinance violation to be a ?nuisance? thereby allowing a private party to bring suit enforcing the county?s ordinance provisions. 6. The County shall require, as a condition of development approval, that all new rural residential development in the Powell Butte area pay system development charges (SDC?s) necessitated by Powell Butte rural residential development. The County currently funds road improvements from the earnings it receives from invested timber receipts. Prior to using property tax receipts for road improvements, the County shall adopt SDC?s sufficient to cover one hundred percent (100%) of the applicable road capital improvements required to support new rural residential development in Powell Butte. In this regard, the County shall promptly adopt a system development charge ordinance to assess a road system development charge on new development. The amount of this system development charge shall be sufficient to recover a significant portion of the capital costs of road improvements required as a result of rural residential development in Powell - 69 - Butte. Nothing in this ordinance shall preclude the County from applying system development charges to other classes of property or in other areas of Crook County. In the event that a developer desires to proceed with development prior to the adoption of the system development charge ordinance, he or she shall pay the sum of $2,000 per single family dwelling at the time of building permit issuance. In the event that the adopted system development charge is less than $2,000, the difference shall be refunded to the developer without interest. In the event that the adopted system development charge exceeds $2,000, the developer shall be obligated to pay the difference. 7. The County shall comply with the transportation planning rule when it adopts the zoning ordinances. 8. The zoning ordinances shall require developers to execute covenants of nonremonstrance in respect to all farm operations in favor of adjacent EFU land. These covenants shall be in the form of equitable servitudes and shall be binding on all heirs, devisees, legatees, vendees, and successors in interest of the developers. The County shall require such covenants to be executed and recorded at the time the building permit is issued. 9. The County will develop its zoning and land development ordinances utilizing the Gannet Study (?Groundwater Availability In The Powell Buttes Area, Central Oregon? Groundwater Report No. 32) recommendations on accessibility of groundwater in the Powell Butte Areas, and will require access to the regional water supply as a condition of development, or use of water from a district or public utility. Private exempt wells in existence prior to March 1, 2000 shall be exempt from the requirements contained in the zoning and land development ordinances pertaining to wells. - 70 - DESTINATION RESORT The following material, Exhibits A and B were added by Ordinance No. 52 on May 22, 2002. Ordinance No. 53, also adopted on May 22, 2002, adopted four inventory maps, along with a composite map and the Crook County Comprehensive Plan Destination Resort Map. EXHIBIT A Destination Resort. A self contained development providing visitor-oriented accommodations and developed recreational facilities in a setting with high natural amenities. To qualify as a Destination Resort under Goal 8, a proposed development must meet the following standards: 1. The resort is located on a site of 160 or more acres. 2. At least 50 percent of the site is dedicated to permanent open space, excluding yards, streets and parking areas. 3. At least seven million dollars ($7,000,000) (in 1993 dollars) is spent on improvements for on-site developed recreational facilities and visitor- oriented accommodations, exclusive of costs for land, sewer and water facilities, and roads. Not less than one-third of this amount shall be spent on developed recreational facilities. 4. Visitor oriented accommodations are provided, including meeting rooms, restaurants with seating for 100 persons, and 150 separate rentable units for overnight lodgings. Accommodations available for residential use will not exceed two such units for each unit of overnight lodging. Rentable units may be phased in with at least 75 units of overnight lodging, not including any individually owned homes, lots, or units, constructed or guaranteed through surety bonding or equivalent financial assurances prior to the closure of sale of individual lots or units. The remainder of the overnight lodging units shall be provided as individually owned lots or units subject to deed restrictions that limit their use to overnight lodging units. The deed restrictions may be rescinded when the resort has constructed the required 150 separate rentable units for overnight lodging. The number of units approved for residential sale shall not be more than two units for each unit of permanent overnight lodging provided under the phased approach. The development approval - 71 - shall provide for the construction of other requested overnight lodging units within five years of the initial lot sales. 5. Commercial uses limited to those types and levels necessary to meet the needs of visitors to the development. Industrial uses are not permitted. To qualify as a Small Destination Resort under Goal 8, a proposed development must be sited on land that is not defined as agricultural or forest land under any statewide planning goal and meet the following standards: 1. The resort shall be located on a site of 20 acres or more. 2. At least $2 million (in 1993 dollars) shall be spent on improvements for on- site developed recreational facilities and visitor-oriented accommodations exclusive of costs for land, sewer and water facilities and roads. Not less than one-third of this amount shall be spent on developed recreational facilities. 3. At least 25 units, but not more than 75 units, of overnight lodging shall be provided. 4. Restaurant and meeting room with at least one seat for each unit of overnight lodging shall be provided. 5. Residential uses shall be limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort. 6. The primary purpose of the resort shall be to provide lodging and other services oriented to a recreational resource which can only reasonably be enjoyed in a rural area. Such recreational resources include, but are not limited to, a hot spring, a ski slope or a fishing stream. 7. The resort shall be constructed and located so that it is not designed to attract highway traffic. Resorts shall not use any manner of outdoor advertising signing except: a. Tourist oriented directional signs as provided in ORS 377.715 to 377.830; and b. On-site identification and directional signs. Developed Recreation Facilities. With respect to destination resorts, Developed Recreation Facilities means improvements constructed for the purpose of recreation. These include, but are not limited to, golf courses, tennis courts, swimming pools, marinas, equestrian trails and facilities, ski runs, and bicycle paths. - 72 - High Value Crop Area. With respect to destination resorts, High Value Crop Area means an area in which there is a concentration of commercial farms capable of producing crops or products with a minimum gross value of $1,000 per acre per year. These crops and products include field crops, small fruits, berries, tree fruits, nuts or vegetables, dairying, livestock feedlots or Christmas trees as these terms are used in the 1983 County and State Agricultural Estimates prepared by the Oregon State University Extension Service. The ?high value crop area? designation is used for the purpose of minimizing conflicting uses in resort siting and does not revise the requirements of an agricultural land goal or administrative rules interpreting the goal. Open space. With respect to destination resorts, Open Space means any land that is retained in a substantially natural condition or is improved for recreational uses such as golf courses, athletic fields, hiking or nature trails or equestrian or bicycle paths or is specifically required to be protected by a conservation easement. Open spaces may include ponds, lands protected as important natural features, lands preserved for farm or forest use and lands used as buffers. Open space does not include residential lots or yards, streets or parking areas. Open Space may include farm lands where farming or ranching activities would be consistent with pre-existing open space uses. Overnight Lodging. With respect to destination resorts, Overnight Lodging means permanent, separately rentable accommodations that are not available for residential use. Overnight lodgings include hotel or motel rooms, cabins and timeshare units. Individually- owned units may be considered overnight lodgings if they are available for overnight rental use by the general public for at least 45 weeks per calendar year through a central reservation and check-in service. Tent sites, recreational vehicle parks, mobile homes, dormitory rooms and similar accommodations do not qualify as overnight lodgings for the purpose of this definition. Self Contained Development. With respect to destination resorts, means community sewer, water and recreational facilities provided on site and limited to meet the needs of the resort or provided by existing public sewer or water service as long as all costs related to service extension and any capacity increase are borne by the development. A "self contained development" shall have developed recreational facilities provided on site. Tract. With respect to destination resorts, means a lot or parcel or more than one contiguous lot or parcel in a single ownership. A tract may include property that is not included in the proposed site for a destination resort if the property to be excluded is on the boundary of the tract and constitutes less than 30 percent of the total tract. Visitor Oriented Accommodations. With respect to destination resorts, means overnight lodging, restaurants and meeting facilities designed to provide for the needs of visitors rather than year-round residents. - 73 - EXHIBIT B Destination Resorts I. Introduction The numerous beneficial impacts of destination resorts are recognized by Statewide Planning Goal 8 and ORS 197.435 to 197.467. The development of destination resorts can serve as an important element to diversify the economic base of the County. Tourism is currently the second leading industry in the State of Oregon, trailing only wood products in total employment and payroll contribution. (See Hobson Ferrarini and Associates Report: Economic Viability and Economic Impacts of Huntington Ranch, A Proposed Destination Resort in Deschutes County Oregon, September 2000, pp. 10-19). Destination resorts have proven to be the most dynamic growth component of the local and national tourism industry in recent years. Destination resorts have positive impacts on local economies in the form of increased payroll contributions (the portion of expenditures that are paid for employment purposes in the form of a salary or wage) and short and long term private sector employment opportunities. The net fiscal impact of destination resorts on local jurisdictions is also positive due to the high assessed valuation of resort properties relative to the intensity of land use and the disproportionately low number of students per residential dwelling unit. Short-term public expenditures relating to infrastructure improvements are generally recovered from the developer and from occupants and visitors of the resort. The disproportionate tax burden assumed by resorts can either lower resident tax rates or increase revenues to local jurisdictions. Recognizing the importance of tourism to the economy of the State of Oregon, the state legislature and LCDC have taken steps to make it easier to establish destination resorts on rural lands in the state. Statewide Planning Goal 8, the recreation goal, was amended in 1984, 1987, and 1993 to create a process for locating destination resorts on rural lands without taking an exception to Goals 3, 4, 11 and 14, which govern development on rural resource lands. This was followed by legislation incorporating Goal 8 into Oregon's land use statutes (ORS 197.435 to 197.467). By these actions, the State of Oregon recognized destination resorts as a legitimate rural land use. The Destination Resort Handbook published by LCDC emphasizes that Oregon supports siting new destination resorts because the resorts help expand and diversify the State's economy. Any county wishing to implement Goal 8 must adopt a map showing which lands in the county are available for destination resort development. The purpose of the map is to provide greater certainty concerning destination resort siting than is available under the exceptions process. To protect forest and farm resources, Goal 8 prescribes that certain classes of lands are off limits to destination resort development. The final map must reflect exclusion of such areas. A county may also exclude additional areas not otherwise excluded by Goal 8. A detailed - 74 - description of the mapping process engaged in by the County is set forth below. Once adopted, the map may not be amended except in connection with periodic review. Goal 8 and the state statute also recognize that destination resorts can have negative impacts on neighborhoods and the rural quality of life. These impacts can be substantially mitigated, however. The County recognizes the importance of balancing protection mechanisms for resource lands and rural land uses with the economic benefits destination resorts provide. The County further recognizes that this balance can be struck by the manner in which areas are designated as being available for destination resort development and by developing balanced siting criteria. II. Destination Resort Mapping Process Goal 8 and ORS 197.455 set forth the destination resort mapping standards as follows. The Crook County Destination Resort Map was prepared consistent with these standards, as detailed below. The Destination Resort Map was prepared by W&H Pacific, a consulting company with extensive experience in destination resort mapping. W&H Pacific acquired electronic copies of United States Geological Service (USGS) quadrangle maps in an electronic format to serve as the base drawing for the Crook County Destination Resort Map. The USGS quadrangle maps provide a sectional grid, including sections, townships, and ranges, which constitute the primary framework for the Destination Resort Map. The USGS maps also provide the location of major highways, streams, communities, and other topographical information to orient and check subsequent mapping efforts. Although not required to do so by Goal 8, Crook County elected to exclude publicly-owned lands from eligibility for destination resort siting. A significant portion of Crook County is federally-owned land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the United States Forest Service (USFS), and the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR). Additional public lands are owned by the State of Oregon and managed by various state agencies. W&H Pacific digitized public land maps for these State and Federal agencies to establish the location for all publicly-owned lands in Crook County. The location of public lands was transferred to the sectional base map to create the first layer of exclusions from destination resort siting. W&H Pacific then mapped the following exclusions pursuant to state law, submitted each exclusion layer to various state and federal agencies for review, and revised the maps per the state and federal agency comments. To provide the required level of detail, W&H Pacific created a separate map for each layer of exclusions (i.e. High Value Crop Areas, Big Game Habitat Areas, etc.). W&H Pacific then produced one map showing all exclusions, and a final ?mirror-image? map identifying all land eligible for resort siting (the Destination Resort Map). - 75 - Pursuant to Goal 8, the Crook County Destination Resort Map shall be the sole basis for determining whether tracts of land are eligible for destination resort siting. A destination resort shall be sited on lands mapped as eligible for destination resort siting by the affected county. A map adopted by a county shall not allow destination resorts approved pursuant to ORS 197.435 to 197.467 to be sited in any of the following areas: (a) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort. By reviewing the most recent population data, the county determined that the largest city within Crook County is Prineville, with a population of approximately 6,000. There are no cities with an existing population of 100,000 within Crook County or within 24 air miles of the boundaries of Crook County. (b)(A) On a site with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farmland identified and mapped by the United States Natural Resources Conservation Service, or its successor agency. To locate tracts with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farm land identified and mapped by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (?NRCS?), W&H Pacific obtained the most current soil survey map from NRCS. The NRCS also provided a list of the relevant soil profiles identified by its soil classification system as unique and prime soils, when irrigated. Because NRCS mapping in Crook County is limited to approximately the westerly one-third of the County, Crook County officials elected to exclude all areas of Crook County not mapped by the NRCS. W&H Pacific then digitized and mapped all potentially prime and unique soils within the areas surveyed by NRCS. To determine which lands within the potentially prime and unique overlay actually qualified as prime or unique based on their irrigated status, W&H Pacific obtained maps of currently irrigated soils from the Central Oregon Irrigation District and the Ochoco Irrigation District. The irrigated lands from the two districts were mapped and overlaid with the NRCS prime and unique soils maps, all aligned on the USGS sectional grid. The areas that were currently irrigated and within the potentially prime and unique soil overlay were then identified as prime and unique soils. Unirrigated land within the potentially prime and unique soil overlay were identified as eligible for destination resort siting if not otherwise excluded by a Goal 8 parameter. Because Goal 8 does not require the exclusion of all prime or unique soils but instead requires only the exclusion of tracts which have 50 or more contiguous acres of prime or unique land, W&H then completed the final phase of the unique and prime soil mapping process by investigating ownership patterns within the prime - 76 - and unique soil areas. To locate parcels and tracts with 50 or more contiguous acres of prime or unique soil, W&H Pacific examined all parcels with prime or unique soils on an ownership by ownership basis. W&H Pacific also obtained Central Oregon Irrigation District ownership records for all lands in the vicinity of prime or unique soils that were not otherwise excluded by the High Value Crop Area criterion, discussed below. W&H Pacific then determined whether single parcels or contiguous parcels in the same ownership contained 50 or more contiguous acres of prime or unique soils. Generally, all Ochoco Irrigation District lands were otherwise excluded by the High Value Crop Area analysis, leaving the Central Oregon Irrigation District lands in the vicinity of Powell Butte to be analyzed for prime and unique soils. Based on this methodology, the County excluded parcels or tracts with 50 or more contiguous acres of irrigated land within the NRCS prime or unique soil overlay from destination resort mapping. (B) On a site within three miles of a high value crop area unless the resort complies with the requirements of ORS 197.445 (6) in which case the resort shall not be closer to a high value crop area than one- half mile for each 25 units of overnight lodging or fraction thereof. Goal 8 and the Destination Resort Statute define High Value Crop Area as follows: An area in which there is a concentration of commercial farms capable of producing crops or products with a minimum gross value of $1,000 per acre per year. These crops and products include field crops, small fruits, berries, tree fruits, nuts or vegetables, dairying, livestock feedlots or Christmas trees as these terms are used in the 1983 County and State Agricultural Estimates prepared by the Oregon State University Extension Service. The DLCD Destination Resort Handbook further explains that this standard does not include land that routinely fails to produce High Value Crops, but has an exceptionally productive year. However, the standard does include areas that consistently produce High Value Crops but fails to do so due to a bad year. The Handbook emphasizes that individual or isolated operations are not a ?concentration of commercial? farms as that term is used in the definition. The Handbook further clarifies that a ?concentration? consists of several farms producing High Value Crops in relative proximity to one another. High Value Crop Areas include lands not used for High Value Crops if such lands are located between and among the High Value Crop lands. To locate land within three miles of a High Value Crop Area, Crook County relied upon research by Mr. Stanley D. Miles, a consultant and Agricultural Economist Emeritus at Oregon State University. To summarize his findings - 77 - regarding High Value Crop Areas in Crook County, Mr. Miles prepared a document entitled ?Assessment of High Value Agriculture Crops in Crook County, Oregon? in December 2001 and a supplemental report entitled ?Supplemental Assessment of High Value Crop Areas in Crook County, Oregon,? dated May 2002 (collectively referenced as the ?Miles Report?). The findings and conclusions in the Miles Report are based upon data from the Census of Agriculture, Agricultural Statistics of the Economic Information Office at Oregon State University, the USDA Soils book for the agricultural area of Crook County (Prineville Area), and consultation with agents from the Crook and Jefferson County OSU Extension Offices. To locate High Value Crop Areas, Mr. Miles first located concentrations of commercial farms by analyzing historical production of agricultural products in Crook County from agricultural economics reports provided by the Oregon State University Extension Offices in Crook and Jefferson Counties. In addition, Mr. Miles also identified the type and location of High Value Crops currently or periodically under production. Finally, Mr. Miles identified additional areas with a concentration of commercial farms that were located on soils that could potentially accommodate High Value Crops. High Value Crops identified in Crook County include roughstock blue grass, vegetable and flour seed, garlic, and other field crops. Mint is potentially a High Value Crop, but the data in the Miles Report illustrates that mint has met or exceeded the $1,000 per acre per year minimum threshold during only one of the last five years. Furthermore, not only has the gross value of mint failed to meet the minimum standard for High Value Crops under Goal 8, the acreage in production has also decreased significantly, from 6,900 in 1997 to 1,350 in 2001. Thus, the County Court found that mint is not a High Value Crop in Crook County under Goal 8. The Miles Report illustrates that the concentrations of commercial farms growing High Value Crops in Crook County are located north and northwest of Prineville and in the northwest corner of Crook County. The Miles Report did not identify a concentration of High Value Crops in the Powell Butte Area (generally defined as Range 14 East, Townships 16 South and 15 South). Following production of the initial December, 2001 report, Mr. Miles conducted additional research on the Powell Butte Area and prepared the supplemental May 2002 report to respond to comments regarding presence of High Value Crops in the Powell Butte Area. To explain why the Powell Butte Area is not a High Value Crop Area, the Miles Report explains that, under Goal 8 and the Destination Resort Handbook, the definition of ?High Value Crop Area? emphasizes the productivity of commercial farms and does not focus solely on the potential productivity of a farm based upon soil type alone. Rather, the definition takes into account all factors relevant to the consistent production of crops with a minimum gross value of $1,000 per acre per year. The Miles Report shows that the unique factors such as the high elevation, - 78 - high risk of frost, short growing season, and relatively unproductive soil profiles within the Powell Butte Area limit farmers? ability to cover the costs of production and therefore render the area unsuitable for consistent High Value Crop production. Therefore, the Powell Butte Area does not support a concentration of commercial farms that are capable of producing High Value Crops on a regular or routine annual basis due to climate and topography. Because the High Value Crop Area standard ?does not include land that routinely doesn?t produce high value crops, but has an exceptionally productive year,? the Powell Butte Area is not a High Value Crop Area. Based upon the High Value Crop Areas identified in the Miles Report, W&H Pacific digitized the boundary of the High Value Crop Areas in Crook County and then imposed an additional three-mile buffer around the perimeter of those lands, as required by the State Destination Resort Handbook. The High Value Crop Areas and the three mile buffer were then transferred to the sectional base map, creating an additional layer of exclusions. Pursuant to this methodology, all land within the High Value Crop core and buffer areas is excluded from destination resort eligibility. Because Jefferson, Wheeler, Grant, and Harney Counties have not identified High Value Crop Areas through the destination resort siting process, Crook County chose to exclude all land within three miles of the Crook County borders adjacent to these counties. Because Deschutes County analyzed High Value Crop Areas through its destination resort mapping process, the County relied upon Deschutes County?s data to determine if there are any High Value Crop Areas in Deschutes County within three miles of the Crook County border. The Deschutes County data indicates that there are no High Value Crop Areas within three miles of the Crook County border (Deschutes County Ordinance 92-002, incorporated herein by this reference). Therefore, parcels within three miles of the Crook-Deschutes border were identified as eligible for resort mapping if not otherwise excluded by a Goal 8 parameter. (c) On predominantly Cubic Foot Site Class 1 or 2 forestlands as determined by the State Forestry Department, which are not subject to an approved goal exception. As stated in the Destination Resort Handbook, cubic foot site class 1 and 2 lands are limited to western Oregon. This factor does not limit destination resort siting in counties in central and eastern Oregon. Generally, the western boundaries of Wasco, Jefferson, Deschutes and Klamath Counties form the boundary between western and eastern Oregon. Because Crook County is located in eastern Oregon, this factor did not disqualify any property within the county from destination resort mapping. (d) In the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area as defined by the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Act, P.L. 99-663. - 79 - The National Scenic Area does not extend into Crook County. Therefore, this factor did not disqualify any property within the county from destination resort mapping. (e) In an especially sensitive big game habitat area as determined by the State Department of Fish and Wildlife in July 1984 or as designated in an acknowledged comprehensive plan. To locate especially sensitive big game habitat mapped by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) in 1984 and refined by Crook County, W&H Pacific reviewed the Crook County big game habitat maps and established the boundaries of habitat areas on the sectional base map. The ODFW and Crook County big game habitat areas include the Elk Winter Range, Antelope Winter Range, Deer Range, and Deer Winter Range. W&H Pacified identified all land within the big game overlays as ineligible for destination resort mapping. As illustrated by the attached maps, these overlays exclude large portions of central and eastern Crook County. III. Destination Resort Goals and Policies 1. Goals To provide for development of destination resorts in the County consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 8 in a manner that will be compatible with farm and forest uses, existing rural development, and in a manner that will maintain important natural features, such as habitat of threatened or endangered species, streams, rivers and significant wetlands. 2. Policies: Mapping for Destination Resort siting A. To assure that resort development does not conflict with the objectives of other Statewide Planning Goals, destination resorts shall be sited only in areas mapped as eligible for destination resort siting on the Crook County Destination Resort Map. Pursuant to Goal 8, destination resorts shall not be sited in Crook County in the following areas: (1) Within 24 air miles of an urban growth boundary with an existing population of 100,000 or more unless residential uses are limited to those necessary for the staff and management of the resort; - 80 - (2) On a tract with 50 or more contiguous acres of unique or prime farm land identified and mapped by the Natural Resource Conservation Service or within three miles of farm land within a High Value Crop Area; (3) On predominantly Cubic Foot Site Class 1 or 2 forest lands which are not subject to an approved Goal exception; (4) In the Columbia River Gorge Scenic Area; (5) In an especially sensitive big game habitat area, as generally mapped by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in July 1984 and as further refined through development of the Crook County Big Game Habitat map. B. Federal lands not otherwise excluded under these policies shall not be mapped as eligible for destination resort siting. Federal land not otherwise excluded that becomes privately owned through land exchanges or other federal disposition can be considered for destination resort siting consistent with these policies and mapped as available for destination resort development when the destination resort map is amended during periodic review. C. The County shall adopt a map showing where destination resorts can be located in the County. Such map shall become part of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The Destination Resort Map shall be incorporated into the Zoning Map as a Destination Resort Overlay (DRO). Ordinance Provisions A. The County shall ensure that destination resorts are compatible with the site and adjacent land uses, particularly farming and forestry operations, through enactment of land use regulations that, at a minimum, provide for the following: (1) Maintenance of important natural features, including habitat of threatened or endangered species, streams, rivers, and significant wetlands; maintenance of riparian vegetation within 100 feet of streams, rivers and significant wetlands. Regulations may allow for alterations to important natural features, including placement of structures, provided that the overall values of the feature are maintained; - 81 - (2) Location and design of improvements and activities in a manner that will avoid or minimize adverse effects of the resort on uses on surrounding lands, particularly effects on intensive farming operations in the area. A destination resort should not cause a significant change in farm and forestry practices on surrounding lands or significantly increase the cost of accepted farm or forest practices; (3) Preservation of County-designated significant Goal 5 resources located on the tract used for the destination resort through avoidance, open space designation, or conservation easements recorded with the property records for the tract. (4) Preservation of farmland through the prohibition of destination resort development on ?High Value Farmland.? High Value Farmland is defined by OAR 660-033-0020(8)(a) as ?land in a tract composed predominantly of soils that are: (A) Irrigated and classified prime, unique, Class I or II; or (B) Not irrigated and classified prime, unique, Class I or II.? The destination resort siting ordinance shall require applicants to demonstrate that tracts proposed for resort siting are not composed predominantly of prime, unique, Class I, or Class II soils. A tract is composed predominantly of such soils if more than 50% of the acreage within the tract is classified as prime, unique, Class I, or Class II. B. Minimum measures to assure that design and placement of improvements and activities will avoid or minimize the adverse effects noted in Policy A, above, shall include: (1) The establishment and maintenance of buffers between the resort and adjacent land uses, including open space, natural vegetation, and where appropriate, fences, berms, landscaped areas, and other similar types of buffers. (2) Setbacks of structures and other improvements from adjacent land uses. C. The County should adopt additional land use restrictions to minimize the adverse environmental effects of destination resort development, particularly in areas subject to natural hazards. The County ordinance should prohibit or discourage alterations and structures in the 100 year flood plain and on slopes exceeding 25 percent, unless the applicant submits a geotechnical report that demonstrates adequate soil stability and implements mitigation measures designed to minimize adverse environmental effects. Alterations and structures - 82 - permitted in these areas should be adequately protected from geologic hazards or of minimal value and design to minimize adverse environmental effects. Uses and alterations which are appropriate for these areas include: (1) Minor drainage improvements which do not significantly impact important natural features of the site; (2) Roads, bridges, and utilities where there are no feasible alternative locations on the site; and (3) Outdoor recreational facilities including golf courses, bike paths, trails, boardwalks, picnic tables, temporary open-sided shelters, boating facilities, ski lifts, and runs. D. Uses in destination resorts shall be limited to visitor-oriented accommodations, overnight lodgings, developed recreational facilities, commercial uses limited to types and levels necessary to meet the needs of visitors to the resort, and uses consistent with preservation and maintenance of open space. Accessory uses may also be permitted. E. The zoning ordinance shall include measures that assure that developed recreational facilities, visitor oriented accommodations, and key facilities intended to serve the entire development are physically provided or are guaranteed proportional to the level of development through surety bonding or substantially equivalent financial assurances prior to closure of sale of individual lots or units. In phased developments, developed recreational facilities and other key facilitated intended to serve a particular phase should be guaranteed through surety bonding if not constructed prior to sales in that phase. IV. Transportation - 83 - ALTERNATE TRANSPORTATION MODES RAILROAD The City of Prineville Railroad provides a vital support in the form of revenues to the operations of the local government, as well as, the transport for the timber products industry. With Prineville?s connection to major north-south and east-west lines, customers can ship goods to almost anywhere in the United States at rates comparable with other Central Oregon communities. Although commercial passenger service is remote and liability and insurance is too costly to utilize the railroad for social and cultural events, there seem to be no real limitations on the railroad?s potential for growth. The following are potential and existing problems associated with the Prineville Railroad: 1. The grade level crossing at 10th and N. Main Streets could become a hazard with increased auto and rail activity. 2. Morning commuters are delayed as much as 15 minutes at the Lamonta Road grade crossing due to close proximity of the railroad car weighing facility. Increased industrial activity would prolong delays. 3. Summer can create a visibility hazard for motorists (particularly those who are not familiar with Prineville) at the Seventh Street and Third Street crossings. It shall be the objective of the City of Prineville to maintain Prineville City Railroad?s existing status and potential for growth. RAILROAD POLICIES 1. To insure input from the Prineville Railroad upon plans for road construction adjacent to, or affecting, the railroad tracks. 2. To provide appropriate measures (i.e. signals, gates, grade separation) as part of a long-range capital improvement program for all crossings. 3. To relocate railroad car weighing scale facilities when conditions create longer delays of automobile traffic on Lamonta Road than the current maximum delays. 4. To present the value of the railroad and its transport capabilities to industries evaluating Prineville?s location. - 84 - 5. To insure safe ?sight distances? upon rebuilding of the Madras Highway grade crossing. 6. To be prepared for increased demand for all rail transport of oil, agricultural products, merchandise and passengers. TAXI AND BUS Users of Prineville?s alternative modes of transportation are the ?transportation disadvantaged?. These persons consist of the elderly population, the physically or mentally handicapped and the economically disadvantaged. Prineville?s cab service is radio dispatched. Main destinations are the city center, and the area east of Combs Flat Road. The busiest times for the service are Friday and Saturday nights. Prineville is served by two (2) bus lines, Hammon Stage Lines with service to Portland, Albany and Eugene, and Pacific Trailways serving Central Oregon and Boise, Idaho via John Day. Ridership is low consisting mainly of the young and elderly. The major source of income is freight. The bus facility in Prineville has no maintenance facilities and owns no adjacent properties for expansion. The Soroptomists Club and Neat Repeat Store sponsor the Senior Citizen Mini Bus. The bus operates six (6) days a week (and Sundays on special occasions) by means of volunteer drivers and a two-way radio. Destinations for the increasing number of riders are oriented towards health services and shopping. Needs are recognized for improved education about the service among the transportation disadvantaged, a wheel chair lift, more wheel chair ramps (curb cuts), designated parking spaces of wider widths for disabled persons and possibly a second bus. It shall be the objective of the City of Prineville to recognize and accommodate the needs of the ?transportation disadvantaged?, and to recognize the importance of conserving energy. TAXI AND BUS POLICIES 1. To investigate the possibility of a shuttle bus and staggered shifts with Prineville?s major employers. 2. To place curb cuts on all corners at street intersections or where pedestrian paths meet corners. 3. To provide extra wide parking spaces in parking lots and near destination entrances to meet the needs of the handicapped. 4. To encourage private efforts to supply forms of inter and intra city transit to the commuter and the transportation disadvantaged. - 85 - (NOTE TSP) BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN A lack of marked routes and a gridiron pattern prevent any clear-cut bicycle and pedestrian routes. Sidewalks are more extensive, and along with alleys, more intensively used toward the center of town and near schools. They become sporadic and nonexistent away from the core area. Pedestrian crossings along major streets, particularly near schools, and activity centers, present hazards where there are no stoplights. Prineville?s bicycle way serves several activity centers, among which are the public parks, schools and central Prineville. The path is aesthetically pleasing and is crossed by only five streets. However, it fails to provide direct access to the commercial and industrial activities in north Prineville, and the Fairgrounds complex in south Prineville. The majority of Prineville?s commercial and public activity is south of Ochoco Creek, and because of the bike path?s location on the creeks north side, it is impossible for those pedestrians and bicyclists originating south of Third Street to avoid mixing with motorized vehicles. It shall be the objective of the City of Prineville to encourage pedestrian and bicycle movement as a safe, feasible alternative to the automobile for the metro area. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN POLICIES 1. To insure routes are safe and convenient. 2. To avoid conflicts (combining intersections) among differing transportation modes. 3. To require that all proposed subdivisions consider bicycle and pedestrian paths, integrated with the Metro Area bicycle and pedestrian path network, within the plat design, and to encourage these paths outside of the street right-of-ways preferably along preserved open spaces. 4. To insure that bicycle and pedestrian paths, not along street right-of-ways are well lighted and provide visual surveillance from the street. 5. To preserve space along existing and proposed principal and minor arterial and demand at least one combined bicycle and pedestrian path. Wherever possible, space shall be preserved along the right-of-way for a bicycle path on one side and a pedestrian path on the other. Both shall be separate from the pavement edge. 6. To require all proposed activity centers generating large amounts of traffic to provide safe and convenient off-street bicycle parking space and routes in their design. 7. To insure neighborhoods and activity centers, including public loading and pickup areas, are served by pedestrian and bicycle routes. - 86 - 8. To provide curb cuts at all corners, intersections, or locations where bicycle and pedestrian routes and paths intersect with streets. 9. To provide for paving of pedestrian and bicycle ways as deemed necessary and feasible with applicable state regulations. 10. To preserve existing irrigation ditch right-of-ways for pedestrian and bicycle movement upon development of adjacent properties. 11. To encourage that OID donate irrigation ditch right-of-ways to development of the construction of bicycle paths of adjacent properties when feasible. 12. To consider bicycle and pedestrian paths among the improvements for properties to be annexed to the city. 13. To improve signs and markings on existing bicycle paths. 14. To designate areas in city parks for overnight camping of bicyclists. AIRPORTS There are approximately 500 take-offs and landings per month with over 20,000 people per year using the Crook County airport. Approximately 25% of the landings and take-offs are Forest Service related. (15% for fire protection, 10% for the movement of personnel; 75-85% are business oriented including the 10% designated as Forest Service related, and 5-10% classified as other.) There are two (2) runways and improved taxiway, which is sufficient to handle corporate jets and general use aviation aircraft. The runways are on oil-finished 4,000? x 60? runway and an asphaltic 5,000? x 60? runway. (Ordinance No. 65; 5/14/92) Executive Air, a Portland based air carrier service, currently use Prineville and other Central and Eastern Oregon airports to pick up bank receipts. Plans have been approved to allow Executive Air to carry small numbers, no more than six, passengers. To date, most of Crook County?s large business, commercial and heavy industrial firms use the airport. Airport development and expansion is important for Crook County?s overall economic growth. Despite capacity of 15 light planes, there is insufficient room on busy weekends for aircraft parking space. In addition restroom, lounge and restaurant facilities are not offered. There are a total of six (6) other airstrips in Crook County; five (5) personal use airports in farm zones and one Forest Service airstrip at Rager Ranger Station. (Ordinance No. 65; 5/14/92) - 87 - Helicopter transport of injured persons from outlying areas to Pioneer Memorial Hospital, or from Prineville to Bend?s Hospital, would save time and lives. There are two helicopter pads in the County; the BLM maintains a facility at the County Airport and there is a second landing pad at Pioneer Memorial Hospital. (Ordinance No. 65; 5/14/92) It shall be the goal of Crook County to upgrade Crook County?s Airport facilities thereby increasing its viability for attracting new industry and business to Crook County by improving the runway capabilities to handle larger aircraft; providing restrooms and a small lounge area for visiting air travelers; constructing additional hangers and aircraft parking space; maintaining the existing Airport Approach Zone and preserving space sufficient for the construction of a helicopter landing pad in close proximity to Pioneer Memorial Hospital. Crook County and the City of Prineville have an Airport Master Plan (AMP). The AMP was approved by Crook County on March 14, 1979 and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on March 30, 1979. The County amended the Airport Layout Plan Map on September 25, 1981 and was approved by the FAA on October 21, 1981. The Airport Layout Plan Map of the AMP was again amended by Crook County in September 1986. This amendment was approved by the FAA on October 9, 1986. The AMP is hereby made a part of this Comprehensive Plan and all the policies and provisions contained in the AMP are hereby incorporated into this Plan document. It shall be the policy of the County to improve and develop the airport in compliance with the AMP (within fiscal capabilities) and to regulate all area land uses in compliance with the AMP. (Ordinance No. 65; 5/14/92) V. Public Facilities and Services - 88 - PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES It is the goal of the city and county to develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. This includes a plan that coordinates the type, location, and delivery of public facilities and services in a manner that best supports the existing and proposed land uses and refers to water supply systems, sewage systems, storm drainage, solid waste disposal system, electric power, natural gas, telephone service, fire protection, police protection, health services, recreation facilities and services and schools and governmental services. POLICIES 1. Designation of urban growth boundaries shall be coordinated with utility companies and with long-range development plans for extending public facilities and services. 2. Service connections to either the community sewer or community water system currently serving Ochoco West Subdivision shall be prohibited unless there is a demonstration that there is adequate water availability and sewer capacity to accommodate additional service connections. (Ordinance No. 122; 6/25/97) 3. Public facilities and services in urban areas shall be provided at levels necessary to support optimum development (maximum density). 4. Providing public facilities and services to rural areas being changed to urban use shall be based upon: 1) the least time required to provide the service; 2) most reliable service; 3) lowest financial cost; and 4) adequate levels of service that satisfy long range needs. 5. A public facility or service shall not be provided in an urbanizable area unless there is provision for the coordinated development of all the other urban facilities and services appropriate to that area. 6. All utility lines and facilities shall be located on or adjacent to existing public or private right-of-ways to avoid dividing existing farm units. 7. The establishment of new sewer systems outside the City of Prineville?s acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary and any unincorporated community - 89 - adopted pursuant to OAR 660, Division 22, shall be prohibited unless an appropriate exception is adopted. (Ordinance No. 122; 6/25/97) 8. To maximize public facility and service coordination; development proposals inside the UGB, but outside the City, shall be reviewed by the City prior to approval by the County. 9. New extensions of sewer lines from within the City of Prineville?s acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary, any unincorporated community adopted pursuant to OAR 660, Division 22, or Ochoco West Subdivision to lands outside those boundaries and said subdivision shall be prohibited, unless an appropriate exception is adopted. (Ordinance No. 122; 6/25/97) 10. All utility companies and irrigation companies affected by any and all land partitionings and subdivisions shall be notified and requested to make recommendations regarding compliance with long-range development plans and specific utility easements. 11. Scientific data defining underground and surface water capacities shall be determined within five (5) years for the Prineville vicinity, Grimes Flat, Ochoco Reservoir, Prineville Reservoir, and Powell Butte. This data shall be used to establish growth limits within a time frame. Low water years shall be the critical determinant. 12. The establishment or extension of a water system shall not be relied upon to authorize a higher residential density than would be authorized without the water system on lands outside the City of Prineville?s Urban Growth Boundary and any unincorporated community adopted pursuant to OAR 660, Division 22. (Ordinance No. 122; 6/25/97) WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM The sole source of pipe distributed water for the Prineville vicinity is provided by Pacific Power and Light Company. The current total pumping capacity of five (5) wells is 2.4 mgd. The past total storage capacity was 1.15 mg. A new reservoir with the capacity of 500,000 gals. was built at the base of Barnes Butte in the spring of 1978, bringing capacity to 1.65 mg.3 The current annual peak demand of this pipe distributed water system is 2.4 mg during the summer. This is an integrated system; when reservoir water reaches critical levels, the pumps recharge the supply. Water is chlorinated at each pump and much of the water is pumped directly to the outlets, bypassing storage reservoirs. See Street Function-Utility Boundaries Map showing the main distribution lines located at the outer limits of the total metropolitan area. An existing 3 Art Thomas, Water Superintendent, Pacific Power and Light Company, personal interview, Prineville, Oregon, Dec. 14, 1976. - 90 - water system map located at City Hall shows sizes and locations of all pipes (Existing Water System Map for Pacific Power and Light Company, Date: June, 1973, by Robert E. Meyer Engineers, Inc., Beaverton, Oregon). The State Watermasters office located in Bend, Oregon, has information regarding primary and supplemental water rights. Legally, all water above or below the ground belongs to the people. However, the State of Oregon has the responsibility of appropriating the use of all water for private use. Any private individual must file water rights with the State Watermaster for the use of natural stream flow, impoundment storage, wells, springs or sumps with the only exception being wells serving a house and a half-acre garden. The state set .01 cubic feet per second as a maximum volume for domestic usage. Since about 1950 the state has required well logs to be filed for all wells, so there is some record of well depths and capacities. Primary water rights were the original rights on river, stream and spring water filed by early day settlers. Supplemental water rights are storage water (private or irrigation district), wells (irrigation and stock use) and sumps. The majority of water rights, both primary and supplemental, are for irrigation purposes. These rights specify the number of acres to be irrigated or the cubic feet per second to be utilized for stock use, but do not reflect actual usage or capacity. Nevertheless, the state has the authority to enforce the volume of water specified by all water rights. During the summer of 1977, due to the drought conditions and the allocation of Prineville Reservoir water to the North Unit Irrigation District, the watermaster?s office for the first time measured all the water pumped and diverted from the Crooked River below Bowman Dam. If drought conditions worsen, the watermaster?s office legally can require all water users to install meters on all pumps and weirs in all canals to facilitate measuring and regulating all water. These installations are at the user?s expense. If a water user doesn?t comply within a specified deadline, then the state will install the apparatus and bill the user.4 SEWAGE SYSTEM The original system for the City of Prineville was installed shortly before World War II. The total number of current sewer connections number 1,644 with 1,407 residential connections and the remainder being commercial, services, cultural, recreational and manufacturing. The total number of people on the system is estimated to be 4,915. Design for a population of 8,820 by 1987 and 11,755 by 1992 for sewer use is recommended. The city treatment facility consists of a stabilization or lagoon consisting of a 37-acre primary cell and a 13-acre secondary cell. Flow is currently retained during summer months to the maximum extent possible; then effluent is discharged to the Crooked River during fall and winter months.The facility was designed for a biological loading of 100 persons per acre of lagoon surface area. However, present lagoon standards allow 175 persons per acre of surface area. Applying this latest criteria to the existing 50-acre lagoon results in a capacity of 8,750 people. 4Department of Water Resources, 1507 E. 1st Street, Bend, Oregon, 97701 (1976). - 91 - Average daily sewage flow is 0.71 mgd. (145 gallons per capita per day) or an annual flow of 259.2 mg. Infiltration of ground water through loose pipe connections and manhole walls plus inflow of water from street drains and roof drains is estimated for nearly 31 percent of the total flow. The pumping capacity of two (2) 1,000 gpm pumps is 1.94 mgd. These pumps are adjacent to the lagoon and discharge the sewer system to the lagoon. The City of Prineville?s waste discharge permit issued by the Department of Environmental Quality required more stringent controls on effluent quality effective July 1, 1977. These standards require secondary treatment from November 1 through March 31 and no greater than 10 mg/1 of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) and suspended solids (SS) from April 1 through October 31 for discharge to Crooked River. The present facilities are not capable of attaining these limits so an engineering firm has been retained by the city to study alternative solutions. The original cost effective alternative was disposal of effluent for irrigation use on farm land adjacent to the lagoon. However, this alternative is not feasible because soil tests show that shallow soil and a high water table endanger domestic well water and Crooked River contamination. The present alternative selected is aerated facultative lagoon and polishing pond with tertiary treatment and disposal to Crooked River. Preliminary design was completed for sewer extension the Laughlin-Melrose area. These cost estimates were, however, expensive for landowner participation. As a result, the project was reduced in scope to include the final design only for the Laughlin area.5 SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS The only sanitary landfill in the county is operated by Crook County and is located near the airport. Two open pits are privately owned, one at Paulina and the other at Jasper Point. The Department of Environmental Quality issued Crook County a sanitary landfill permit on January 27, 1975 for twenty years of operation of the present site. The Bend office of DEQ reports that the capacity remains feasible as long as the operation is managed to its maximum efficiency. Approximately 75 cubic yards of waste are disposed daily at the county landfill site; about 19 percent of this is compacted waste and the remainder is loose. The total mixed residential and commercial waste disposed at the county landfill from July 1, 1976 to June 30, 1977 was approximately 26,986 cubic yards. No records are maintained for the Paulina or Jasper Point open pits; however, the 1974 COIC Solid Waste Management Plan estimates 4,500 cubic yards of waste per year at the Paulina site. These small quantities of waste haven?t created serious problems. The Solid Waste Management Plan, however, recommends that the Paulina pit be improved to modified landfill status and that the Jasper Point pit be closed and replaced with a drop box that in turn would be dumped at the county sanitary landfill. Val Toronto and Associates, Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plan, Crook County, Oregon, 1972. Robert E. Meyer, Engineers, Inc., Laughlin-Melrose Facilities Plan, Facilities Plan for Sewage Treatment and for Sewage Treatment and Disposal, City of Prineville (June, 1977). Mitchell, McArthur, Gardner, O?Kane, Associates, 1985 Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan (December, 1972). - 92 - There are no records kept of daily quantities of waste recycling or resource recovery at the county sanitary landfill; however, some recycling is occurring. The landfill attendant has all salvage rights. All household appliances and junk automobiles hulks are piled separately and then sold to metal salvagers who flatten the scrap and transport the scrap by truck to Portland or California. Baling wire, mattress springs, or other wire is recycled if clean of other trash. Salvage businesses in Bend buy copper, brass, radiators, aluminum batteries, die cast aluminum, auto transmissions, dirty aluminum, and soft lead. The attendant strips and cuts up these materials during spare time, although most of his time is spent collecting county dump fees from visitors. Approximately 98 percent of all wood waste generated from Prineville mills is recycled for production of particleboard or box manufacture. A sizeable quantity of mill clean-up scrap and cardboard are, however, brought to the landfill. Private individuals recover some of the wood waste for fuel and the remainder is buried. Any usable materials or tools can be left at the office and the attendant either sells or gives them away.6 ELECTRIC POWER Electric power is provided by two (2) companies in the county, Pacific Power and Light (PP&L) and Rural Electrification Association (REA), which is served locally by Central Electric Co-op (main office located at Redmond, OR). Central Electric Co-op - Benchmark data and company policies for extending service for Central Electric Co-op are as follows: a post card survey conducted during December, 1975 and adjusted to reflect 100% of all residential customers shows 146 residences without electric heat; 29 mobile homes without electric heat; 106 residences with electric heat; 103 mobile homes with electric heat for a total of 384 residential accounts in Crook County. During March, 1977, the Co-op estimates that the average residence consumed 1675 KWH of electricity. If the 384 residences are adjusted for March, 1975 at the rate of 8% increase per year, 422 residences consumed approximately 706,850 kwh during March, 1977. It must be noted that these figures are only rough approximations. March does not represent a peak demand month and no irrigation accounts are included in these figures. Central Electric Co-op is a preferred customer of the Bonneville Power Administration. All policies are governed by REA, which are more liberal than the State Public Utilities Commission Regulations. The Co-op has short to long-range development plans for future locations of transmission lines and substation facilities, but growth has been so rapid the past five years that many plans are outdated. 6Stevens, Thompson and Runyan, Inc., Solid Waste Management Plan: Central Oregon Intergovernmental Council (Crook, Deschutes & Jefferson Counties, 1974). - 93 - A major problem in the past has been that the Co-op hasn?t been aware of proposed land partitionings and subdivisions until land purchasers appear at the Co-op office and request power for a new home construction. This last minute notice frustrates fiscal programming and overall planning of utilities for new development. Recently a new policy was adopted that requires land developers to deposit a sum of money that will cover the cost of installing the entire backbone system for a new development. The Co-op will refund the money within seven (7) years as revenues are collected from land owners who hook up to the system. This policy protects the Co- op in the case that a development does not succeed in selling lots.7 Pacific Power & Light Company - As of April, 1976, the total number of accounts in Crook County numbered 4,480 with the following breakdown: Apartments 353 Single Family 2855 Mobile Homes 672 Uncoded 10 Total Residential 3890 Commercial 572 Industrial 15 (over 100 kwh/demand) Other 3 Two transmission lines supply Prineville?s PP&L customers. The original one comes from Redmond past Houston Lakes and is 69 kv capacity. A recent addition is a 69 kv line from the Pilot Butte Substation near Bend which crosses the base of Powell Buttes. This line is insulated for 115 kv to facilitate future expansion. The Public Utilities Commissioner of Oregon sets forth the following policies regarding line extension: the applicant for extended service other than for irrigation does not pay anything if the cost of extension does not exceed eight (8) times the annual revenue anticipated from the hook up. The limit for irrigation hook up is four (4) times the anticipated annual revenue. In either case, the applicant must advance the excess cost to PP&L.8 See the Electrical Power Map in order to locate the service boundaries between the two power companies and to locate all primary transmission lines in the county. This map shows zone three districts that are served jointly by the two companies. Also included are the Oregon- California direct and alternating current inter-ties and the two PP&L feeder lines originating in Deschutes County. The lines were taken from more detailed engineering maps, but cross- country lines are accurate to the nearest quarter section. 7Don Hinman, Chief Engineer, Central Electric Co-op, Redmond, Oregon, 1976. 8Chuck Boyden, Manager, and Ron Fox, Pacific Power & Light Company, personal interview, Prineville, Oregon (Dec. 14, 1976). - 94 - NATURAL GAS As of December 7, 1976, Cascade Natural Gas reported approximately 1,100 customers in Prineville. About two-thirds of this number is residential users. The supply is purported good and new customers are welcome. The Public Utilities Commission prohibits advertising the sale of natural gas and limits the cost to the applicant for pipe extension (not to exceed three (3) times the anticipated annual revenue from the hook up; excess cost must be paid in advance to construction).9 See Natural Gas Map showing the location of the Western States natural gas inter-tie and the Cascade Natural Gas feeder line serving Prineville. See Electric Power Map showing the main distribution lines located at the outer limits of service of the entire Prineville area. See map located at City Hall for detailed location of all gas pipelines. TELEPHONE SERVICE The county is served by three telephone companies, Pacific Northwest Bell, United Telephone Company and Blue Mountain Telephone Company. Pacific NW Bell will extend service free of charge up to one-half mile along a public road providing two or more telephones will be served and up to one-tenth mile onto private property. Cost to the applicant becomes $1,600 per mile beyond these limits. All customers have the privilege of one or two party service, but the cost becomes prohibitive beyond the base rate area. Ten to twenty different requests over a year?s period may constitute a legitimate reason for a major line extension to an outlying area. All of Powell Butte is four party service because of the long distance from the base rate area located at Redmond.10 (See Rural Fire Protection District/School Bus Routes /Utilities (telephone, natural gas) Map. This map shows the service boundaries separating the three utility companies along with all primary overhead and underground transmission lines in the county. Cross country lines are accurate to the nearest quarter section and lines following public roads may be misplaced from one side of the road to the other. 9Gerald Liabraaten, District Manager, Cascade Natural Gas, 800 NE Third, Bend, Oregon 97701, personal interview (Dec. 7, 1976). 10Ed Peters, Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone, 841 NW Bond, Bend, Oregon 97701, personal interview (December 7, 1976). Andy Zacherl, Forecaster, United Telephone Company, 1927 S. First, P.O. Box 867, Redmond, Oregon 97756, personal interview (May, 1977). Ed Asher, Manager, Blue Mountain Telephone Inc., Fossil, Oregon 97830, personal interview (May, 1977). - 95 - FIRE PROTECTION The Rural Fire Protection District/School Bus Routes /Utilities (telephone, natural gas) Map shows boundaries of Prineville Rural Fire Protection. SCHOOLS The total enrollment for school year 1976-77 for all primary and secondary educational institutions in Crook County was 2,550. The current total capacity for all primary and secondary educational institutions in Crook County is 2,750. No additional school facilities are under construction at the present time. During winter and spring of 1977, school bus passengers averaged 1,303 passengers per day. The total capacity of all buses is 1,226, allowing three students per seat. Several buses make double runs. See Rural Fire Protection District/School Bus Routes/Utilities (telephone, natural gas) Map.11 PIPELINES An underground natural gas pipeline runs from Madras, through the Lone Pine area, to Bend. The Prineville feeder line runs parallel to the railroad tracks from the grade crossing at the Madras Highway into Prineville. On June 1, 1977, the Crook County Court adopted a resolution supporting the Artic Gas delivery route system (as presented by the Pacific Gas Transmission). This, a major natural gas pipeline (running from Alaska to San Francisco) night be constructed parallel to the existing line running through the Lone Pine area. There are no imports or exports to and from Crook County that would substantiate the use or construction of any other pipelines at this time. 11George Hamburger, School Supt. Office, Prineville, Oregon 97754, personal interview (July 7, 1977). Eric Forster, Transportation Supervisor, School Bus Garage, Prineville, Oregon 97754, personal interview (May 17, 1977). Insert Map Street Function ? Utility Boundaries Insert Map Electric Power Insert Map Rural Fire Protection District/School Bus Routes/Utilities (telephone, natural gas) VI. Natural/Scenic/Buffer Areas - 99 - NATURAL/SCENIC/BUFFER AREAS It is the goal of Crook County to ensure continuity of the open space character that has always existed in Crook County, to promote landscape buffers within the man-made environment that are in harmony with the natural landscape and which will aid in reducing major impacts such as air pollution, making a healthier environment and enhancing the value of neighboring property; and to protect the following natural resources for the use and enjoyment of future generations: 1. Mineral and aggregate resources 2. Energy sources 3. Fish and wildlife habitats 4. Ecologically and scientifically significant natural areas, including desert areas 5. Outstanding scenic views and sites 6. Water areas, wetlands, watersheds, and groundwater resources 7. Wilderness areas 8. Historic areas, sites, structures and objects 9. Cultural areas 10. Potential and approved Oregon recreation trails 11. Potential and approved Federal wild and scenic waterways and state scenic waterways 12. Potential park and recreation sites Cultural Areas - An area characterized by evidence of an ethnic, religious or social group with distinctive traits, beliefs, and social forms. Natural Area - Includes land and water that has substantially retained its natural character and is important as habitats for plant, animal, or marine life. These areas are reserved for scientific research and educational value. - 100 - Open Space - Consists of lands used for agricultural or forest uses, and any land area, which if protected, would conserve the above natural/scenic resources. LAND NEEDED OR DESIRABLE FOR OPEN SPACE (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) Crook County abounds in Open Space. The County, while moderate in size when compared to other Eastern Oregon Counties, contains nearly 3,000 square miles of territory with a population of slightly over 14,000. Nearly one-half of that area is publicly owned. There is only one incorporated city, Prineville, with a population of a little over 5,500, located in Crook County. The majority of the privately owned lands within Crook County are used and planned and zoned for agricultural and forest purposes, creating a rural lifestyle within the County with an immense amount of Open Space protected by resource planning and zoning. The major public ownerships include the U.S. Forest Service with a total of 434,792 acres, the Bureau of Land Management with 493,290 acres, and the Bureau of Reclamation with 15,960 acres. Total ownership of federal lands is 944,042 acres. State agencies account for 28,274 acres, and local government agencies account for 11,479 acres. Thus, public ownership accounts for a total of 944,042 acres. Private ownership is listed at 923,405 acres. This information was taken from previously drafted documents contained within the Crook County Planning Office. One specific document, entitled ?Parks and Recreation and Open Space Study for the Greater Prineville Area, Crook County, Oregon? completed in June, 1976, is of particular interest. The study was completed by the City/County Planning Department at that time and contains essentially an inventory of the recreational opportunities available in Crook County. It is noted that the study was completed before the Crook County Comprehensive Plan was acknowledged in 1978. The emphasis of the study is improvement plans for existing park developments within the City of Prineville and in the Prineville Urban Growth Boundary. Chapter 3 of the document utilizes an overlay technique of the entire County to indicate general areas desirable for Open Space. No site specific recommendations are made in the study for Open Space designations. A floating Open Space zone for the County is proposed. Again, no site specific areas are indicated. Other Programs The County?s Natural Resource zones, including EFU-1, EFU-2, EFU-3 and F-1, provide for large minimum lot sizes ranging from 40 to 160 acres, including 320 acres being required for Critical Elk Habitat. Other categories of Goal 5, the Natural Resource Goal, also achieve the preservation of Open Space through implementation measures required by the other Goal 5 categories. This would include Big Game Habitat, Riparian Areas, and Natural Areas. Through these programs, the County maintains and preserves generalized Open Space throughout the County. - 101 - Conclusion Based upon the above facts, including the significant public ownerships of lands within the County, the maintenance of generalized Open Space by the County Resource zones, and other programs required by Goal 5, the County finds there are adequate lands available for generalized Open Space within the County. No further action is required. Scenic Areas - Lands that are valued for their aesthetic appearance. SCENIC VIEWS (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) The Crook County Comprehensive Plan notes a number of scenic resources, including Ochoco Wayside Viewpoint, approximately 133 miles of Oregon Scenic Highway, Barnes Butte, the Rimrocks, and the Palisades of the Crooked River. Ochoco Wayside Viewpoint The Ochoco Wayside Viewpoint is a State of Oregon owned and operated viewpoint lying west of Prineville on the bluff overlooking Prineville. The viewpoint offers outstanding views of the City of Prineville and its environs. The sharp bluff drops dramatically to the valley floor. This is a State of Oregon facility and the State owns lands surrounding the viewpoint. There are no conflicting uses and it is designated a 2-A resource. Oregon Scenic Highways Crook County has a total of 132.94 miles of State of Oregon designated Scenic Highways. These are as follows: Oregon 27 32.92 miles Oregon 126/U.S. 26 36.8 miles U.S. 26 5.73 miles Paulina Highway 52.49 miles These scenic highways are protected by Oregon Statutes and no conflicting uses are identified. They are designated as a 2-A resource. Barnes Butte No information was available at the time this document was researched. This site is designated as a 1-B resource. The County will complete the Goal 5 process when the information becomes available, in accordance with Revised Policy 1 of the Natural Resource Goal. - 102 - Rimrocks Crook County is noted for large plateaus, or rimrocks, surrounding the valley floors in the Prineville area. The specific locations of the rimrocks are difficult to pinpoint. The County has specific policies to protect and preserve the scenic and aesthetic values of the rimrocks, requiring a site development plan for all land uses or development proposals. The County has unofficially required a setback from the edge of a rimrock for any development proposed; however, this needs to be carried over into the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, a conflicting use would be a proposed development which breaks the skyline when viewed from the valley floor and an ESEE analysis is required. ESEE Analysis Economic Consequences: Loss of scenic views or sites by development locating at the edge of rimrocks would be detrimental to the aesthetic quality of the Prineville area and could cause loss of tourism interest in the area. Social Consequence: Loss of scenic views or sites by development locating at the edge of the rimrocks could cause a degradation of the rural lifestyle of Crook County. Environmental Consequences: Loss of aesthetic views and sites cause a degradation of the environmental quality of the Prineville Valley. Energy Consequences: No specific energy consequences are foreseen in the differential between requiring a setback or locating the edge of a given rimrock. Program to Achieve the Goal. In order to preserve scenic views along the rimrocks, the Comprehensive Plan Policy must be carried over into the County Zoning Ordinance to be utilized when reviewing specific development proposals. Setbacks from the rimrock edge shall be 200 feet for structures. A site plan review showing the proposed structure location shall be required. Palisades of Crooked River The Palisades of Crooked River lie below Bowman Dam. No detailed information nor an accurate description was available at this writing and this resource is designated as a 1-B resource to be addressed when the information becomes available, through revised Natural Resource Goal Policy 1. Wilderness Areas - Areas where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. It is an area of undeveloped land retaining its primeval character and influence, without permanent improvement or human habitation, which is protected and managed so as to preserve its natural conditions and which generally appears to have been affected primarily by the forces of nature, with the imprint of man?s work substantially unnoticeable, has outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive - 103 - and unconfined type of recreation, may also contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic or historic value. Buffer Areas - Areas between residential and industrial neighborhoods. Property within open space zones qualifies for reduced tax assessments under ORS 308.740 - 308.790 passed by the 1971 State Legislature. The following shall be buffer areas: 1. Terrace north of Lamonta Road - Buffers the west and south boundaries of the Buckaroo Acres area. The natural drainage area north of Crooked River Meat Company is the urban growth boundary and shall be reserved as a buffer for future development to the north. 2. American Forest Products Vicinity - The natural drainage area descending from Hudspeth?s pond to Clear Pine Moulding was designated as proposed open space in the 1972 Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan and shall serve as a buffer between industrial expansion around American Forest Products and residential expansion southeast of the drainage. The area east of Hillcrest subdivision and south of American Forest Products shall be designated a buffer area because additional residential and/or industrial development here would result in additional conflict. The north boundary of this industrial site shall serve as a buffer for future residential development in that direction. 3. Ochoco Lumber Vicinity - Residential development along Willowdale Drive has created a barrier for continuous expansion of Ochoco Lumber to the east of Willowdale Drive. There shall be a buffer area along the east and south boundaries of Ochoco Lumber. Ochoco Lumber plans to expand on their property north of Ochoco Creek, but has no plans to purchase and develop new property east of their present site. Recreation Trails - Proposed recreation trails lie within the Ochoco National Forest and, as such, are protected by federal rules and regulations. They are designated as 2-A resources by the County. It is noted the prior submittal indicated private land may be involved in the Pacific Crest to the Desert Trail. No information is readily available. The County designates this as a 1-B resource and utilizes the proposed 1-B resource policy to be adopted as Goal 5, Policy 1. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) Natural Areas - The U.S.F.S. has the following natural areas under consideration in the RARE II Inventory-Green Mountain (6,630 acres), Mill Creek (15,950 acres), Bridge Creek (6,325 acres), Lookout Mountain (15,260 acres), Rock Creek (9,286 acres) and Broadway (8,680 acres) for a total of 62,131 acres. The BLM has two natural areas under consideration for primitive area management- North Fork of Crooked River (approx. 7,360 acres) and South Fork of Crooked River (approx. 34,080 acres, considered secondary potential) and of this 9,280 considered primary potential. There is a total of 16,640 acres prime natural area. - 104 - The Oregon Natural Heritage Program (office in Portland) is a non-profit organization established to collect inventory data on remaining natural areas in the site. Until LCDC requested data, this inventory data was reviewed only by the Nature Conservancy, a national non-profit conservation organization whose privately donated resources are solely devoted to the preservation of ecologically and environmentally significant natural areas throughout the country. Recently, the Oregon Natural Heritage Program was funded by LCDC for publication of a complete natural area inventory of Western Oregon for the use of country planning agencies. A similar document was to be funded by LCDC for Eastern Oregon planners and published in January, 1978. No site at this time should be interpreted as a mandatory area to be protected by stringent natural area requirements. Currently, there are no Research Natural Areas (RNA?s) designated within Crook County. The closest one being Ochoco Divide Natural Area across the Wheeler County boundary near Marks Creek Lodge. Currently a site report has only been completed for Grizzly Mountain (see appendix). However, site reports are to be included for Big Summit Prairie, G. I. Ranch, Big Houston Lake and Crooked River Gorge (Palisades) in the completed inventory report in January. The twenty-one site preliminary inventory included in this Comprehensive Plan has been subdivided into the three categories of natural area, geological area and wildlife area. The following Oregon Natural Heritage Program sites (see Recreation: Historical: Natural: Scenic Map) mapped as natural areas are ?Painted Hills? Butte (Gerry Mt.), Powell Butte, Little Summit Prairie, Grizzly Mt., West Butte, Big Summit Prairie, G.I. Ranch (?Miniature Malheur?), ?Island? in Prineville Reservoir, Gray Prairie, Twelve Mile Creek Grassland and Mill Creek Roadless Area. Big Summit Prairie is probably the most unique of those natural areas. It is a large mountain meadow that was settled in the late 1800?s. From a historical standpoint, the original log cabin school remains (built before 1897), the ?new? Summit Prairie School (1896 or 1897); four large homes including the Lowrey Place (1885), Merritt House (1906), Summit Prairie Schmidt House (1906) and the Muddy Company Headquarters (approximately 1887) which currently are headquarters for Boston Ranch Company (current owner of most of Big Summit Prairie). This prairie was also a summer encampment of various Indian tribes before the white man settled there. Active grazing on the prairie for nearly one hundred years has reduced herbaceous vegetation below its natural capacity. However, wildflowers grow in abundance here. The BLM has identified one species of wildflower there (Long-Bearded Mariposa Lily) that is rare and has been recommended for endangered classification. NATURAL AREAS (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) The County has identified a number of natural areas on which location, quality and quantity information is available. The following discussion lists those identified areas. - 105 - Powell Buttes Powell Buttes is located in Sections 25 and 26, Township 16 South, Range 14 East, Willamette Meridian, within the County. It contains approximately 1,300 acres and is predominately a south facing slope which contains several excellent examples of plant communities. Plant communities contain Western Juniper/Big Sage Brush, Blue Bunch Wheat Grass, and Western Juniper/Blue Bunch Sheat Grass. The site has been proposed for Research Natural Area designation. The Nature Conservancy points out that this would fill a high priority cell need in the Oregon Natural Heritage Plan. The property is owned and managed by the Bureau of Land Management. BLM designated 520 acres in 1989 as a Research Natural Area, officially known as ACEC/RNA Powell Buttes. The County supports the BLM management plan and designates this site as a 2-A resource and that no conflicting uses are identified. Twelve Mile Creek Grassland Twelve Mile Creek Grassland is located 45 miles southeast of Prineville in Section 21, Township 19 South, Range 23 East, Willamette Meridian. It contains approximately 300 acres. It is described as a low rolling flatland south of Twelve Mile Table with sagebrush/bunch grass communities over a wide area. The grassland is at approximately 4,500 feet elevation and is used as a winter range by pronghorn antelope and other wildlife. Twelve Mile Creek is a slow shallow stream about three feet wide flowing along the south side of this grassland. The property is owned and managed by the Bureau of Land Management. BLM has no special designation for this site. No conflicting uses are identified. The County designates this as a 2-A resource. Green Mountain Green Mountain lies 12 miles north-northeast of Prineville in Sections 25 and 26, Township 13 South, Range 16 East, Willamette Meridian, and Sections 7, 11, 16, 20, 29 and 31 of Township 13 South, Range 17 East, Willamette Meridian. It contains approximately 6,700 acres. Terrain in the Green Mountain area is rough and broken with elevations varying from 3,500 to 5,600 feet at the crest of Green Mountain. Because of its roadless character and vegetative mosaic, the area provides excellent habitat for deer and elk. Approximately 50 percent of the area is located within big game winter range. Plant communities range from juniper/bunch grass, Ponderosa/Douglas Fir, elk sedge to Ponderosa/fescue. The property is owned and managed by the United States Forest Service and, as such, no conflicting uses are identified. The County designates this as a 2-A resource. Lookout Mountain Lookout Mountain lies approximately 21 miles east of Prineville in Township 14 South, Range 19 East, Township 14 South, Range 20 East, and Township 15 South, Range 20 East. It contains approximately 15,260 acres. The Lookout Mountain area has unique - 106 - topographic features that make it easy to distinguish from surrounding land forms. From a low point near Big Summit Prairie of 3,793 feet, the land rises towards the southeast through dense vegetation of mixed conifer forests to a high point of over 6,926 feet. At this elevation there are a number of plant species, including Bebb?s Willow and the Sierra Onion, existing in this area. These species were considered threatened in Oregon (Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base, March 1985) but have since been removed from the threatened species list. (Phone conversation with Lisa Croft, USFS, July 24, 1992. It is noted there is a rare lily established in this area.) Lookout Mountain lies entirely within lands under the administration of the National Forest Service and, as such, no conflicting uses are identified. The County designates this as a 2-A resource. Grizzly Mountain Site The Grizzly Mountain site lies in Sections 15, 18, 20, 22, 27 and 29 and Section 7, Township 13 South, Range 15 East, Willamette Meridian. It contains approximately 1,300 acres. Grizzly Mountain is the prominent feature in this part of Central Oregon, with an elevation of 5,635 feet. Vegetation consists of scattered junipers and sagebrush on the lower slopes to a Ponderosa pine forest on the upper elevations. The area is under the ownership and management of the Bureau of Land Management and, as such, no conflicting uses are identified. BLM has no specific designation for this site. The County designates this as a 1-B resource. Gray Prairie Gray Prairie is located in Sections 15, 22 and 23, Township 15 South, Range 20 East, Willamette Meridian. It is part of a 22,000 acre federally owned property in the area. A check with the Crook County Assessor?s Office determined the ownership, via phone call on July 16, 1992. The site is described as being a mid-elevation prairie in the Ochoco Mountains. The U.S. Forest Service reports the presence of lithic scatters. A phone conversation with Lisa Croft indicated the presence of Peck?s Mariposa Lily in this area and some scattered private property inholders on this site. Information on the amount of private property is not currently available. The County designates this site as a 1-B resource. Forest Creeks BLM has recently identified 405 acres, known as Forest Creeks, in Townships 15 and 16 South, Ranges 21 and 22 East, Willamette Meridian, in Crook County. The area contains two stream segments near the North Fork of the Crooked River. The segments have significant willows plant communities and the area has been designated as an area of Critical Environmental Concern/Research Natural Area by BLM. It is owned and managed by BLM and as such is designated a 2-A resource by Crook County. NOTE: Big Summit Prairie, GI Ranch, and West Butte will be covered under the County?s planning program in the Fall of 1992. In addition, there may be more research required on sites identified by the Nature Conservancy which will have to be conducted during the Fall of 1992 due to time limitations on this short term effort. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/8/92) - 107 - Geological Areas - The most popular geological landmarks of the county are Barnes Butte, Rimrocks around Prineville and the ?palisades? of Crooked River Gorge below the Bowman dam. The Parks and Recreation and Open Space Study of Greater Prineville Area designates 51 acres of Barnes Butte located above cultivated crop land and 4,156 acres of Rimrock area (including 200 feet setback from rim edge) for scenic preservation. The Open Space Study addresses the rimrock from the intersection of Elliot Road and O?Neil Highway, including Westwood Subdivision and Ochoco Wayside Viewpoint, to the Steams Ranch. The report also includes rimrocks paralleling Juniper Canyon, Combs Flat Road and Ochoco Creek out to Ochoco Reservoir. Further consideration should be given to scenic value of Crooked River rimrocks all the way to Smith Rock Road. The BLM has also designated land under their ownership atop Barnes Butte for geological value. BLM designated four additional sites for geological value as follows: 1) Logan Butte located along Camp Creek (approximately 9,600 acres). This is the southern most exposure of the John Day Formation. Bentonite is mined from the clays of this formation and palentological evidence can be discovered. 2) Eagle Rock and ridge extending west along Prineville Reservoir (approximately 9,600 acres). This also is designated for rockhounding value because of two agate quarries. (See Recreation, Chapter III regarding further rockhound sites.) 3) Bear Creek Buttes known for mineral exploration and 4) Powell Buttes. Geological sites inventoried by the Oregon Natural Heritage Program include the following: Crooked River Gorge (Palisades) from Steams Dam to Prineville Reservoir (approximately 1, 280 acres). This tall, narrow canyon is one of the best exposures of columnar, extensive and pillon (lake type) forms of lava existing collectively. Near Suplee on the Weberg Ranch is an exposure of the oldest rock found in Oregon, believed to be 450 million years old. Fossil remains also occur here. Professor Bob Lawrence of O.S.U. has studied this unique feature; more detailed information of his findings can be found on Pg. 150-151, Comparative Evaluation of ERTS-I, O.S.U., 1974. Another site inventoried by ONHP is White Rock located near Mill Creek within the U.S. National Forest Service boundaries. Three other sites of geological value located within the Forest Service boundaries are Evans Creek Area, Steins Pillar and Twin Pillars. Twin Pillars are protected within the Mill Creek Roadless Area. Steins Pillar is rated high for scenic value by the U.S.F.S.; in fact, a trail to its base is a high trail construction priority. Wildlife Value - The following sites are designated by Oregon Natural Heritage Program for wildlife value: 1) Big Huston Lake (waterfowl); 2) G.I. Ranch, ?Miniature Malheur? (waterfowl breeding); 3) Paulina Strutting grounds (grouse); 4) Twelve mile Table (deer and grouse); 5) Dry Creek Reservoir (waterfowl); 6) Wiley Creek Homestead (birds); 7) Merwin?s Reservoir (waterfowl); and 8) Prineville Reservoir Wildlife Management area (3,360 acres managed for fish, deer and bird nesting by the Department of Fish and Wildlife). - 108 - The Department of Fish and Wildlife designates the following additional sites as waterfowl nesting habitat: Crooked River from Jap Creek to Steams Ranch, lower and upper Ochoco Creek, mouth of Bear Creek, mouth of Birch Canyon, Crooked River from Prineville Reservoir through Post and up the south fork, Beaver Creek and Camp Creek. The following reservoirs and wetlands are also designated as waterfowl nesting habitat: Big Summit Prairie, Little Huston Lake, Fischer Reservoir, Hudspeth Reservoir, Johnson Creek Reservoir, Lillard Reservoir, Freezeout Reservoir and Pringle Flat Reservoir. See Wildlife, Chapter IX and Wildlife Map for further information. The Wildlife Map designates approximately 215,200 acres of crucial deer winter range. It also outlines elk and antelope habitats. Natural/scenic buffer areas may also include Historic Areas as referenced in the following chapter and AGGREGATE AND MINERAL RESOURCES as referenced in Chapter IX, NATURAL RESOURCES. Additional features to be considered for natural/scenic value are Dry River (possibly a marker at the crossing of Redmond Highway 126) and the geographical center of Oregon, located near Post. FEDERAL WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) The following portions of the Crooked River and the North Fork of the Crooked River are designated as Wild and Scenic Rivers. Management Name Location (Agency) N. Fork T 16, 15 B.L.M. Crooked River R 21, 22 Crooked River T 16, 17 B.L.M. R 16 S. Fork T 17-20 B.L.M. Crooked River R 22 N. Fork T 15, R 21 Forest Crooked River T 14, R 21-22 Rec. Corridor N. Fork T 14, 15 Forest Crooked River R 22, 23 Scenic Corridor It is noted there may be private property interspersed along the banks of portions of these rivers. These lands are still subject to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and are protected from development or conflicting uses by that Act. As such, all identified resources are designated as 2-A resources. It is noted the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service are in the process of identifying outstanding remarkable values - 109 - associated with these rivers and developing management plans for these resources. For that reason, the County will adopt the following Goal 5 Policies to comply with Goal 5. NATURAL/SCENIC/BUFFER AREA POLICIES 1. As soon as information becomes available which indicates the location, quality, and quantity of an identified Goal 5 Resource that was designated as a 1-B resource in the Goal 5 Inventory, the County will complete the Goal 5 process for that identified resource. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) 2. Where conflicting uses have been identified, economic, energy, environmental and social consequences shall determine designation. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) 2. Agriculture, grazing, forestry, parks and recreation uses shall be considered consistent with natural/scenic values dependent on resource carrying capacities. 3. Construction of impoundments or any other stream facility shall not reduce stream flow, water levels, or the carrying capacity of down stream areas to support fish, wildlife, agriculture, recreation, pollution abatement or visual aesthetics. 5. Deleted by Ordinance No. 51; 9/16/91. 4. Crucial deer winter range and waterfowl nesting habitat shall be protected and preserved. Elk and antelope habitat shall also be protected in accordance with Oregon Fish and Wildlife management plans. 5. Three areas of Crooked River, namely the ?palisades? below Bowman Dam, North fork and South fork shall be protected. In addition to the Green Mountain, Mill Creek, Lookout Mountain Roadless Areas and Boardtree Special Management Area protected by the U.S.F.S., the Big Summit Prairie Area shall also be given special consideration for protection as a natural area. 6. Barnes Butte shall be protected against development of any structures except for transmission lines or communication towers, either by the existing park reserve zone or by adopting an open space zone similar to the one described in the Parks and Recreation and Open Space Study for the greater Prineville area. 7. Rimrocks from the intersection of Elliot Lane and O?Neil Highway, including Westwood Subdivision and Ochoco Wayside Viewpoint, to Stearns Ranch; and those rimrocks paralleling Juniper Canyon, Combs Flat Road and Ochoco Creek to Ochoco Reservoir shall be protected against manmade structures by such zoning restrictions as deemed necessary. Restrictions addressing setbacks and building restrictions shall be applied to protect scenic values. - 110 - 8. The Ochoco Creek and Crooked River floodplains lying within the urban growth boundary shall be protected as greenway by such zoning restrictions as deemed necessary. 9. Subdivision development along all streams and rivers shall be required to provide public access deemed necessary. 10. Buffer zoning restrictions shall be adopted for the Terrace industrial site north of Lamonta Road, American Forest Products industrial site and Ochoco Lumber industrial site. Such regulations shall encourage park and open space development; an intermingling of commercial, light industrial and low density residential uses; and stringent landscaping requirements for all industrial development within such a zone. 11. Landscape buffers shall be provided along major arterial street right-of-ways in order to mitigate the negative impacts of air and noise pollution and the unsightliness of rapid, concentrated traffic. Such buffers can be broad open space, change in grade, trees, etc. depending upon the level of impact to be mitigated. 12. ?Outdoor? advertising signs as described in ORS 377.710 (23) shall only be allowed within commercial and industrial zones. 13. Designated natural, scenic, or buffer areas shall serve a valid public purpose and property owners shall be duly compensated for the right of public use if deemed justifiable. 14. Local, state and federal agencies shall coordinate and cooperate in natural/scenic/buffer resource management. 15. Relative to the protection and preservation of the scenic and aesthetic values of the Prineville Valley ?rimrock? a site development plan shall be required for all land use/ development proposals. A specific procedure shall be incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance to provide clear and objective criteria to review all proposed land use development proposals. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) 16. A. As soon as the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service completes the National Wetlands Inventory, the County will identify these wetlands as a special category in the Plan Inventory and complete the Goal 5 process when additional information is made available on the location, quality and quantity of the resource; and B. As soon as the Division of State Lands has provided the County with a copy of applicable portions of the Statewide Wetlands Inventory, the - 111 - County will develop notice procedures as set forth in ORS 215.418. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) 17. The following federal Wild and Scenic River segments are included in the Comprehensive Plan as significant Goal 5 resources: Crooked River (Chimney Rock segment from Bowman Dam down to Dry Creek) North Fork Crooked River (From its source at Williams Prairie downstream to the upper end of Big Summit Prairie, and from the lower end of Big Summit Prairie downstream to one mile from its confluence with the Crooked River. (A) For the North Fork Crooked River, above Lame Dog Creek, the County will notify the Ochoco National Forest of any change in land use within the proposed administrative boundary. (B) For the Crooked River and the North Fork Crooked River, below Lame Dog Creek, the County will notify the Prineville BLM District Office of any change in land use within the proposed administrative boundary. (C) Within six months after BLM and the Forest Service complete the management plan for the river, the County will (1) evaluate the outstandingly remarkable values, (2) identify conflicting uses, and (3) based on an ESEE analysis develop a program to achieve Goal 5. Until this work is completed, the County will rely on the Riparian Protection Ordinance as proposed to protect the resource. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) VII. Historic Areas - 112 - HISTORIC AREAS It is the goal of Crook County to protect the historic areas of Crook County for future generations. This includes sites, structures and objects that have local, regional, statewide or national historical significance for future generations. Structures may be classified historical due to unique building, materials, construction technique or architectural style. Historical resources are non-renewable and are of lasting interest to a community and society as being able to see and walk through homestead houses and barns, windmills and mine tunnels, can explain history better than history books. Historical sites always remain but the glamour is lost when all evidence is burned or otherwise destroyed (for example, the old Ochoco Inn site). Man?s diligent workmanship is quite fragile and is endangered by fire, flooding, abandonment and natural weathering, relocation change in use or ownership, failure to meet building codes, vandalism and theft caused by uncontrolled public access. Archaeological sites are of extreme importance because these are often the only record of primitive man; these sites, however, are steadily being destroyed by amateur artifact hunters. The Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, Parks and Recreation Branch of the Department of Transportation, holds the inventory of state archaeological sites. During review processes of state or federally funded projects, the state may take action to protect archaeological sites. Sources of grants-in-aid for historic preservation include: (1) State Highway Commission (matching funds for maintenance and operation of museums); and (2) Department of Housing and Urban Development (Historic Conservation Program, Open Space Land Program, and Urban Beautification Program). The complete historic inventory includes pictures, specific locations, dates, names of builders and discoverers, present ownership, usage and condition, and references encompass more than 120 historic areas. This complete inventory was the basis for selecting the thirty-six (36) designated areas. The complete inventory is filed by the Crook County Historical Society in the A. R. Bowman Memorial Museum. The following inventory information was added by Ordinance No. 71, July 28. 1992. McCall Ranch - The McCall Ranch lies approximately three miles off O?Neil Road, northeasterly of Prineville. Originally constructed in 1911-15, it features the house, dairy barn, and horse barn. It is the boyhood home of former Governor Tom McCall and was built as a wedding present for Al and Dorothy Lawson McCall by Mrs. McCall?s father, Thomas Lawson, who was widely known as the Copper King. The house was called Westernwold. Detailed information on this resource is available at the State Historic Preservation Office and the Crook County Planning Office. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) - 113 - The McCall Ranch has been determined to be a significant ?IC? historic resource. (Ordinance No. 86; 12/8/93) The following was also included in Ordinance No. 86, but the sections in which the information was to be placed do not exist. However, both paragraphs involve the McCall Ranch, and are appropriate to be placed here. ?Overall, demolition and exterior alterations are conflicting uses regarding historic structures, sites, and areas. The following ESEE analysis will apply to the McCall Ranch.? ?Conclusion. Based on the above ESEE analysis, the County designates the McCall Ranch as a ?3-C? historic resource (limit the conflicting uses) under Goal 5.? (Ordinance No. 86; 12/8/93) (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) Big Summit Prairie Historic Homes - There are a number of structures located on Big Summit Prairie, including the original log cabin school (built before 1897), the new Summit Prairie School (built in 1896 or 1897), and four large structures including the Lowrey Place (1985), the Merrit House (1906), Summit Prairie House (1906), and the Muddy Company Headquarters (approximately 1887) which currently serves as the headquarters for the Boston Ranch Company, the current owner of most of Big Summit Prairie. All information exists regarding the location and dates of construction of these structures. No information currently exists on the current condition of these structures or whether or not they will still be considered historic structures. Therefore, they are designated as a 1-B resource and the Goal 5 process will be completed by the County when information becomes available, in accordance with Revised Goal 1, the Natural Resources Goal. Prineville Railroad - The City of Prineville owns and operates the Prineville Railroad which runs from the City of Prineville to main railroad lines at Prineville Junction near the incorporated community of Terrabonne. The Prineville Railroad was constructed in 1917 to tie the City of Prineville into the newly constructed railroad lines running south along the banks of the Deschutes River to Bend from the City of The Dalles. Conversations with the Prineville City Administrator by phone on July 21, 1992, indicate the structures in the railroad lines have been modernized over the years and while the roadbed is essentially the same as it was in 1917, most of the facilities have been updated and the railroad should not be considered an historic resource. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) Structures located within the Prineville Railroad line have been determined to be insignificant ?1A? sites under the Goal 5 rule. (Ordinance No. 86; 12/8/93) - 114 - Additional Structures and Sites - The following structures and sites have been identified as potential historic resources; however, detailed information on quality and quantity is not available. Therefore, these are designated as 1-B resources. Ranches and Houses: Templeton House - T. 14 S., R 15 E., Sec. 26. On Gumpert Road, one (1) mile southwest of Lamonta, Prineville area. The David Templeton House is a one and one-half story, wood frame building with a gable roof. This ?T? shaped building has been altered significantly. New wings and additions have been made. The home was built in 1876 and is in excellent condition. Recorded on the state historical site inventory. Bill Brown Ranch - T. 21 S., R. 24 E., Sec. 18. 30 miles south of Paulina, two (2) miles upstream from the mouth of Buck Creek. Built in 1908. Was probably the largest individually owned and operated livestock ranch in the Northwest for its time (sheep and horses). G.I. Ranch - T. 20 S., R. 23 E., Sec. 30. 25 miles southwest of Paulina, at the headwaters of the South Fork of Crooked River. Settled in 1877 by John William Gilchrist. The Lost Wagon Train of 1845 passed through this area and camped here. This extensive ranch operation has continued, with some of the older buildings still standing. Old Sugar Creek Ranch - T. 16 S., R. 24 E., Sec. 13. Nine miles northeast of Paulina at the confluence of Sugar Creek and Beaver Creek. Included on the state inventory of historic sites. The William Noble family established the ranch in 1871, moving from Linn County. They lived in a crude log cabin until 1888 when Thomas Brennan hand hewed timbers for this house. Faulkner Ranch House - T. 16 S., R. 23 E., Sec. 34. Near the Town of Paulina. Was the first homestead in Paulina. Castle Cabin - T. 18 S., R. 19 E., Sec. 32. Located on Bear Creek. Owned and restored by the Bill McCormack family, dated 1882. - 115 - Summit Prairie Schmidt House - T. 14 S., R. 21 E., Sec. 18. Located on Big Summit Prairie, 30 miles northeast of Prineville. Built approximately 1902 and was one of the most elaborate homes in Crook County. Contains six bedrooms, kitchen, dining room, sitting room, and smoking room. Sitting room was decorated with hand fashioned paneling. Merritt House - T. 14 S., R. 21 E., Sec. 14. Located on Big Summit Prairie, 30 miles northeast of Prineville. Built in 1906. A unique feature of this large, two-story home is two stairways to the second floor, without a single door connecting the two upstairs sections. The large back room was the community dance hall. Cram or Breese Ranch - T. 14 S., R. 16 E., Sec. 2. Located three miles east on the Ochoco Highway. Insufficient information. Shumway Ranch - T. 16 S., R. 14 E., Sec. 28. Located on the south side of Powell Buttes on Shumway Road. One of the largest sheep ranges in Central Oregon. An 800 foot long flume built in 1904 crosses a ravine on this ranch and is one of the last remaining examples of early irrigation superstructures. Century Farm - T. 14 S., R. 16 E., Sec. 34. One (1) mile east of Prineville on the north side of Ochoco Highway. Settled in 1868 by Samuel R Slayton. Only recorded Century Farm located in Crook County. McCall Horse Barn - T. 14 S., R. 14 E., Sec. 21. Near O?Neil along Crooked River. The horse barn on the former McCall Ranch (now the Schlosser Ranch) circa 1911-15, is a rectangular wood frame building with a gambrel roof. Two tall cupolas with louvers and four small gables are mounted on the roof. The exterior of the barn is narrow, lapped siding The barn has bays on the north and south elevations. Both this barn and the dairy barn discussed previously are of Dutch- Colonial design. Schoolhouses: Of the remaining old-time schools, Barnes Conat Basin, Combs Flat, Houston Lake, Suplee, Summit Prairie, Upper McKay, and Howard, the latter is the most structurally sound and located on the most protective site. - 116 - Howard School - T. 14 S., R. 18 E. Sixteen miles northeast of Prineville along Ochoco Creek, on the left hand side of the road to the Ochoco Ranger Station, about three miles from Highway 26 junction. Built in 1879. Mill Creek (First Schoolhouse) - T. 14 S., R. 17 E. Ten miles east of Prineville along Mill Creek. The log schoolhouse was constructed in 1868. A frame schoolhouse, built in 1875, replaced the drafty log structure. Summit Prairie - Thirty miles northeast of Prineville, on Big Summit Prairie. The old Summit Prairie School was built in 1897(8). Early Day Mining: Mayflower Mine - T. 13 S., R. 20 E. Twenty-two miles northeast of Prineville, three miles northeast of the Ochoco Ranger Station. Discovery of gold in 1871 and Crook County?s only productive gold mine. Skeleton of the stamp mill remains. The town of Scissorsville was built at the base of the mine and reached a population of 1,700 people. Maury Mountain Mines - On the north slope of the Maury Mountains about five miles south of Post. Discovery in early 1930s. Best producing quicksilver mine in the area. Stage Stops and Roads: Beckman Place - T. 16 S., R. 14 E., Sec. 3. In the Powell Butte area, at the end of the Powell Butte-Bend highway where Shumway Road intersects. The old red barn was a livery stable in the early 1900s. Mark Carson or Glenn Place - T. 17 S., R. 21 E., Sec. 12. Approximately 30 miles southeast of Prineville, along the Paulina Highway at the confluence of Camp Creek and Crooked River. Recorded on the state historic site inventory. The house is hand hewn log with a stone and clay fireplace built in 1884. The farmstead, complete with barn and other outbuildings, is a good example of early day homesteads. This was a stage stop and post office along the Willamette Valley and Cascade Mountain Wagon Road. - 117 - Camp Maury - T. 17 S., R. 21 E., Sec. 20. Thirty miles southeast of Prineville. In 1864, three companies of the First Oregon Cavalry, under the command of Captain John M. Drake, explored the Crooked River Basin in the vicinity of Paulina for the purpose of establishing a supply depot for the protection of immigrants. It seems that renegade Paiute bands, including those led by Chief Paulina, had taken to harassing the newcomers. Three successive supply depots were established: Camp Maury, Camp Gibbs, and Camp Dahlgren. Only the site remains for Camp Maury. Colonel Watson was originally buried here after he was killed in battle against Chief Paulina. State Historical Inventory listing. Prineville-Canyon City Road -T. 14 S., R. 18, 19, and 22 E. 1860s, the Canyon City Road was used as a shortcut by the pioneers and miners headed for the John Day region. This route was first known as the Ochoco and Canyon City Road. The road followed the Willamette Valley and Cascade Mountain Military Road east out of Prineville to the vicinity of the Keystone Ranch. At that point, the road to Mitchell continued up the south side of Ochoco Creek a mile or so before crossing to the north side. In T. 14 S., R. 18 E., Sec. 22, U.S. 26 follows Marks Creek up a grade, while the pioneer road continues up Ochoco Creek toward the Ochoco Ranger Station. The Ochoco and Canyon City Road leaves Ochoco Creek and goes up Canyon Creek just beyond the Ranger Station. The road went up Allen Creek Horse Camp in the Ochoco National Forest at the northeast edge of the prairie. While the old road is not visible from the present day horse camp, it can be seen about a quarter mile northeast of the camp, just below Forest Service Road No. 22. The old road closely follows Forest Road No. 22 to Scott Camp and leaves the County area. Camp Gibbs - Insufficient information. Farley Farm - Insufficient information. Camp Watson Military Wagon Road - Part of Willamette Valley or Cascade Mountain Road. Old Santiam Wagon Road - By the early 1960s, many people wanted to traverse the Cascade Mountains from the Willamette Valley to Central Oregon. Settlers wanted to fatten their cattle on the east side grass. Merchants and freighters desired to get supplies to the newly discovered gold mines of eastern Oregon and Idaho. Military men were asked to stop the murderous escapades of the Smoke Indians throughout the region. - 118 - The Willamette Valley and Cascade Mountain Road Company was founded in 1864 and, years later, the route became known simply as the Old Santiam Wagon Road. The Old Santiam Wagon Road begins west of the Cascades and crosses the west border of Crook County at the level terrain south of the Crooked River all the way to Prineville. Continuing east, the road went up Ochoco Creek through meadows from Prineville, an area which today is covered with fields which have obliterated the old route. About eight miles east of town, the road crossed the mouth of Mill Creek. Beyond Mill Creek, near the mouth of Lawson Creek, the road crossed to the south side of the Crooked River about one mile west of the Keystone Ranch. The road continued up Veazie Creek, Wickiup Creek (T. 14 S., R. 19 E., Sec. 20), Horse Heaven Creek (T. 16 S., R. 19 E., Sec. 2), Meadow Creek, Lost Creek, and Meades Sheep Rock Creek and the present Teaters Road. In about a mile, the old road crossed both Teaters Road and the North Fork of the Crooked River. The old road went over a divide and down a canyon to Old Faithful Reservoir on the Mervin Ranch. A few miles north of Mervin Reservoir No. 3 (T. 16 S., R. 12 E., Sec. 29) is the site where Lieutenant Stephan Watson and two other soldiers were killed by Indians in 1864. Also north of the reservoir, an old military stockade was once constructed form juniper logs. Precisely who built the stockade is uncertain; one theory suggests it was the site of Camp Dahlgren, which was established by Captain John Drake, Watson? commander, in 1896. The camp was named for Colonel Ulric Dahlgren. The old stockade was also on the early military road which went north via Little Summit Prairie to Camp Watson. The Old Santiam Road then went along Paulina Creek, Grindstone Creek, Coffee Creek, crosses Twelvemile Creek at the Howdin Ranch, and left the Crook County (current limits). The original parts of the road are visible in the following section (within the County area): Camp Dahlgren ? Camp Watson Road ? also part of OLD SANTIAM WAGON ROAD. The only visible part of this road might be seen in the O?Neil area (T. 14 S., R. 14 E., Sec. 29 and 30). Meek?s Cut-Off (Huntington Road) - The route which had been used by Meek?s Lost Wagon Train in 1845. This was the party famous for the role of the Lost Blue Bucket Mine, a site reportedly rich in gold nuggets but which has never been successfully rediscovered. By 1865, many of the Indians had been confined to either the Warm Springs Reservation or the Klamath Agency in southern Central Oregon. By treaty, the U.S. Government was obligated to supply the Indians with - 119 - supplies. In 1865, P. Huntington built a road from The Dalles to the Klamath Agency in order to get supplies to the reservation. Parts of this road were Indian trails which had already been used as a road. An example was the route from present day Bend to Madras, used by Meek?s Lost Wagon Train. The Bend-Madras section was incorporated in Huntington?s route which became known as the Huntington Road. The description of the road begins at the Morrow-Keenan Ranch, 20 miles north-northeast of Prineville and about 15 miles southeast of Madras along Grizzly Road. The Huntington Road went directly west from the Morrow-Keenan Ranch for over a mile through the fields south of Willow Creek. The old road then turned south and southeast to cross the present road from US. 26 to the site of Grizzly (this county road also is called Grizzly Road). The road intersected the present County road in T. 12 S., R. 15 E., Sec. 36, the old road continued west, passed by the Bonneville Power Administration?s electric substation on Grizzly Road, continues along from Pine Creek and crosses the Crooked River at Forest Crossing. After Huntington Road crosses to the south side of the Crooked River, some confusion exists to its location and the exact location of the Huntington Road between the Forest Crossing and present county limits is not known. The route from Bend to points north of Redmond was first used by part of Meek?s Lost Wagon Train of 1845. Meek?s party had split at the G.I. Ranch on the South Fork of the Crooked River after experiencing great hardships. One group followed the drainage of the Crooked River to beyond Prineville. The other went west to the Bend area before turning north. The two groups rejoined northeast of Madras. The original parts of this road might be visible in the following sections of the Crook County area. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) HISTORIC AREA POLICIES 1. The Crook County Courthouse, A. R. Bowman Memorial Museum, Pioneer Log Cabin in Pioneer Park, McCall Ranch, Mill Creek Cemetery area and the Maury Cemetery-Glenn Place area shall be submitted to the State Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. 2. Property owners of the designated sites shall be informed of the historic areas selected and programs shall be initiated on an individual basis in order to preserve the remaining historical structures or objects. Privacy from public trespass on the property owners land is of prime importance. Public agencies should investigate fee acquisition, easements, preferential assessment, development rights - 120 - acquisition, or any other technique that will enable preservation of the sites whenever they become endangered. 3. The Planning Department shall alert the Crook County Historical Society whenever a historical area is endangered. In the case that structures or objects will be torn down, the historical society shall be given first privilege to take pictures, record historical data and collect or purchase any artifacts that may be available. 4. The Crook County Historical Society shall make recommendations to the Planning Commission regarding the alterations of historical sites and structures. The recommendations shall be based upon an adopted set of standards pertaining to the preservation of historical areas. 5. Detailed information contained in the historic areas inventory on file at the A. R. Bowman Memorial Museum shall not be disseminated to the public at large, but it shall be available to local decision makers and historical researchers. 6. City and county governments may seek technical and financial assistance from all state and federal sources in order to protect, restore, or purchase significant historic areas that can fulfill the needs for parks, recreation or natural and scenic resources. 7. The County shall develop and adopt a specific Zoning Ordinance procedure for reviewing proposed alterations or demolition of identified historic structures. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) 8. The County shall seek the aid and financial assistance of the State Historic Preservation Office to survey and analyze identified historic structures and resources within the County. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) 9. Crook County Cemetery District shall consider purchase of all cemeteries currently under private ownership; this includes marking any unmarked graves of which there is record (Barnes, Newsome and Roberts). 10. Thirty-six historic areas (listing in Appendix) are designated for historic preservation by the Crook County Historical Society; these include school houses, stage stops, ranches and other historic landmarks and are designated on the Recreation: Historical: Natural: Scenic and Prineville Metro Historic Sites Maps. Insert Map Prineville Metro Historic Sites VIII. Housing ? Prineville Metro Area IX. Natural Resources/Hazards and Development Limitations - 122 - NATURAL HAZARDS POLICIES 1. The county shall recognize the development limitations imposed by the carrying capacities of natural resources; i.e. surface and ground water capacities, soils, geology, etc. 2. Natural resource physical limitations shall be one of the primary evaluation factors for development approval. The carrying capacities thereof shall not be exceeded. 3. It shall be recognized that problem areas or hazards do not necessitate disapproval of development, but that higher development standards can be expected in order to minimize problems or hazards. 4. To maintain development costs at a minimum and to encourage the most efficient use of resources by guiding development to low hazard or physical limitation areas. 5. High density development shall be encouraged in areas having high carrying capacities and low physical limitations, and discouraged in areas having low carrying capacities and high or severe physical limitations. Thereof, the following criteria shall be considered: (a) Slopes greater or less than 30%. (b) Safe distance from rimrock scarps, talus debris and fractures. (c) Sufficient quality and quantity of water. (d) Location relative to floodplain channels, high ground water, unstable soils or geology, etc. 6. It shall be the developer/builder?s burden of proof for determining the degree of hazard or physical resource carrying capacity. 7. Natural resource evaluations, hazard determinations, development effect and corrective measures shall be determined by a licensed/bonded consultant at the expense of the developer for proposed developments located in recognized hazard areas or areas with severe physical limitations. - 123 - WATER RESOURCES The major sources of domestic and irrigation water for Crook County (excluding the reservoir systems) are the ground water aquifers associated with alluvial deposits (floodplain and terraces) in the Prineville Valley, Paulina Basin, Upper Crooked River Valley, Big Summit Prairie, South fork of the Crooked River (G.I. Ranch vicinity) and Camp Creek. The Irrigation Suitability: Water Resources Map defines the floodplain and terrace alluvial deposits in Crook County and gives as estimate of the probable extent of the underground alluvial aquifers. A detailed ground water study has been made for a limited portion (60 square miles) of the Prineville Valley by Robinson and Prince (1963); however, until a complete inventory study of ground water and recharge areas of the upper Crooked River and Ochoco Creek drainage basins has been made, the capacity of these alluvial aquifers remains largely unknown as does their potential to support development of any sort in the county. Water potential outside of these alluvial aquifers is very limited. The remaining geologic formations are only capable of yielding very small amounts of water (1 to 8 gpm) and these generally occur as perched aquifers. Wells tapping these formations can sustain household use if the density of the development is low (less than 2 dwellings/acre). Because of the limited water potential of these formations, an extensive system of small reservoirs has been constructed to supplement well water. They are most prevalent in the eastern portion of Crook County and are used primarily for irrigation purposes. The following map descriptions correlate major geologic formations with water-bearing potential on the Irrigation Suitability: Water Resources Map. These are to be used as general guidelines with well log summaries providing more refinement for detailed site information. Alluvium (alluvial valleys and terraces) - The most productive aquifer is the water deposited alluvial materials which usually are found at lower elevations and associated with surface water flows. Where these materials are saturated, and consist predominantly of silts, clays and sands, yields range from 20-50 gallons per minute. In areas where sands and gravels are most prevalent, yields of up to 1,000 gallons per minute may be expected.17 17David Beech, Hydrogeologist, Water Resources Department, (1976-77). - 124 - The most important source of ground water in the Prineville Valley is a single artesian aquifer consisting of a layer of sand and gravel that ranges in thickness from less than 10 to more than 30 feet. This permeable layer underlies the valley floor at depths ranging from less than 100 to about 300 feet and is known to extend through an area of at least 12 square miles. An indication of the type of problems associated with these formations is stated below: Pump tests performed on the Jasper Knolls wells indicate that they have developed from perched water aquifers within the Clarno (and John Day) formation. Wells developed within the Clarno (and John Day) formation characteristically are low yielding. Because of poor yielding characteristics, increased demand in the summer months can only aggravate the problem.18 It is strongly recommended that there be no expanded use of the Jasper Knolls water system over and above the 27 homes presently being served until additional sources of water can be developed. The loss of storage and low yield characteristics of the perched aquifers of the Clarno (and John Day) formation limit the pumpage rate of wells. Ochoco and Maury Mountain Watershed Areas - To insure compliance with minimum water quality standards (established by DEQ), the U. S. Forest Service has designated 34,000 acres (not broken out in County statistics) of land adjacent to forest streams as Streamside Management Areas (SMU). Streamside management should also be located along areas outside of the U. S. Forest boundaries to insure that the watershed and recharge areas for the overall ground water supply are maintained in quality and quantity. Watersheds - Research indicates there are five irrigation districts within Crook County which may use surface watersheds. Conversations with the manager of the Ochoco Irrigation District indicate there may be four watersheds used by other irrigation districts in the County; however, extensive research would be required. The other irrigation districts or companies are: People?s Irrigation Company, Lowline Ditch Company, Crooked River Central District, and Central Oregon Irrigation District which is headquartered in Deschutes County. Due to time constraints, these are designated as a 1-B resource and the County will complete the Goal 5 process when information becomes available. Through the Department of Land Conservation and Development and the Water Resources Department, it was learned there may be a surface watershed of the City of Prineville. Conversations with the City Manager of Prineville on July 9, 1992, indicate the city has no knowledge of this watershed and relies on wells for its domestic water. The City decided not to purchase a water right for reservoir water in conjunction with its new wastewater treatment plant. (See attached letter from David Evans & Associates.) 18Beech - 125 - Use and control of water resources in the County is subject to the provisions of the Lower Deschutes River Basin Program, Basin 5, as adopted by the State Water Resources Board on April 4, 1981. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) Surface Water System - A general discussion of the surface water system is contained in the Overall Economic Development Plan. In addition, the appendix contains an inventory of water reservoir systems in Crook County; an inventory of stream flow mileage, and game fish species; and an inventory of lakes and impoundments. Irrigable Lands and Water Resources - The majority of the existing identified irrigated agricultural lands in Crook County occur in the alluvial valleys and adjacent terraces of the Prineville Valley and the Paulina Basin. Major drainages such as the Upper Crooked River, Bear Creek, Camp Creek, McKay Creek, Allen, Mill and Ochoco Creeks all have irrigated lands. Other potential agricultural lands have been identified by the general and detailed soil mapping. The Irrigation Suitability, Water Resources Map, addresses the ability of general soil types to sustain crops. It does not infer that water is available in sufficient quantity to develop the land or that it is economically feasible. Irrigable lands are shown as those areas presently under irrigated agriculture. Water resources are those surface storage, ground water and stream related water bodies presently developed or assessed for potential development. The following table estimates the relative quality of irrigable and non-irrigable soils on the basis of irrigation suitability groups. Table XV ACREAGE OF IRRIGATION SUITABILITY GROUPS FOR CROOK COUNTY (in thousands of acres) Group I ? Excellent 49.7 Group II ? Good 133.8 Group III ? Fair 114.1 Group IV ? Poor 293.6 Total 591.2 Group V ? Non Irrigable 1,298.5 The purpose of identifying irrigated agricultural lands is to estimate the extent of these lands in Crook County, assuming that all land with available water is or has been recently under agricultural production. Based upon general soil capabilities, the extent of Crook County lands potentially available for irrigation and dry land agricultural use can be estimated. The map also indicates areas of known water reserves, and other areas that have ground water potential. For information regarding irrigation and water rights for land above Prineville Dam and those below but not included in irrigation districts, see BOR Special Report - Deschutes Project (1972). Water is recharged to the ground water body from rainfall through upper connection with the flow of adjacent streams, old irrigation percolation. A great deal of rainfall may be lost to runoff due to impermeable nature of the Madras, Clarno and John Day Formations. There may be areas so impermeable that little or no recharge is received and even household extraction of - 126 - water may result in water level declines. The recharge to the artesian aquifer in the Prineville Valley occurs principally along the north side of the valley floor on the alluvial terrace. A small amount of recharge occurs from a downward leakage from the overlying unconfined aquifers. Water quality from perched zones will be high while that water developed from the ground water body will not be quite as high and in some instances may be unusable. Shallow ground water aquifers, like the alluvial valley fill at Prineville, are especially susceptible to bacteriological and chemical contamination. It is possible that the water quality within this shallow aquifer could deteriorate in time. Because of the varying aquifer characteristics, it is important that large production wells be pump tested for a period of 24-72 hours and recovery measurements made for an equal period. Such tests can provide data about the aquifer?s ability to produce water on a sustained basis. The following guidelines can be used to help curtail potential water problems in new developments. 1. The ground water supply (and its carrying capacity) shall be used as major criteria for evaluation of any growth policies in Crook County. 2. The water potential of major geologic formations can be used as a first approximation for the carrying capacity of the ground water system. It should establish whether or not the population projections to the year 2000 can be realistically supported, and whether or not all support active services needed for that population can be supplied, i.e. industrial, commercial development, housing, utilities, etc. 3. At present, there is insufficient data to estimate either carrying capacity of the county?s water supply or the ability of the recharge areas to keep up with the increased demand as the county grows, even at the low estimate of 2% per year population increase. The ground water study of the Prineville valley needs to be updated and expanded to cover the remainder of the county. 4. Knowledge of the water potential of geologic formations will assist in predicting future problems of water supply to any area being developed. 5. Detailed well log information from the Central Oregon Watermaster can help further refine these general predictions of water potential in cases where recent wells have been drilled. 6. The carrying capacity of the water resources shall be determined as this capacity is the key to the survival of the community, its economy and growth potential. 7. The largest carrying capacity exists for the alluvial aquifers; the smallest carrying capacity for the formations outside of the alluvial valleys and terraces. 8. The alluvial valley and terraces are used as a first approximation for estimating the amount of irrigable agricultural land in the county. - 127 - Definitions 1. Aquifer - A geologic unit that is capable of transmitting and yielding appreciable amounts of water to a well. Normally, water flows in gravel, sand and silt strata, which have clay strata below (and above) to retain water. These strata act as ?channels? for water to flow from the recharge area to major drainages and eventually the ocean. 2. Ground Water - Water that occurs under hydrostatic pressure below the land surface and completely saturates or fills all the pore spaces of the rock material in which it occurs. 3. Water Table ? The upper surface of such a zone of saturation, if confined. 4. Confined Ground Water - An aquifer which underlies a less permeable layer that retards the upward movement of water. 5. Perched Aquifer - Closed water basins which are not connected with the regional ground water system. Water is trapped by impermeable strata (clay, etc.) and recharged only by rainfall in the immediate area. Common for the John Day and Clarno Formations. 6. Recharge - Refill of the regional ground water system. WATER RESOURCE POLICIES 1. Crook County shall be established as a ?critical water supply area? in order to initiate a detailed ground water and recharge area study through the Department of Water Resources or some other agency. 2. The Prineville ground water study shall be updated for the purpose of establishing the carrying capacity of the ground water system, especially the alluvial valley and terraces, setting an upper limit on additional development the county can support, and ensuring recharge areas are identified and reserved for water quantity and quality. 3. Population growth shall be encouraged in relation to the carrying capacity established during an average year based on normal precipitation and snow accumulation. Growth based upon maximum carrying capacities established during a high runoff/precipitation year would result in severe water shortages during an average year. 4. Streamside management, i.e. U.S. Forest Service model, shall be incorporated, for all private and public lands to insure the water supply remains in good condition. - 128 - 5. Present irrigation systems (both agriculture and domestic) which utilize the ground water aquifers, shall be discouraged from utilizing potable water from any alluvial aquifer and required to obtain irrigation water from reservoir systems. - 129 - FLOODPLAINS The 100-year floodplain is considered an area with potential for extreme hazard. Major impacts occur during flood stages in areas not protected by major reservoirs. This occurs especially in the Post-Paulina study area which is unprotected by flood control structures. There are 168 linear miles of classified floodplain along the Crooked River. The Prineville Metro Area has 320 acres within the floodplain. The 100-year floodplain is the minimum area which will be inundated by the base flood, i.e. a flood that has a one percent (1%) change of occurrence in any given years. Crooked River, Ochoco Creek and their major tributaries comprise 99% of the flood area identified by Flood Hazard Boundary Maps for that portion of the county located on the maps. These maps were generated on the basis of topographic contours only, through a contract issued by the Federal Insurance Administration and its input has been used to date to refine these boundaries; this data is insufficient data to indicate floodplain areas especially in a semi-arid climate. Local knowledge was used to refine these areas; however, many small drainage tributaries of the major streams may have high flood hazard and erosion potential within localized areas. However, these localized flash flood conditions contribute insignificantly to flood conditions when channeled into the larger drainages. It should be recognized that many hazard areas may be partially, or totally, reclaimed through adequate engineering, especially where drainage can be provided within areas of high water tables. Many areas within the original Prineville soil survey have been drained and are no longer considered a problem. The original soil survey data sheets used to locate problems associated with high water tables, and poor foundation soils have been amended on the basis of local experience. High water table problems exist only in the summer months; other times of the year do not have the problem. Flood Rate Maps (not available at this date), will, however, be based upon these maps and could refine the flood hazard boundaries using engineering principles. The last 100-year magnitude flood occurred in 1965. At that time both Ochoco and Prineville Reservoir dams contained the flood waters and minimized their impact below the dams. The largest flood on record (May 8 & 9, 1956) was used to produce the floodplain map for that portion of Ochoco Reservoir and the Crooked River. A flow of 2,500 cfs was estimated for the flood waters. Ochoco Reservoir dam prevented major flooding downstream during this flood; however, ?....should a more intense rainstorm occur in late spring or early summer when the reservoir is nearly full, as happened in the May, 1956 flood, downstream flooding could be expected? (Ochoco Creek Floodplain Study). In the Prineville area, the Crooked River will contain a flood stage of 8 to 10 feet if no backup is produced by natural debris dams. The most critical areas are approximately three (3) miles south of town where a terrace forces the river channel to the base of the rimrock slope and - 130 - at the Crooked River Bridge (West Third). Should a debris dam occur at either of these locations, the town could be flooded. It should be noted that maximum erosion and deposition, and river meandering occur during flood stages. New river courses are formed and old ones abandoned. Bank erosion and water damage must be planned for and can occur more than once per 100 years. It shall be the purpose of resource information and maps within this document to recognize the 100-year floodplain areas as the minimum areas which could be inundated by flood, and to require strict controls for development near or presently within them. High density development shall occur as far from the floodplain as possible, while building and engineering requirements, such as drainage systems, minimum flow elevations, and diking shall be required within areas that could potentially have high water problems. Construction standards established by the Federal Insurance Agency for Emergency Program Aid shall be observed; these include: 1) proper anchoring of structures; 2) use of construction materials that will minimize flood damage; 3) adequate drainage for new subdivisions; 4) new or replacement utility systems are to be located and designed to preclude flood loss; and 5) all new construction or improved/repaired structures in flood hazard areas are to be elevated or flood-proofed to the 100 year elevation. It is necessary to identify and maintain floodways in their natural undeveloped condition in order to minimize meander and bank erosion damage, to provide an unobstructed channel for flood waters, to provide conditions for minimum velocity and streams flow, and to reduce flood damage in areas not protected by flood control structures. The portion of the floodplain nearest the stream channel shall be considered best suited for grazing, hay and grain fields, orchards, truck gardens, nurseries or other open space agriculture; parks, playgrounds, golf courses, ball fields, or other recreation not involving structures; locations of utility lines; and for storage during non-flood seasons. Fragile soils and geologic formations subject to high erosion shall be protected. Development, off-road vehicle use, recreation, and overgrazing shall be discouraged. The resource information shall identify areas with high water tables, and soils unsuitable for foundations, and identify areas where problems caused by high ground water and poor foundation soils and subsequent septic failure will result in pollution of ground water supplies. Adequate measures shall be taken in these areas to avoid all problems associated with septic tank disposal. FLOODPLAIN POLICIES It shall be the policy of Crook County to recognize the 100-year floodplain areas as the minimum areas which could be inundated by flood, and to require strict controls for development near, or presently within them. The following shall be considered in relation to development in floodplain areas: 1. High density development shall occur as far from the floodplain as possible. 2. Building and engineering requirements such as drainage systems, minimum floor elevations, and diking as set forth by federal regulations shall be required within areas that could potentially have high water problems. - 131 - 3. Construction standards established by the Federal Insurance Agency for Emergency Program Aid shall be observed; these include: (a) Proper anchoring of structures. (b) Use of construction materials that will minimize flood damage. (c) Adequate drainage of new subdivisions. (d) New or replacement utility systems are to be located and designed to preclude flood loss. (e) All new construction or improved/repaired structures in flood hazard areas are to be elevated or flood-proofed to the 100-year elevation. It shall be the policy of Crook County to identify and maintain floodways in their natural undeveloped condition in order to: 1. Minimize meander and bank erosion damage. 2. Provide an unobstructed channel for flood waters to provide conditions for minimum velocity and stream flow. 3. To reduce flood damage in areas not protected by flood control structures. The portion of the floodplain nearest the stream channel shall be considered best suited for: 1. Grazing, hay and grain fields, orchards, truck gardens, nurseries, or other open space agriculture. 2. Parks, playgrounds, golf courses, ball fields, or other recreation not involving structures. 3. Locations of utility lines. 4. Storage during non-flood seasons. HIGH WATER TABLE - PRINEVILLE AREA Soils within the Prineville area whose water table is less than six (6) feet from the surface are identified by the Physical Limitations Map. Boyce, Crooked and Forester soils indicate seasonally high water tables. Water is normally encountered at depths between one and three feet during the summer months, July through September. Water may also occur on the surface. The soils predominate in low or nearly level areas on floodplains, old stream channels, sloughs, oxbows and adjacent low terraces. Metolius and Powder soil series also indicate seasonally high - 132 - water tables of lesser degree. The existing soil surveys do not recognize these soils as problem areas. However, they are recognized as contributing to high ground water problems because of local experience. These soils are located along the Crooked River Valley, Crooked River Canyon, and at the base of Juniper Canyon. Seasonally high water table problems are caused by spring runoff of snow melt, by flood and sprinkler irrigation, and by soils with high enough clay content to make them impervious to ground water flow. The general soil boundaries indicating ground water problems have been further modified by engineering practices such as diversion canals, drainage ditches, and interceptor drain tiles. The areas indicated as having extreme, or moderate high water tables present problems for foundations, underground utilities, septic tanks, wells and adequate drainage. These problems may be partly or totally solved by using engineering techniques; consequently, increased development costs can be expected. POOR FOUNDATION SOILS - PRINEVILLE METRO AREA There are approximately 760 acres of soils poorly suited for foundations in the Prineville Metro Area. These soils, also located within areas of high water tables, create additional limitations for sewers, water systems, and other underground utilities; severe limitations also exist for roadways because of the soils' high shrink-swell characteristics. Problems associated with these soils include foundation cracking, settling and water damage to structures, and underground utility systems thus resulting in pollution of groundwater. SLOPE Slope percent classes have been developed county wide, using slope soil associations (Slope/Soil Composite Map). The Slope/ Soil Composite Map has been derived by mapping topographic contours. The slope classes describe the range of slope and can be used along with the original topographic maps as an aid in identifying landscape limitations /roughness of terrain. Steepest slopes (in excess of 30%) generally pose higher development and maintenance costs for structures and utilities, although modern engineering technology and design may alleviate some or all of these limitations. Steep slopes are commonly characterized by shallow rocky soils, high erosion potential, mass movement, septic tank limitations and low agricultural potential. SEPTIC TANK SUITABILITY Septic tank-drainfield system approval by the Crook County Health Department is based on soil type or texture, depth of soil (minimum of 18?), topography, slope (maximum of 25%), depth to restrictive or impervious layers, depth to water table, existence of perched water tables, location of wells, lakes, streams, etc., and general environmental and physical characteristics of the land. The Crook County Health Department requires an onsite subsurface sewage disposal evaluation, approval and permit whenever an individual sewage disposal system is the proposed method of sewage disposal. An approval and evaluation is required prior to approval of a - 133 - partitioning, a subdivision, a building permit, a mobile home installation, etc., if an individual sewage disposal system is the proposed method of sewage disposal. The septic tank suitability maps give an indication of which areas in the county and Prineville valley do and do not have the probability to support septic tank facilities. They can be used for planning purposes as a determinant for allowed population densities or for expansion of particular areas. Site specific analysis is necessary for indications of suitable septic tank locations. The septic tank suitability maps were derived by identifying specific soils with general soil units and determining suitability of these soils by correlating Health Department criteria with soils information (S.C.S. Oregon I Soil Sheets); percents of soils suitable for septic tanks were thus determined. AGGREGATE The inventory of aggregate removal sites included is primarily based upon the inventory submitted to the U. S. Department of Agriculture by George Ross of the Prineville Soil Conservation Service Office. This inventory was conducted during the spring of 1977. Eight removal sites are reported for Crook County Road Department use as follows: 1) Camp Creek owned by Les Schwab; 2) Grass Butte owned by the State of Oregon, Crook County owning mineral right (cinders); 3) Myers Butte (cinder); 4) Juniper Canyon owned by the BLM; 5) McKay Creek owned by Hudspeth and Ovens; 6) Congleton Ranch near Paulina, the county does not plan to use it anymore; 7) Bear Creek (inactive); and 8) Jones Ranch. See Appendix IV for all legal descriptions of sites and Oil: Geothermal: Mineral: Quarry Map. The City of Prineville has two stockpile sites, but all of their road building material is purchased. The State Highway Department utilizes four primary removal sites. Two are located along the Paulina Highway at mileposts 32 and 38. Grass Butte (cinder) and where the Oregon/California power interite crosses the Redmond Highway are the other two sites. Additional material sites inventoried by SCS are: Spears Meadow, Bandit Springs, Lookout Range, Ochoco Dam, Combs Flat, Eagle Rock, and Beaver Creek. The Ochoco National Forest records 75 abandoned gravel pits and 25 active gravel pits, none of which are plotted on the map. Primary removal sites located on BLM land are: 1) Grote (cinder); 2) Taylor Butte; 3) Horse Butte; 4) Summit Prairie, and 5) Dry River. Four removal sites in the county are privately owned. They are: 1) Lone Pine; 2) O?Neil; 3) Modular crushing plant site and 4) pit at milepost 3-1/2 located on Combs Flat Road. This aggregate inventory does not reflect an in-depth study of available material site capacities nor does it accurately differentiate between removal and stockpile sites. The office of BLM has more detailed information concerning aggregate sites in Crook County. Subsequent to the original adoption of this Comprehensive Plan, mineral and aggregate resources became a major land use planning issue in Crook County. As an identified Goal 5 resource, a number of sites were identified and became the subject of numerous ordinance amendments to this plan. Because of the voluminous nature of the text material, that information is contained in Appendix II. What follows is a simple listing of all the sites beginning with Ordinance No. 43 through Ordinance No. 120. - 134 - ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3C3-GRV-3 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-SAN-1 O?Neil and Gravel 3C-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-CIN-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-4-4 c. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis, and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C Sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have actual or potential conflicting; uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-17 Alves #1 (Northwest Basalt) 3C2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 3C3-BAS-29 Hackelman (County) 3C-BEN-3 Coats 3C-BEN-3 Alaska Pacific 3C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 3C-BEN-3 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) d. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a site-specific ESEE analysis on each resource site and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have potential or actual conflicting uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3CI-BAS-19 Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3CI-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 - 135 - 3CI-GRV-10 Pieratt 3C3-GRV-11 Bernard 3C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate & Paving 3C3-GRV-13 Raasch 3C3-GRV-14 R & R 3C3-GRV-15 Keudell 3C3-GRV-16 Breese 3C3-GRV-17 Williams 3C3-GRV-18 UCON, INC. 3C3-GRV-19 Phillip Schlosser 3C3-GRV-20 Ty and Linda Fehrenbacher 3C3-GRV-21 Albert R. Kilpatrick 3C-SAN-3 Pieratt NOTE: The Oregon State Highway Division uses an internal three-part number to designate its sites; the three parts are respectively: For example Crook County?s 1C1-BAS-1 site is an Oregon State Highway Division site that is identifies internally by the Division as site #7-3-4. The ?7? signifies _____________; the ?3? signifies ___________, and the ?4? signifies___________. B. IC Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME ICn-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1Cn-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1Cn-SAN-3 Pieratt 1Cn-SAN-3 Williams ICn-SAN-3 UCON, INC. ICn-SAN-3 Phillip Schlosser C. IC Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME IC2-GRV-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-13-4 1C1-GRV-2 Oregon State Highway Division #7-41-4 ICI-GRV-3 Oregon State Highway Division #7-38-4 IC2-GRV-4 Oregon State Highway Division #7-36-4 IC1-GRV-5 Oregon State Highway Division #7-25-4 ICI-GRV-6 Oregon State Highway Division #7-9-4 IC1-GRV-7 Phillip Schlosser (Ochoco Ready Mix) - 136 - IC3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 1C3-GRV-11 Bernard 1C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate and Paving IC3-GRV-13 Raasch 1C3-GRV-14 R & R IC3-GRV-15 Keudell 1C3-GRV-16 Breese 1C3-GRV-17 Williams IC3-GRV-18 UCON, INC. IC3-GRV-19 Phillip Schlosser 1C3-GRV-20 Ty and Linda Fehrenbacher IC3-GRV-21 Albert R. Kilpatrick D. IC Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1Cn-CIN-1 Oregon State Highway 1Cn-CIN-2 Pieratt E. IC Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1C-BEN-1 Coats 1C-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific 1C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 1C-BEN-4 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) MINERALS, OIL, GEOTHERMAL & BENTONITE Historically, the primary mineral exploration in the county has been for quicksilver (Mercury). Five areas have been the most productive: 1) Maury Mountain Mine (see Historic Areas Inventory); 2) Ochoco Creek Area (Byram/Oscar, Staley, Champion and Taylor Ranch Mines); 3) Johnson Creek Area (Independent, Mother Lode, Amity, Blue Ridge and Round Mountain Mines); 4) Kidnap Springs Area (Strickland Butte Mine); and 5) Bear Creek Area (Oronogo and Platner Mines). Three areas referred to in Bulletin 55 entitled Quicksilver in Oregon, published by the State of Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, are the Humbolt Mine located near the northern county line along Highway 26 to Mitchell, Gray Prairie Prospect located in the Ochoco National Forest south of Lookout Mountain and Moore Prospect located on Riverside Ranch. No area in Crook County is currently active with quicksilver mining. - 137 - Ochoco Creek also historically was an active site for gold and silver exploration. However, only the Mayflower Mine was a success. (Refer to Historic Areas Inventory). Traces of Uranium, Manganese and other elements are found in the county also. See Oil: Geothermal: Mineral: Quarry Map. Currently, the most active exploration in the county is for semi-precious gemstones. See ?Geological Areas?, Natural/ Scenic Buffer Areas, Chapter VI, and Recreation: Historical: Natural: Scenic Map. Oil exploration has accompanied the search for these minerals. In 1958 an oil well was drilled by Sunray-Midcontinent and Standard Oil of California in the vicinity of Sherwood Creek south of Post. The rotary drill discovered gas deposits at 3980-4020 feet and the drilling operation stopped at 7919 feet. See Oil: Geothermal: Mineral: Quarry Map. No geothermal exploration has been conducted within the county, but the U.S. Geological Survey records two hot springs on a 1975 revised Geothermal Land Classification Map. These include a 60-87?F spring on the Hackleman Ranch and a hotter spring, 116-122?F spring on the Weberg Ranch at Suplee. The U.S. Geological Survey also designates about 163,200 acres of land between these two hot springs as lands prospectively valuable for geothermal resources. Bentonite is a very fine particle clay that is refined from clays found in the John Day Formation. The most active processing of Bentonite is done by Central Oregon Bentonite Company, sold for kitty litter, on the Weberg Ranch located on Camp Creek. MINERAL AND AGGREGATE POLICIES (Ordinance No. 51; 9/16/91) Goal: To provide for the protection and use, both current and future, of the mineral and aggregate resources of the County consistent with statewide land use planning goals, and its administrative rules, while minimizing any adverse impacts to the surrounding area. Policies: (1) The County shall use the requirements of Goal 5 to conserve and protect, consistent with legal opinions of the State and as Court decisions may dictate. As defined in the statewide planning goals the meanings of: (a) Conserve: is to manage in a way which avoids wasteful or destructive uses and provides for future availability. (b) Protect: is to save or shield from loss, destruction or injury or for future intended use. (2) Deleted by Ordinance No. 55; 2/26/92 (2) The County shall review, as part of each periodic review process, the status of mineral and aggregate resources in the County. - 138 - (3) The County shall insure that significant inventory sites are designated for mineral and aggregate. (4) In order to be placed in the County?s Goal 5 resource inventory list, the site must have received a designation as a ?significant site? based on location, quality and quantity of the resource. All significant sites must have an ESEE analysis completed in order to resolve any conflicts. (Ordinance No. 55) An abundance of a Goal 5 mineral or aggregate resource shall not be used as the basis to deny placement on the County plan inventory list. (5) The County shall participate in a regional needs analysis when adjoining Counties agree upon such an approach and sufficient funding is available to complete such a project. The analysis shall only be used as a tool to assist local governments in determining whether additional inventory sites need to be designated. (6) A mineral and aggregate resource site that is not on a Crook County Goal 5 inventory or that is listed as a 1B site shall be placed on the inventory of significant sites and shall be conserved and protected for surface mining after all the following conditions are met: (a) A report is provided by a certified geologist, engineer or other qualified person or firm verifying the location, type, quantity and quality of the resource. (b) The site is determined to be a significant 1C site after reviewing all available evidence the regarding location, quality, and quantity of the mineral and aggregate resource and the site is added by amendment to the comprehensive plan; and (c) There are no conflicting uses of the ESEE analysis results in a determination that the resource is important relative to conflicting resources, uses and thither applicable statewide planning goals and policies. (7) Extraction of mineral and aggregate is a temporary consumptive use of land, therefore, it is imperative that not only care is taken in the mining process, but the site is reclaimed for future use. (9) Deleted by Ordinance No. 55; 2/26/92 (8) On an interim basis, notification and a conditional use hearing is required for any non-resource dwelling proposed within one-fourth (1/4) of a 1-B site to limit conflicting uses until an ESEE analysis has been completed. (11) Deleted by Ordinance No. 55; 2/26/92 - 139 - (9) Crook County?s plan policy is to classify, each significant resource site according to current available date on location, quality and quantity, and regulate each site according to its classification. Crook County will not allow expansion of any site without additional data. Therefore, in order to expand mining operations on a mineral or aggregate site into an area not currently designated for mining, the operator must provide the best information available regarding quantity, quality, and location of the resource in the proposed expansion area to update plan data. An ESEE analysis shall be required if the expansion area is found to be a significant Goal 5 resource based on location, quality, and quantity information. (13) Deleted by Ordinance No. 55; 2/26/92 (10) A mineral or aggregate resource site designated for mining in the comprehensive plan ESEE analysis may be mined when a permit is obtained in accordance with the standards of permit review. (15) Deleted by Ordinance No. 55; 2/26/92 (16) Deleted by Ordinance No. 55; 2/26/92 (17) Deleted by Ordinance No. 55; 2/26/92 (11) Decisions of the County in determining the significance of a mineral or aggregate resource site, identification and analysis of conflicting uses, and development of a program to achieve Goal 5 with respect to the resource site shall be consistent with state law. To the extent feasible, mitigation of the effects of mining on other uses of land shall occur as part of the development of a program to achieve Goal 5 with respect to the resource site. These decisions of the County shall be based on substantial evidence. (Ordinance No. 55) WILDLIFE The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission provides statistics on population and habitat status to all public agencies in Crook County. This information is used as base data for wildlife resources. Detailed descriptions of populations and habitats are available from B.L.M., U.S.F.S. and Oregon State Fish and Wildlife. The status of wildlife populations in Crook County and the number of acres required for their respective habitats are outlined in Appendix VI. This data was collected in 1970 which is cited as an average population year for most species. Major big game species are mule deer, pronghorn antelope, and Rocky Mountain elk. Optimum habitat requirements for these species include adequate water, forage and a variety of vegetation cover for thermal protection, hiding and fawning purposes. Detailed habitat requirements for elk, antelope and deer are included in Appendix VI. The general winter range - 140 - locations for these wildlife species, as well as for waterfowl nesting habitat, are plotted on the Wildlife Resource Map. Because deer winter range covers most of the county, only crucial winter range was mapped. Even though herds may use only portions of these areas during the year, year-round range condition is essential for survival. Big game herds must have good summer forage to survive even mild winters without substantial loss. A total of 215,200 acres have been designated as crucial deer winter range; 323,200 acres as elk winter range; and 227,840 acres as antelope winter range and 44,800 acres as waterfowl nesting areas. Data showing nesting locations of endangered bird species has been retained on file in the Prineville City-Crook County Planning Office. The Oregon Fish and Game Commission should be contacted for detailed site analysis. Appropriate wildlife specialists should be contacted if lands under the jurisdiction of other public agencies are involved. The Peregren Falcon is the only bird species classified on the endangered list that has been reported on Ochoco National Forest lands. However, the U.S.F.S. suggests that the Veary should also be protected. Even though the Veary has a low vulnerability, it is one of the rarest birds in Eastern Oregon. The Western Spotted Frog, and the Red Tailed Hawk, while considered rare in other areas, are considered common in Crook County by the U. S. Forest Service and B.L.M. However, both agencies favor preservation of the habitat (cool, moist springs), for the large number of species which also utilize it. Bird and mammal species identified as endangered, threatened or highly vulnerable are listed in Appendix III (identified by state and federal agencies). Information for fisheries is included in Appendix III. Fishery recreational use is discussed in Chapter III on ?Recreation?. It is the purpose of the resource maps to identify wildlife resources on a general scale and to delineate species habitat requirements for preservation. The areas outlined are considered potential, as well as existing habitat, even though there may be few, or no species within them at the present time, i.e. elk in the Maury Mountains. All mapped habitat areas could fulfill wildlife needs if animal species were utilizing them. The general nature of the winter range, waterfowl nesting areas, and lack of specific locations on nesting sites, however, requires that the Fish and Game Commission be contacted for any matter which could affect existing or potential wildlife habitat. FISH AND WILDLIFE AREAS AND HABITATS The following information was provided by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife in 1990. Big game that are considered sensitive in the County are mule deer, Rocky Mountain Elk, and Pronghorn Antelope. Deer populations have declined during the past few years, primarily because of the drought and severe winter weather conditions. Population levels in the County are currently 45-65 percent of ODFW?s management objectives. With improved weather conditions, deer populations are expected to increase and again reach management objectives. Elk and antelope numbers have been increasing at a moderate pace during the past ten years. See the table below for the current (1990) population estimates. Improved aerial surveys, telemetry studies, and personal - 141 - communication with various landowners have provided additional information on the distribution of elk in Crook County. This information has been used to update the elk winter range maps for the County. Additional survey information and the use of larger scale maps have also permitted minor modifications on deer and antelope winter range maps to improve their accuracy. Small numbers of Black Bear and Cougar also exist in the County. Their numbers have been increasing slowly over the past ten years. Species umber Mule Deer 12,660 Rocky Mountain Elk 1,500 Pronghorn Antelope 1,400 Black Bear 35 Cougar 14 The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has provided the County with detailed maps indicating big game winter range within the County. These have been compiled onto composites to show the overall impact on the County. There is a vast amount of acreage involved. Rocky Mountain Elk winter range includes 580,685 acres. The antelope winter range includes 280,425 acres. The mule deer winter range includes 861,066 acres with 354,445 acres listed as Critical Winter Deer Range. The methodology in deriving these numbers is simply after the composites were created to use a computerized plenometer to estimate the total acreages involved. It is noted that the big game ranges overlap each other significantly and should not be taken as separate totals. Crook County in its acknowledged Comprehensive Plan contains policies for the protection of wildlife habitat, including Wildlife Policy 2 which states ?Density with a Crucial Wintering Area for deer shall not be greater than one residence per 160 acres and for the General Winter Range not more than one residence per 80 acres.? Wildlife Policy 3 states ?Elk wintering areas shall not have more than one residence per 320 acres.? However, these policies are not carried over into the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, there is the potential for conflicting uses at the present time. Conflicting Uses The most significant conflicting use to big game habitat in Crook County is an increase in density of residential dwellings in the habitat area. There are economic, social, environmental, and energy consequences involved with the potential conflicting use. Economic Consequences The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife has indicated Crook County generated approximately three million dollars of economic activity for big game hunting in the year of 1987. Loss of habitat will significantly reduce the number of big game and have a direct impact on the economic benefits derived from big game hunting. - 142 - Social Consequences Loss of big game habitat will reduce the social values achieved by Crook County over the long term. The County is famed for its rural lifestyle and the attendant social values that accompany that lifestyle. In the long term, reduction of big game habitat will lessen those social values. Environmental Consequences Loss of big game habitat will result in degradation of other factors of the environment with the decrease in numbers throughout the food chain. Energy Consequences Increased residential dwelling development in the big game habitat areas generally causes scatteration of distribution systems for energy, resulting in more costly energy prices for the consumer. Program To Achieve The Goal In order to protect the big game habitat, the Comprehensive Plan policies must be carried over and enacted directly into the County Zoning Ordinance for the EFU-1, EFU-2, EFU-3, and F-1 zones. By placing the density requirement standards in the specific resource zone, the acknowledged exception areas are exempted from these requirements. RIPARIAN AREAS Riparian areas provides needed habitat for wildlife and fish in the Class I and II streams within the County. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife provided a series of maps showing the riparian habitat areas throughout the County. These have been reproduced on a composite map showing the location within the entire County. Conflicting Uses The most significant conflicting use is destruction of existing vegetative cover within the identified riparian areas. This normally happens through residential development within these areas. ESEE Analysis Economic Consequences: Loss of riparian habitat would cause a reduction in fish production in Class I and II streams and impact water quality. - 143 - Social Consequences: Loss of riparian habitat would reduce recreational opportunities in Crook County for fishing and other small game habitats. Environmental Consequences: Loss of riparian habitat would diminish water quality, increase erosion potential along Class I and II streams, and diminish the ecology of Class I and II streams. Energy Consequences: Loss of riparian habitat could cause a degradation of the stream banks which may diminish production of hydro energy downstream. Program To Achieve The Goal In order to protect the riparian habitat, a specific riparian habitat protection requirement will be added directly into the County Zoning Ordinance as Section 4.180. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) SENSITIVE BIRD HABITAT (Ordinance No. 124; 5/27/93) BIRD SITE INVENTORY Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 101.00 1 Houston 14-15-20-100 227.17 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.00 1 Houston 14-15-20-400 134.50 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.00 1 Houston 14-15-21-101 253.36 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.00 1 Houston 14-15-21-101 111.10 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.01 2 Houston 14-15-20-100 227.17 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.01 2 Houston 14-15-20-400 134.50 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.01 2 Houston 14-15-21-101 253.36 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.01 2 Houston 14-15-21-101 111.10 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.02 3 Houston 14-15-20-100 227.17 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.02 3 Houston 14-15-20-400 134.50 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.02 3 Houston 14-15-21-101 253.36 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.02 3 Houston 14-15-21-101 111.10 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 103.00 4 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-2300 320.00 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 103.00 4 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-2303 613.05 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 103.00 4 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-300 720.00 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 107.00 5 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1700 640.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 5 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1800 640.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 5 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1900 10641.24 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 6 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1700 640.0 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 6 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1800 640.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public - 144 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites -- Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 107.00 6 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1900 10641.24 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 111.00 7 Mud Spring 15-24-28 Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 15-18-0-100 11837.40 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 15-18-0-1600 320.00 Developed F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 16-18-0-1100 597.60 Undeveloped Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 16-18-0-1200 240.00 Undeveloped Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 16-18-0-132 320.00 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 16-18-0-135 1097.85 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 113.00 9 Ochoco River 15-17-5-1000 15.30 Undeveloped EFU-2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 113.00 9 Ochoco River 15-17-5-1000 17.64 Undeveloped EFU-2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 113.00 9 Ochoco River 15-17-5-1100 264.00 Undeveloped EFU-2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 116.00 Hensley Butte 13-16-0-4000 724.50 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Nest Private 116.01 Hensley Butte 13-16-0-4000 724.50 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Nest Private 118.00 10 Mud Spring 15-24-0-100 17458.35 Undeveloped FU1 & F1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 118.00 10 Mud Spring 15-24-0-101 160.00 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 118.00 10 Mud Spring 15-24-0-400 200.00 Developed F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 118.00 10 Mud Spring 15-24-0-401 236.60 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 118.00 11 Mud Spring 15-24-0-500 320.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 121.00 13 Foley Butte 12-16-0-100 11849.24 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Nest Private 121.00 13 Foley Butte 12-16-0-400 320.00 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Nest Private 122.00 14 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-2000 800.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Nest Public 123.00 15 Post 16-19-0-100 9647.44 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 16-19-0-2600 291.14 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 16-19-0-700 160.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 17-19-0-200 478.78 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 17-19-0-300 599.20 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 17-19-0-301 39.30 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-1106 40.00 Undeveloped P-R Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2500 320.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2700 73.08 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2702 721.90 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-3600 440.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-700 10721.49 Developed P-R Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-700 0.00 Developed P-R Bald Eagle Nest Public 126.00 17 Powell Mtn 16-25-16 Sage Grouse Lek Private 126.01 18 Powell Mtn 16-25-17 Sage Grouse Lek Private 127.00 19 Rabbit Valley 16-20-0-1300 2060.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 127.00 19 Rabbit Valley 16-20-0-1900 950.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 127.00 19 Rabbit Valley 16-20-0-300 7301.50 Developed F-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 128.00 20 West Butte 18-16-0-2800 160.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private & Public 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-105 5.21 Undeveloped R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-1404 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-200 6.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-201 15.08 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-202 1.39 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-203 2.14 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-204 57.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private - 145 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites -- Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-205 1.39 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.00 22 O?Neil 14-14-0-1801 78.86 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.00 22 O?Neil 14-14-0-1804 240.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.00 22 O?Neil 14-14-27-100 626.93 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.00 O?Neil 14-14-34-1803 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.01 23 O?Neil 14-14-35-100 319.08 Undeveloped EFU3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.01 23 O?Neil 14-14-35-101 141.13 Undeveloped EFU3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.01 O?Neil 14-14-35-1801 Golden Eagle Nest Private 136.00 24 Houston 14-15-28 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.00 25 Houston 14-14-24-100 37.38 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.00 25 Houston 14-14-24-200 80.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.00 25 Houston 14-14-24-300 128.95 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.00 25 Houston 14-14-24-400 200.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.01 26 Houston 14-14-24-100 37.38 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.01 26 Houston 14-14-24-200 80.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.01 26 Houston 14-14-24-300 128.95 Undeveloped EFU23 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.01 26 Houston 14-14-24-400 200.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 138.00 27 Cadle Butte 14-18-0-1805 2236.43 Developed EFU2 Bald Eagle Nest Private 138.00 27 Cadle Butte 14-18-0-2400 548.53 Developed FU2 & F1 Bald Eagle Nest Private 138.00 27 Cadle Butte 14-18-0-2401 5.42 Undeveloped FU2 & F1 Bald Eagle Nest Private 139.00 28 GI Ranch 20-22-0-1300 1754.68 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 139.00 28 GI Ranch 21-22-0-400 1568.47 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 139.00 28 GI Ranch 21-22-0-500 41.81 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 140.00 29 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3300 1388.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 140.00 29 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3700 360.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 140.00 29 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3800 40.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 141.00 30 Prineville 15-16-7 Golden Eagle Nest Private 141.01 31 Prineville 15-16-7 Golden Eagle Nest Private 142.00 32 O?Neil 14-14-21-100 297.95 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 142.00 32 O?Neil 14-14-21-300 221.57 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 143.00 33 O?Neil 14-14-20-100 489.74 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 143.00 33 O?Neil 14-14-20-300 79.14 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 143.00 33 O?Neil 14-14-29-100 93.82 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 143.00 O?Neil 14-14-29-300 Golden Eagle Nest Private 148.00 34 Powell Buttes 16-15-11-800 Golden Eagle Nest Private 148.00 34 Powell Buttes 16-15-18-2100 Golden Eagle Nest Private 148.00 34 Powell Buttes 16-15-7-800 Golden Eagle Nest Private 148.00 34 Powell Buttes 16-15-8-800 Golden Eagle Nest Private 150.00 Alkali Flat 17-17-33 Golden Eagle Nest Private & Public 151.00 35 GI Ranch 21-22-0-600 319.87 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 151.00 35 GI Ranch 21-22-0-700 1445.66 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 151.00 35 GI Ranch 21-22-0-800 360.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 152.00 36 Prairie Hill 16-20-0-1300 2060.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 152.00 36 Prairie Hill 16-20-0-1900 960.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 152.00 36 Prairie Hill 16-20-0-300 7301.50 Developed F-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 155.00 37 O?Neil 14-14-20-100 489.74 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 155.00 37 O?Neil 14-14-20-300 79.14 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 155.00 37 O?Neil 14-14-29-100 93.92 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private - 146 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites -- Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 155.00 O?Neil 14-14-29-300 Golden Eagle Nest Private 158.00 38 Ibex Butte 20-23-0-100 4403.32 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 159.00 39 Ochoco River 14-17-31 Golden Eagle Nest Private 160.00 40 Ochoco River 15-17-12 Golden Eagle Nest Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 20-23-0-200 13455.95 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 21-23-0-200 5514.96 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 21-23-0-500 82.92 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 21-23-0-600 78.98 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 21-23-0-700 238.50 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-35-2800 100 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-35-2902 2.30 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-35-2903 6.45 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-3700 35.42 Undeveloped R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-3701 0.58 Undeveloped R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-5000 15.46 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-5001 12.30 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-5002 1.00 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 2.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 1298.80 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 80.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 458.32 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 811.64 Developed A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-500 38.86 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-600 5.70 Undeveloped SRM-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-601 13.59 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-602 4.00 Undeveloped SRM-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-603 13.58 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-700 1.53 Undeveloped SRM-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-800 3.75 Undeveloped SRM-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-900 1.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 178.00 44 Prineville 15-16-2-200 40.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 44 Prineville 15-16-2-300 18.50 Undeveloped EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 44 Prineville 15-16-2-301 20.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 44 Prineville 15-16-2-400 1.50 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 Prineville 15-16-1-1004 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 Prineville 15-16-1-904 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 Prineville 15-16-1-1000 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 45 Prineville 15-16-2-200 40.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 45 Prineville 15-16-2-300 18.50 Undeveloped EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 45 Prineville 15-16-2-301 20.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 45 Prineville 15-16-2-400 1.50 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public - 147 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites -- Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 178.01 Prineville 15-16-1-1004 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 Prineville 15-16-1-904 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 Prineville 15-16-1-1000 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 46 Prineville 15-16-2-200 40.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 46 Prineville 15-16-2-300 18.50 Undeveloped EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 46 Prineville 15-16-2-301 20.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 46 Prineville 15-16-2-400 1.50 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 Prineville 15-16-1-1004 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 Prineville 15-16-1-904 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 Prineville 15-16-1-1000 Golden Eagle Nest Public 182.00 47 Pilot Butte 17-18-0-500 278.38 Undeveloped EFU-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-100 639.53 Developed EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-300 720.00 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-800 78.19 Developed EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-801 18.91 Developed EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-803 9.32 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-806 79.09 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-807 9.24 Undeveloped Golden Eagle Nest Private 188.00 49 Hardin Ranch 19-23-0-700 4778.71 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 189.00 50 Prineville 14-16-28-200 144.10 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 189.00 50 Prineville 14-16-28-201 5.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 189.00 50 Prineville 14-16-28-400 80.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 189.00 50 Prineville 14-16-28-700 160.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 192.00 51 O?Neil 14-14-21-100 297.95 Developed EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 192.00 51 O?Neil 14-14-21-300 221.57 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 193.00 52 Ochoco River 14-17-36 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 195.00 53 Houston 14-15-19-200 411.63 Developed EFU3 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 200.00 54 Twelvemile River 19-24-0-100 14333.95 Developed Sage Grouse Lek Private 207.00 55 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3300 1388.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 207.00 55 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3501 390.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 207.00 55 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3700 360.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 207.00 55 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3800 40.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-1106 40.00 Undeveloped P-R Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2500 320.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2700 73.08 Undeveloped EFU-1 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2702 721.90 Developed EFU-1 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-3600 440.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-700 10721.49 Developed P-R Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-700 0.00 Developed P-R Prairie Falcon Nest Public 211.00 57 Maupin Butte 17-23-0-700 6120.00 Developed EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 211.00 57 Maupin Butte 17-24-0-1100 167.20 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 212.00 58 Maupin Butte 17-24-0-1200 1619.16 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 212.00 Maupin Butte 16-15-7-800 Sage Grouse Lek Private 214.00 59 Eagle Rock 16-17-31 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 215.00 60 Bowman Dam 17-16-0-100 17299.33 Undeveloped P-R Prairie Falcon Nest Public 217.00 61 Powell Buttes 16-14-12-100 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 217.00 61 Powell Buttes 16-14-12-2100 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 217.00 61 Powell Buttes 16-14-12-300 Prairie Falcon Nest Private - 148 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites -- Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 218.00 62 Brothers SW 19-17-35 Sage Grouse Lek Private 221.00 63 Ochoco River 15-17-20 Bald Eagle Nest Public 229.00 64 Paulina 16-23-0-300 2040.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 375.00 65 Ochoco River 15-17-10 Bald Eagle Roost Private 375.00 65 Ochoco River 15-17-4 Bald Eagle Roost Private 375.00 67 Ochoco River 15-17-3 Bald Eagle Roost Private 375.00 68 Ochoco River 15-17-9 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-100 338.41 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-100 2.52 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-101 0.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-200 36.66 Developed EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-200 89.56 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 379.00 70 Post 16-19-0-100 9647.44 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 379.00 70 Post 16-19-0-2500 291.14 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 379.00 70 Post 16-19-0-700 160.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private Ochoco Butte 13-20-36 Bald Eagle Nest Private & Public BIRD SITE INVENTORY ? ROOSTS: Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites - Roosts Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 107.00 5 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1700 640.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 5 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1800 640.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 5 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1900 10641.24 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 6 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1700 640.0 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 6 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1800 640.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 107.00 6 Drake Butte 17-20-0-1900 10641.24 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private & Public 111.00 7 Mud Spring 15-24-28 Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 15-18-0-100 11837.40 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 15-18-0-1600 320.00 Developed F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 16-18-0-1100 597.60 Undeveloped Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 16-18-0-1200 240.00 Undeveloped Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 16-18-0-132 320.00 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 112.00 8 Pilot Butte 16-18-0-135 1097.85 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 113.00 9 Ochoco River 15-17-5-1000 15.30 Undeveloped EFU-2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 113.00 9 Ochoco River 15-17-5-1000 17.64 Undeveloped EFU-2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 113.00 9 Ochoco River 15-17-5-1100 264.00 Undeveloped EFU-2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 118.00 10 Mud Spring 15-24-0-100 17458.35 Undeveloped FU1 & F1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 118.00 10 Mud Spring 15-24-0-101 160.00 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 118.00 10 Mud Spring 15-24-0-400 200.00 Developed F-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 118.00 10 Mud Spring 15-24-0-401 236.60 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private - 149 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites ? Roosts ? Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 118.00 11 Mud Spring 15-24-0-500 320.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 16-19-0-100 9647.44 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 16-19-0-2600 291.14 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 16-19-0-700 160.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 17-19-0-200 478.78 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 17-19-0-300 599.20 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 123.00 15 Post 17-19-0-301 39.30 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 375.00 65 Ochoco River 15-17-10 Bald Eagle Roost Private 375.00 65 Ochoco River 15-17-4 Bald Eagle Roost Private 375.00 67 Ochoco River 15-17-3 Bald Eagle Roost Private 375.00 68 Ochoco River 15-17-9 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-100 338.41 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-100 2.52 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-101 0.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-200 36.66 Developed EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 376.00 69 Ochoco River 14-17-35-200 89.56 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Roost Private 379.00 70 Post 16-19-0-100 9647.44 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 379.00 70 Post 16-19-0-2500 291.14 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private 379.00 70 Post 16-19-0-700 160.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Roost Private BIRD SITE INVENTORY ? NESTS Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites ? Nests Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 101.00 1 Houston 14-15-20-100 227.17 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.00 1 Houston 14-15-20-400 134.50 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.00 1 Houston 14-15-21-101 253.36 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.00 1 Houston 14-15-21-101 111.10 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.01 2 Houston 14-15-20-100 227.17 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.01 2 Houston 14-15-20-400 134.50 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.01 2 Houston 14-15-21-101 253.36 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.01 2 Houston 14-15-21-101 111.10 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.02 3 Houston 14-15-20-100 227.17 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.02 3 Houston 14-15-20-400 134.50 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.02 3 Houston 14-15-21-101 253.36 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 101.02 3 Houston 14-15-21-101 111.10 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 103.00 4 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-2300 320.00 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 103.00 4 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-2303 613.05 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 103.00 4 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-300 720.00 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 116.00 Hensley Butte 13-16-0-4000 724.50 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Nest Private 116.01 Hensley Butte 13-16-0-4000 724.50 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Nest Private 121.00 13 Foley Butte 12-16-0-100 11849.24 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Nest Private 121.00 13 Foley Butte 12-16-0-400 320.00 Undeveloped F-1 Bald Eagle Nest Private 122.00 14 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-2000 800.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-1106 40.00 Undeveloped P-R Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2500 320.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2700 73.08 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Nest Public - 150 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites ? Nests ? Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2702 721.90 Developed EFU-1 Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-3600 440.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-700 10721.49 Developed P-R Bald Eagle Nest Public 125.00 16 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-700 0.00 Developed P-R Bald Eagle Nest Public 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-105 5.21 Undeveloped R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-1404 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-200 6.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-201 15.08 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-202 1.39 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-203 2.14 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-204 57.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 130.00 21 Houston 14-15-27-205 1.39 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.00 22 O?Neil 14-14-0-1801 78.86 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.00 22 O?Neil 14-14-0-1804 240.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.00 22 O?Neil 14-14-27-100 626.93 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.00 O?Neil 14-14-34-1803 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.01 23 O?Neil 14-14-35-100 319.08 Undeveloped EFU3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.01 23 O?Neil 14-14-35-101 141.13 Undeveloped EFU3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 134.01 O?Neil 14-14-35-1801 Golden Eagle Nest Private 136.00 24 Houston 14-15-28 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.00 25 Houston 14-14-24-100 37.38 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.00 25 Houston 14-14-24-200 80.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.00 25 Houston 14-14-24-300 128.95 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.00 25 Houston 14-14-24-400 200.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.01 26 Houston 14-14-24-100 37.38 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.01 26 Houston 14-14-24-200 80.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.01 26 Houston 14-14-24-300 128.95 Undeveloped EFU23 Golden Eagle Nest Private 137.01 26 Houston 14-14-24-400 200.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 138.00 27 Cadle Butte 14-18-0-1805 2236.43 Developed EFU2 Bald Eagle Nest Private 138.00 27 Cadle Butte 14-18-0-2400 548.53 Developed FU2 & F1 Bald Eagle Nest Private 138.00 27 Cadle Butte 14-18-0-2401 5.42 Undeveloped FU2 & F1 Bald Eagle Nest Private 140.00 29 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3300 1388.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 140.00 29 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3700 360.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 140.00 29 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3800 40.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 141.00 30 Prineville 15-16-7 Golden Eagle Nest Private 141.01 31 Prineville 15-16-7 Golden Eagle Nest Private 142.00 32 O?Neil 14-14-21-100 297.95 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 142.00 32 O?Neil 14-14-21-300 221.57 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 143.00 33 O?Neil 14-14-20-100 489.74 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 143.00 33 O?Neil 14-14-20-300 79.14 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 143.00 33 O?Neil 14-14-29-100 93.82 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 143.00 O?Neil 14-14-29-300 Golden Eagle Nest Private 148.00 34 Powell Buttes 16-15-11-800 Golden Eagle Nest Private 148.00 34 Powell Buttes 16-15-18-2100 Golden Eagle Nest Private 148.00 34 Powell Buttes 16-15-7-800 Golden Eagle Nest Private 148.00 34 Powell Buttes 16-15-8-800 Golden Eagle Nest Private 150.00 Alkali Flat 17-17-33 Golden Eagle Nest Private & Public - 151 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites ? Nests ? Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 152.00 36 Prairie Hill 16-20-0-1300 2060.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 152.00 36 Prairie Hill 16-20-0-1900 960.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 152.00 36 Prairie Hill 16-20-0-300 7301.50 Developed F-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 155.00 37 O?Neil 14-14-20-100 489.74 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 155.00 37 O?Neil 14-14-20-300 79.14 Undeveloped EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 155.00 37 O?Neil 14-14-29-100 93.82 Developed EFU2 Golden Eagle Nest Private 155.00 O?Neil 14-14-29-300 Golden Eagle Nest Private 159.00 39 Ochoco River 14-17-31 Golden Eagle Nest Private 160.00 40 Ochoco River 15-17-12 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-35-2800 100 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-35-2902 2.30 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-35-2903 6.45 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-3700 35.42 Undeveloped R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-3701 0.58 Undeveloped R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-5000 15.46 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-5001 12.30 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 14-15-36-5002 1.00 Developed R-5 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 2.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 0.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 1298.80 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 80.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 458.32 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-300 811.64 Developed A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-500 38.86 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-600 5.70 Undeveloped SRM-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-601 13.59 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-602 4.00 Undeveloped SRM-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-603 13.58 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-700 1.53 Undeveloped SRM-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-800 3.75 Undeveloped SRM-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 173.00 43 Houston 15-15-0-900 1.00 Undeveloped A-A Golden Eagle Nest Private 178.00 44 Prineville 15-16-2-200 40.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 44 Prineville 15-16-2-300 18.50 Undeveloped EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 44 Prineville 15-16-2-301 20.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 44 Prineville 15-16-2-400 1.50 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 Prineville 15-16-1-1004 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 Prineville 15-16-1-904 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.00 Prineville 15-16-1-1000 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 45 Prineville 15-16-2-200 40.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 45 Prineville 15-16-2-300 18.50 Undeveloped EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 45 Prineville 15-16-2-301 20.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 45 Prineville 15-16-2-400 1.50 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public - 152 - Crook County Sensitive Bird Sites ? Nests ? Continued Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 178.01 Prineville 15-16-1-1004 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 Prineville 15-16-1-904 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.01 Prineville 15-16-1-1000 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 46 Prineville 15-16-2-200 40.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 46 Prineville 15-16-2-300 18.50 Undeveloped EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 46 Prineville 15-16-2-301 20.00 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 46 Prineville 15-16-2-400 1.50 Developed EFU-2 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 Prineville 15-16-1-1004 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 Prineville 15-16-1-904 Golden Eagle Nest Public 178.02 Prineville 15-16-1-1000 Golden Eagle Nest Public 182.00 47 Pilot Butte 17-18-0-500 278.38 Undeveloped EFU-1 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-100 639.53 Developed EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-300 720.00 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-800 78.19 Developed EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-801 18.91 Developed EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-803 9.32 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-806 79.09 Undeveloped EFU-3 Golden Eagle Nest Private 186.00 48 Powell Buttes 16-14-0-807 9.24 Undeveloped Golden Eagle Nest Private 189.00 50 Prineville 14-16-28-200 144.10 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 189.00 50 Prineville 14-16-28-201 5.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 189.00 50 Prineville 14-16-28-400 80.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 189.00 50 Prineville 14-16-28-700 160.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 192.00 51 O?Neil 14-14-21-100 297.95 Developed EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 192.00 51 O?Neil 14-14-21-300 221.57 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 193.00 52 Ochoco River 14-17-36 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 195.00 53 Houston 14-15-19-200 411.63 Developed EFU3 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 207.00 55 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3300 1388.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 207.00 55 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3501 390.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 207.00 55 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3700 360.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 207.00 55 Grizzly Mtn 13-15-0-3800 40.00 Undeveloped EFU2 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-1106 40.00 Undeveloped P-R Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2500 320.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2700 73.08 Undeveloped EFU-1 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-2702 721.90 Developed EFU-1 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-3600 440.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-700 10721.49 Developed P-R Prairie Falcon Nest Public 208.00 56 Alkali Flat 17-17-0-700 0.00 Developed P-R Prairie Falcon Nest Public 214.00 59 Eagle Rock 16-17-31 Prairie Falcon Nest Public 215.00 60 Bowman Dam 17-16-0-100 17299.33 Undeveloped P-R Prairie Falcon Nest Public 217.00 61 Powell Buttes 16-14-12-100 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 217.00 61 Powell Buttes 16-14-12-2100 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 217.00 61 Powell Buttes 16-14-12-300 Prairie Falcon Nest Private 221.00 63 Ochoco River 15-17-20 Bald Eagle Nest Public Ochoco Butte 13-20-36 Bald Eagle Nest Private & Public - 153 - BIRD SITE INVENTORY ? LEKS: Crook County Bird Sites - Leks Site No. County No. Quad Map Map Acres Status Zone Species Site Type Landowner 126.00 17 Powell Mtn 16-25-16 Sage Grouse Lek Private 126.01 18 Powell Mtn 16-25-17 Sage Grouse Lek Private 127.00 19 Rabbit Valley 16-20-0-1300 2060.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 127.00 19 Rabbit Valley 16-20-0-1900 950.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 127.00 19 Rabbit Valley 16-20-0-300 7301.50 Developed F-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 128.00 20 West Butte 18-16-0-2800 160.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private & Public 139.00 28 GI Ranch 20-22-0-1300 1754.68 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 139.00 28 GI Ranch 21-22-0-400 1568.47 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 139.00 28 GI Ranch 21-22-0-500 41.81 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 151.00 35 GI Ranch 21-22-0-600 319.87 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 151.00 35 GI Ranch 21-22-0-700 1445.66 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 151.00 35 GI Ranch 21-22-0-800 360.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 158.00 38 Ibex Butte 20-23-0-100 4403.32 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 20-23-0-200 13455.95 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 21-23-0-200 5514.96 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 21-23-0-500 82.92 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 21-23-0-600 78.98 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 171.00 42 GI Ranch 21-23-0-700 238.50 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 188.00 49 Hardin Ranch 19-23-0-700 4778.71 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 200.00 54 Twelvemile River 19-24-0-100 14333.95 Developed Sage Grouse Lek Private 211.00 57 Maupin Butte 17-23-0-700 6120.00 Developed EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 211.00 57 Maupin Butte 17-24-0-1100 167.20 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 212.00 58 Maupin Butte 17-24-0-1200 1619.16 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private 212.00 Maupin Butte 16-15-7-800 Sage Grouse Lek Private 218.00 62 Brothers SW 19-17-35 Sage Grouse Lek Private 229.00 64 Paulina 16-23-0-300 2040.00 Undeveloped EFU-1 Sage Grouse Lek Private (Ordinance No. 124; 5/27/93) WILDLIFE POLICIES 1. All crucial wildlife areas indicated on the inventory map shall be classified as exclusive agriculture, grazing, forest or open space. No major land use change shall be permitted without a conditional use permit. 2. Density within Crucial Wintering Areas for deer shall not be greater than one residence for each 160 acres and for the General Winter Range, not more than one residence for 80 acres, except in the EFU-3 zone in which 40 acres may be allowed per residence. (Ordinance No. 71; 7/28/92) 3. Elk wintering areas shall not have more than one residence per 320 acres. 4. To preserve valuable upland game bird habitat, urban sprawl and scattered residential use on agricultural lands shall be prohibited. - 154 - 5. Channelization and overgrazing of river and stream channels shall be discouraged. 6. Road construction shall not occur except as deemed necessary in crucial deer, elk and antelope wintering areas. Offroad travel shall not be allowed within crucial areas during winter periods. 7. Intensive recreational developments shall not locate within sensitive crucial habitat areas. 8. Habitat of all species indicated as endangered, threatened or vulnerable shall be preserved. Nesting sites of endangered bird species shall be protected and buffered from conflicting uses. 9. The County shall within 120 days of the adoption of Ordinance No. 124 (5/27/93), review and revise, if necessary, the analysis of the economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) consequences of protecting the inventoried bald eagle, golden eagle, prairie falcon nest areas; the inventoried bald eagle roost areas; the sage grouse lek areas submitted by ODFW and to complete the Goal 5 process. The following two statements or policies were also included as part of Ordinance No. 124. It is unclear if there is any validity to them. Section 2 ? Crook County hereby adopts an Interim Protection Policy for the ODFW Inventory of Sensitive Bird Habitat Areas and in compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 5. These sites are attached hereto as Exhibit ?A? and are adopted by this reference and incorporated herein, and are subject to the Sensitive Bird Habitat Combining Zone. Section 3 ? Crook County hereby adopts a Comprehensive Plan Policy to allow a maximum of one hundred and twenty (120) days from the date of this adoption to allow Crook County and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) to review, and amend if necessary, the Goal 5 inventory of bald eagle roosts and sage grouse lek sites submitted by ODFW, and to complete the required Goal 5 program. These sites are attached as Exhibit ?A? to the Sensitive Bird Habitat Verification of Inventory Ordinance. (Ordinance No. 124; 5/27/98) GEOLOGY The general geology of Crook County is almost entirely volcanic in origin. The Clarno and John Day Formations are the most extensive with Columbia River Basalts, Dansforth Mascall Rim Basalts, Deschutes Formations and unconsolidated materials (i.e. alluvial valleys and terraces, etc.) following in decreasing order. General geology interpretations for Crook County have been used to extrapolate the Water Resource-Irrigable Lands Map and the - 155 - Structural Geology-Natural Hazards Map. The most up to date account of the geology of Crook County has been compiled from aerial photo interpretation and geologic mapping. A summary of these major geologic formations is as follows: Alluvium (recent age) - Unconsolidated gravel, sand and silt along streams, channels, floodplains and low terraces. Materials derived from erosion of sediments, and rocks located in the drainage basins. Terrace Alluvium (Pleistocene and Recent Age) -Unconsolidated sand, silt and clay deposits formed by stream or lake processes reworking bedrock materials. The Prineville terrace deposits are up to 300 feet thick. A stratum of gravel ranging between 10 and 30 feet thick at the base of this unit is the most productive ground water source in the area. These gravels are mined at the terrace scarp. Alluvial fan debris, slope wash and pediment materials (Pleisto - and Recent Age) - Poorly sorted and stratified gravel, sand and silt derived from local bedrock. Mode of formation indicates continuing debris flow and sheet flood processes which would be hazardous. Landslide Debris - Unsorted and unstratified mixtures of basalt and tuffaceous sedimentary rocks. The vast majority of landslides are inactive as most movement probably took place during the Pleistocene. However, some slides are still active northeast of Prineville in the Ochoco Mountains.19 Rim Basalts - (Late to Pliocene to Pleistocene) - The basalt flows which rest on top of older geologic units described below (normally less than 100 feet thick). These are the youngest basalt flows of the county. They are prone to sliding on underlying Mascall, Dansforth and Deschutes formations along steep slopes and canyons. Mascall and Dansforth Formations - (Late Miocene to Pliocene Age-Paulina Basin and Deschutes Formation Middle Pliocene Age to Pleistocene- Prineville Basin) ? Poorly consolidated siliceous tuffs, welded tuffs and tuffaceous sediments formed principally by river and lake processes which reworked freshly fallen ash. Up to 300 feet thick. Columbia River Basalt - (Middle Miocene) - Basalt flows which overlie the John Day Formation unconformably. Locally, thin tuff and tuffacious sandstone and siltstone deposits are interbeded with the basalt flows. Flows average 50-100 feet thick but can be up to 800 feet. Extremely prone to sliding on underlying John Day tuffs. 19Lawrence, Oregon State University, 1976 personal communication. - 156 - John Day Formation - (Lower Oligocene to Lower Miocene Age) - Silicic tuffs and tuffacious sediments produced by (1) direct deposition from ash falls and (2) redeposition of ash by wind, shallow streams and sheet wash. These rocks are very unstable on slopes, especially under rimrock basalts and other relatively rigid materials. They are also easily eroded, particularly where vegetation is sparse. This formation is often exposed as a thin band around the Clarno formation. It is unconformable on the Clarno. Silic and andesitic flows and welded tuffs are present in the western part of the county. Clano Formation - (Eocene Age) - Andesitic flows, tuffs and tuffacious sediments, the latter formed by rivers, debris flows and mud flows reworking ash deposits. Erosion continued throughout the period when this unit was developing resulting in minor unconformities. This unit underlies the largest part of the Maury Mountains and the western part of the Ochoco mountains. Structural geology indicates that the Clarno, John Day and Columbia River Basalt formations are all folded on a N.E. trending axis. Good examples are found in the Big Summit Prairie area. Following that event, additional folding occurred and produced E.W. trending structures. These events produced many faults, joints and bedding lineations which are evident on high flight photography. The Geology Map is an interpretation of where these features are in the county. Faults and joints, which are older than 5 million years (before present), have broken up the Columbia River Basalt Formation east of Big Summit Prairie and the Clarno Formation in the south central portion of the county. The latter area has the highest number of fault and joint patterns in the county. The youngest faults and joints are concentrated in the southeast portion of the county in Paulina Basin, the south fork of the Crooked River, north portion of Camp Creek drainage and the Bear Creek drainage south of Prineville Reservoir. These youngest features have been active until very recently (less than 5 million years before present). They are now inactive, stable and pose no hazard problem. Definitions 1. Faulting - Indicated motion has occurred and has produced an offset of geologic formations. 2. Jointing - Indicates no motion has occurred and no offset of geologic formations. 3. Lineaments - Indicates either 1) faulting or jointing patterns, or 2) bedding within geologic formations. Note: Analysis of these structural features indicates that no fault motions or earthquakes should occur in Crook County as all motion of this type has ceased. - 157 - LANDSLIDES Extreme Potential, i.e. active landslides. (Map Unit 012, Structural Geology and Natural Hazards Map, approximately 6,400 acres.) To date, the only historically active landslides in Crook County occur northeast of Prineville in the Ochoco Mountains (vicinity of Wildcat Mountain, Hash Rock and Rooster Rock) and along Crooked River east of Prineville Reservoir. The most common landslide pattern involves rimrock situations where thin basalt flows overlie tuffs and tuffaceous sediments, i.e. Clarno, John Day, Mascall , Dansforth or Deschutes formations. Erosion of the tuffaceous sediments undercuts the basalt flows which then collapse and slide with the underlying sediments. Common indications of active landslides (slope instability) are hummocky terrain with micro-relief in the form of prominent ridges and valleys, distinctive scarps at the head of (and sometimes within) the landslide, random orientation of trees and fence posts and small lakes at heads of rotated blocks. Many of these conditions are also indications of rapid soil creep (downslope movement of soil and rock). Both Clarno and John Day formations have serious soil creep potential especially where thick overburden occurs (Map Unit 620, 624, 630 on Geology Map). Extreme caution should be taken in active landslide areas. Activities, which increase the weight supported by the slide (heavy construction logging), inject water into the formation, undercut the base (road cuts, terracing), or produce vibration (logging activity, road construction, blasting); all these activities may cause these areas to move catastrophically. Very High Potential, i.e. tuffs and tuffaceous sediments of Clarno and John Day formations. (Map Units 620 and 730 respectively, Geology Map, approximately 207,360 acres total and Unit 2 on Structural Geology and Natural Hazards Map.) The major portion of these areas occurs south of Crooked River, east of Prineville Reservoir, up Bear Creek and Camp Creek drainages and northwest of Prineville. These units have a high potential for sheet erosion, gully wash and mud flows during periods of heavy rainfall (cloud bursts); particularly where vegetation is sparse and on steep slopes. They also have serious soil creep potential especially for units with thick overburden or very loosely consolidated sediments (Map Units 620, 630 Geology Map). Badland topography is common for these units. Colloidal clays found in these sediments are thought to be significant contributors to water turbidity in the Prineville Reservoir. These fragile soils can be quickly eroded by any off-road vehicular travel whether it be recreation or construction oriented. Cloudburst Activity. Storm tracks, which normally produce cloudbursts, originate in the southwest and travel across Pine Mountain and Horse Ridge, then through Crook County affecting approximately 325 square miles and into Wheeler County moving in a northeast direction. Prior to 1971-72, storm tracks and resulting cloud burst activity were concentrated in the western portion of Crook County. The Swartz Canyon area, Powell Butte Area and McKay- Mi11 Creek Area were the main location of highest intensity storms. After 1971-72, there was a definite shift in weather patterns and storm activity to the east and to the north. This shift produced maximum intensity cloudbursts, which first struck the Bear Creek Area, then ?jumped? the Maury Mountains to strike the south side of the Ochoco Mountains in the Lookout Mountain- North Fork (Crooked River) area. After that, the storm would jump the remainder of the Ochoco - 158 - Mountains and again strike further to the northeast in the Bridge Creek and West Branch areas of Wheeler County. Instead of jumping the Maury and Ochoco Mountains, storm tracks can split around them hitting the McKay-Mill Creek area and Camp Creek area. The mountains form definite barriers for storm activity; however, they are often hit by lightening strikes which result in forest fire hazards. Storms which generate cloudbursts occur two to three times a year in the Bear Creek area, Lookout Mountain-North Fork area and McKay-Mill Creek area. These areas also record the strongest intensity storms. The normal pattern is 5-10 minute downpours resulting in sediment erosion and deposition at the base of every gully and minor tributary to the major drainages in the area. Often a minimum of 2 to 3 feet of debris covers the roads. Walls of water 10 to 15 feet high have been noted from these rainstorms in the upper stretches of gullies as the soil and bedrock formations are not capable of absorbing the large quantity of water. This water is quickly dissipated when it reaches the alluvial plains (Map Units 002 and 402). The Camp Creek area, Swartz Canyon area and east of the Lookout Mountain-North Fork area have storms of less intensity which occur commonly once every 2 to 3 years. It should be noted that the areas indicated for cloud burst activity coincide with areas marked as high erosion potential because of the predominance of sedimentary tuffs and clays. Very High Potential for Hazard Erosion. Poorly consolidated tuffaceous sediments of the Dansforth, Mascall and Deschutes formations (Map Units 602, 702, 639, 902) possess very high erosion potential. They comprise approximately 21,200 acres, mostly within the southeast portions of the county in the Paulina Basin, and the South Fork of the Crooked River. Small outcrops also occur on rimrock slopes in the Prineville area. Unknown Potential, Inactive Landslides. (Map Unit 012, approximately 64,000 acres.) These formations occur primarily along canyon walls where rimrock basalts overlie weak tuffaceous sediments. The majority are concentrated along rimrock slopes adjacent to the Prineville Valley at the Ochoco and Prineville Reservoirs, and along the upper Crooked River Valley. Isolated inactive landslides occur around Grizzly Mountain, in the Ochoco and Maury Mountains and in southeastern Crook County. These landslides are presently geologically stable and it is unlikely that present climatic and erosional process will reactivate them. However, changes in land use activities could reactivate portions of all of these areas, especially those activities which would increase the weight that is supported by the slide (high density developments), which would inject water into the formation (septic tank drainfields, irrigation or water well leakage), or which might undercut the base (road cuts, terracing, etc.), or vibrations from construction, logging or blasting. Talus and Scree. (Map Units 013, 113, 413.) These areas receive major rock fall debris from surrounding cliffs. The majority are located within the Paulina Basin and southeastern portions of Crook County. Most rimrock slopes and other slopes receive minor rock debris over long periods of time. Generally, cliff retreat within these areas is minimal. However, large - 159 - fractures are common near the edges of the rimrock. These particular areas are potential hazards for disturbance related activities. They also indicate cliff retreat and subsequent long-term talus slope development. Landslide material may incorporate any of that referenced hereinafter. The mechanical action of sliding has broken the formations altering the hydrological characteristics of the original material. In general, the permeability of the slide material is much greater than that of the parent material. Landslide material is also a surficial deposit which allows it to receive recharge from rainfall. Such deposits should yield moderate amounts of water to wells (5 to 15 gpm) when saturated. These formations may, however, present other problems in the form of geologic hazards. Rim Basalts (Excluding Columbia River Basalts - Ter) - These formations are above the regional water table and are not thick enough for water development. Water may be trapped in sufficient quantity for household use on a limited scale, but it is more probable that wells will have to penetrate into deeper strata for water sources. Columbia River Basalts (Only Ter) - When found in sufficient thickness below the water table, this unit is a significant aquifer. The Columbia River Basalt in western Crook County is not an important aquifer. This unit is not thick enough for the development of water and is usually found at elevations above the water table. Where saturated, it may produce enough water to sustain household use (1-8 gpm). In the Ochoco Mountains of the northeast portion of Crook County, the Columbia River Basalt Formation may be a significant aquifer. Here, the formation is located in the major recharge area for the Ochoco and Crooked River drainages and could have substantial water potential. The Columbia River Basalt Formation between Prineville and the Prineville Reservoir cannot be a significant aquifer because there is very limited recharge area. It is likely that wells in this formation are tapping a large perched aquifer or system of perched aquifers as the recharge can only be from precipitation in the immediate vicinity. It is cut off from the major recharge areas of the Maury and Ochoco Mountains. Deschutes, Dansforth and Mascall Formations; John Day Formation; Clarno Formation; and Pre-Tertiary Formations - These formations can be grouped together because they are all poor aquifers. They consist of fine-grained sediments, tuffs, and volcanic materials which cover the bulk of Crook County. Wells drilled in these formations characteristically produce small yields, 1 to 8 gpm, and are often dry. Occasionally a more permeable zone may be encountered, but the water stored in such zones will be limited. Perched water tables are the rule rather than the exception. NATURAL DISASTERS AND HAZARD AREAS The physical properties of the major geologic units have been used to identify areas which have high potential for erosion, mass movement or other natural disaster and hazard situations related to bedrock geology. Areas, which have a potential for damaging land and/or property, are rated on a relative scale as to degree of hazard present. Refer to Development Limitations Chapter III, and Structural Geology and Natural Hazards Map. - 160 - SOIL CAPABILITY CLASSES The Soil Conservation Service has developed the following description of soil capability class: ?The capability classification is a grouping that shows, in a general way, how suitable soils are for most kinds of farming. It is a practical grouping based on limitations of the soils, the risk of damage when they are used, and the way they respond to treatment? (Page 11, Prineville Area Soil Survey). The S.C.S. has defined eight capability classes which are generally described as follows (Pg. 11 & 12, Prineville Area Soil Survey): ?Class I : Soils that have few limitations that restrict their use. No soils in the Prineville Area are in this class. Class II : Soils that have some limitations that reduce the choice of plants or require moderate conservation practices... Class III : Soils that have severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants, or require special conservation practices, or both... Class IV : Soils that have very severe limitations that restrict the choice of plants, require very special management, or both... Class V : Soils that are subject to little or no erosion but have other limitations, impractical to remove, that limit their use largely to pasture, range, woodland, or wildlife... Class VI : Soils with severe limitations that make them generally unsuitable for cultivation and that limit their use largely to pasture or range, woodland, or wildlife and cover... Class VII : Soils with very severe limitations that make them unsuitable for cultivation without major reclamation and that restrict their use largely to range, woodland, or wildlife... Class VIII : Soils and land forms that have limitations that preclude their use for commercial plant production and restrict their use to recreation, wildlife, water supply, mining, or aesthetic purposes...? Soils that are of S.C.S. class I- IV are usually deep, well drained and on the gentle slopes of the floodplains and terraces of the Crooked River and its major tributaries. These lands are productive for irrigated crops. - 161 - Those soils of S.C.S. classes V-VIII are generally shallow, have drainage problems, and commonly occur in steep and rocky areas. These lands are limited in use to pasture, range, woodland, wildlife habitat, watershed, and recreation areas. For detailed descriptions of soils, see individual soil survey reports. The soil maps show those areas in the county which have the best soils for agriculture (generally class A - S.C.S. classes I-IV). When correlated with existing land use and other factors, the information can help direct growth relative to the preservation of agricultural lands. S.C.S capability classes can also be used to determine the location of pasture and grazing lands. Soil surveys have not been conducted to the level of accuracy necessary to determine soil capabilities within small individual tax lots except for that area covered by the Prineville Area Soil Survey. The General Soils Map for the County does not separate either individual soil types or classifications, nor, due to its general nature, does it distinguish good rangeland areas. The Septic Tank Suitability Maps and the Detailed Soils Maps were extrapolated from soil interpretations; other information which could be extrapolated includes number of acres covered by each soil, percentage of land covered by each soil, depth of soils, parent material, landform descriptions, etc. The soil information and maps have been compiled using photo interpretation and information found in the Prineville Area Soil Survey, the Trout Creek Area Soil Survey and the Bear Creek Soil Survey. RANGELANDS Rangelands are those areas of the county which, by reasons of physical limitations, low and/or erratic precipitation, rough topography, poor drainage, restrictive soils, or extreme temperatures, are unsuited to cultivation. Rangelands are a source of forage for free ranging native and domestic animals, as well as a source of wood products, water and wildlife. Rangeland resources may be described as follows: 1. Grazing in Ochoco National Forest Lands - The Ochoco National Forest is divided into 63 grazing allotments, or herd units, which vary in size from 40 to 60,000 acres throughout the Prineville, Big Summit and Paulina Ranger Districts. Approximately 63 grazing permits are issued by the U. S. Forest Service on Ochoco National Forest lands. An estimated 8,452 head of cattle and 4,550 head of sheep consume 39,611 A.U.M?s of forage during the three to four month grazing season. Appendix I contains a computation chart used by the Forest Service for A.U.M?s consumed by livestock. Within the Ochoco National Forest and Crooked River National Grasslands, approximately 733,281 acres are in a suitable range condition, 96,496 acres unsuitable and 19,700 acres administratively closed to grazing. No acreage estimates are available for private lands. However, statistics can be developed if detailed information is needed in the future. 2. Grazing on B.L.M. Lands - The B.L.M. manages a total of 511,341 acres in Crook County. All B.L.M. lands are under range management. There are 96 B.L.M. allotments; 61 in the Prineville unit, and 35 in the Upper Crooked River Unit. - 162 - The Grazing Allotment Map outlines Crook County?s grazing allotment boundaries. The map indicates that the ranch economy of Crook County is economically tied to the grazing allotments and management practices of the public lands. MULTIPLE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Multiple resource management implies (simultaneous) utilization of rangeland resources to result in a harmonious combination of the variety and uses of products the land is capable of yielding on a sustained basis. Uses include livestock grazing, recreation, wildlife, watershed, and wood products (forest production). Multiple resource management does not necessarily imply all uses being made simultaneously on one localized site. Management to promote dominant use of rangeland for special purposes may be required for specific locations when compatible with land capability. However, multiple products and uses should be the output for extensive areas of rangeland. FOREST LANDS The purpose of forestry background data and resource maps is to describe the general location of commercial forest resources and forest types within Crook County (maps developed by using O.S.U. aerial photographic interpretations and U.S.F.S. data); to describe and give examples of the level of detail which other agencies involved with commercial forest lands have at present, and to identify applicable management plans in use and those under review by U.S. Forest Service, State Forestry and B.L.M. A general view of the county?s forest resources has been obtained from vegetation land use interpretations of high flight photography (O.S.U., 1973). No distinctions have been made in the vegetation interpretations between commercial and non-commercial forest lands. The majority of the commercial forest lands generally occur within the Ponderosa Pine, Douglas Fir, and mixed Conifer types with very little acreage in the Lodgepole Pine and Spruce-Fir types. Non-commercial forest lands are generally located in the Juniper types, Savanna like vegetation and meadows. The Private/Commercial Forests and Forest Types Map shows general forest types and the private/public forest lands. The General Vegetation Land Use Map indicates general county-wide vegetation/land use. Vegetation types are broadly classified into ?rangeland? (juniper, sage, grasses), ?forest? (ponderosa pine, douglas fir, mixed conifer, lodgepole, spruce and meadow/marsh), ?agricultural? (field crops, pasture, non-producing), ?cultural?, and ?miscellaneous? (urban, water, barren lands) on the Vegetation Land Use Map. The major forest resources occur in the Ochoco and Maury Mountains and in the lower southeast corner of the county. Agriculture lands occupy the Prineville alluvial valley and terraces and Paulina Basin with small acreages following major stream channels. Rangelands cover the remainder of the land. It should be noted that almost all of the forest and agriculture area are used extensively for the grazing of livestock. Vegetation land use is used to extrapolate general boundaries for the forest resource of the Ochoco and Maury Mountains on the basis of tree species. It also is used to extrapolate - 163 - estimates for agriculture and rangelands for the county, excluding the overlap of range into forested lands. Detailed vegetation land use mapping is available through the U. S. Forest Service, BLM and State Forestry. Commercial Forest Lands Public Lands - The U. S. Forest Service manages 443,870 acres of land in Crook County. Approximately 68% of this land is classified as commercial forest and 18% as non-commercial forest. This accounts for approximately 80% of all commercial forest lands located in the county, more than 90% of the volume of saw timber cut, and slightly less than 90% of the timber growing stock. The remainder of the commercial forest land is either under private ownership/management and protected (fire) by State Forestry, or under BLM management. Appendix II is a statistical summary of the national forest lands located in Crook County. Total acreages of the Ochoco National Forest are also included for reference. The total value of timber receipts for FY 1976 returned to Crook County from the Ochoco National Forest lands was $1,020,247.42, or slightly more than half of all timber receipts generated on the whole national forest. During the year, 137,805 MBF of timber were cut, of which 133,414 MBF were sold. The BLM managed 511,341 acres of land in Crook County of which 11,225 acres are classified as productive (commercial) timber land; 99,000 acres as non-productive (non- commercial) timber land; and remaining is classified as non-forest land. The majority of the productive (commercial) forest land is located in the Ochoco Mountains adjacent to the National forest in the northeast section of the county. Minor acreages occur in the Maury Mountains and on Grizzly Mountain. At present, the land classified as non-productive (non-commercial) timber consists of juniper stands which produce at least 20 cu. ft./ac/yr of timber. This volume is enough to classify this land as commercial timber; however, there is no present demand (market) for it other than for firewood and for one sawmill. These non-productive areas are concentrated in the southeast portion of the county, i.e. upper fork of the Crooked River, and Camp Creek north of the G.I. Ranch area. Private Timber Lands - Privately owned timber lands are protected against fire damage by the Oregon Forestry Department (District 10). In addition, the State Forestry Department also regulates private industry timber practices under the ?Forest Practices Act?, and does consulting for small timber producers concerning management practices. The State Forestry Department protects 164,666 acres of private timber land. Of this, approximately 106,077 acres are classified as Class II or commercial forest and 58,589 acres of Class III or non-commercial forest land (ORS 526.324 Classification). BLM is contracted to protect 9,091 acres of commercial land and 17,803 acres of grazing lands. The majority of privately owned timber land is located adjacent to the Ochoco National Forest west of Lookout Mountain. Minor acreages are located adjacent to all parts of the National Forest. This data should be viewed as a very general guide to private forest location and condition as neither the Tax Commission nor the State Forestry Department has the need to update the original timber mapping which was done in 1959 (information from State Forestry Department). - 164 - Detailed Inventories of Forest Lands (U.S. Forest Service) - The total resource information system (TRI) is being used on the Ochoco National Forest for storage of detailed resource information and is available at the office of the Ochoco National Forest. The forest is divided into areas, or TRI ?compartments? which have been, or, are in the process of being, inventories using uncontrolled mosaics for base maps. Timber types, plant community ecoclasses, soils, wildlife resource areas, streams, recreation sites, and other resource information are all depicted on overlays. Information on individual map units, or ?cells?, within these ?compartments? are stored in computers and microfilm files. Stream side management units, foreground retention units, range parameters, wildlife data, and certain other types of information are not presently stored in the computer files. Statistics have not been broken out for these particular resources in Crook County. However, most of this information can be extrapolated and developed manually from original data if needed for future studies. Summaries of Timber Class Distribution for the Ochoco National Forest and of national forest acreages for Crook County are included in the Appendix of this plan. The following resource information established many of the natural constraints used for management plans on the Ochoco National Forest: 1. Timber Resource Inventory - The National Forest was classified into 12 silvicultural management groups for the draft environmental statement of the Timber Management Plan. These groups were recombined for mapping and may be seen on the Private/ Commercial Forests and Forest Types Map. 2. Plant Community Ecoclass Inventory (Hall, 1973). Plant community descriptions are organized by similarity between dominant plants and environments. All meadow types are grouped together; low elevation communities are grouped by grass, shrub, and tree dominance and forest communities are organized roughly by elevational occurrence and by similarity in dominant trees. Lastly, non-forested alpine openings are listed. The basis for land and natural resource management guidelines are included in data related to general environment, soils, and dominant vegetation types. This information is the basis for management decisions, including range condition and trend guides, silviculture guides, forest stockability guides, and vegetation response to management guides. Productivity information was applied to the two TRI compartments which cover the east end of the Maury Mountains. Land, which has the potential for commercial timber production, is presently classified as commercial timber land. The soil land types mapped for the Ochoco National Forest are correlated with plant community types. This provides the potential productivity of land for commercial timber (see forest background data for advanced soil maps and tables). Definitions - Commercial Forest Land 1. Commercial forest lands are those lands capable of producing crops of marketable wood products and are not withdrawn from this use by statute or administrative regulation. Commercial forests can be managed to generally produce in excess of - 165 - an annual growth of 20 cubic feet per acre of marketable lumber. This includes accessible and potentially accessible land and operable and potentially operable area. 2. Non-commercial forest lands - Non-commercial forest land is land incapable of producing 20 cubic feet per acre per year of industrial wood products. 3. Non-forest land - Non-forest land is land that has never supported forests and lands formerly forested but now developed for such non forest uses as crops, improved pasture and residential areas. 4. Potential yield - The maximum sustained yearly cutting level attainable with intensive forestry practices. 5. Productivity classes - Productivity classes refer to general land productivity as a function of fertility and moisture availability. Productivity is referred to as site class or site index in the U.S.F.S. technical literature. 6. Sustained yield (as defined in Multiple Use Act) - Sustained yield of the several products and services means the achievement and maintenance of perpetuity of a high level annual or regular periodic output of the various renewable resources of the National Forest without impairment of productivity of the land. 7. ORS 526.324 Classification of Forest Land - All forest lands within the county fall into one of the following classes: (a) Class 1 - Timber class, includes all forest land primarily suitable for the production of timber (none in Crook County); (b) Class 2 - Timber and grazing class, includes all forest land primarily suitable for joint use for timber production and the grazing of livestock, as a permanent or semi-permanent joint use, or as a temporary joint use during the interim between logging and reforestation; (c) Class 3 - Agricultural class, includes all forest land primarily suitable for grazing and other agricultural use. Proposed Forest Management Practices Ochoco National Forest - Overall management direction for Ochoco National Forest is contained in the Forest Land Management Plan. A Draft Environmental Statement of a revised Timber Management Plan is to be issued in late 1978. The Timber Management Plan contains specific direction as to how timber resources will be managed. The 5 year Timber Action Plan (updated annually) is based upon the objectives of the Timber Management Plan. BLM Forest Lands - Initial timber resource inventories and statistical data are being worked into a draft environmental statement and management program which will be completed in the early 1980?s. At present, the Organic Act of 1976 is the legal directive for management programs administered by the BLM. Insert Map Septic Tank Suitability Insert Map Septic Tank Suitability Insert Map Physical Limitations Insert Map Structural Geology and Natural Hazards Insert Map Slope/Soil Composite Insert Map Irrigation Suitability: Water Resources Insert Map Oil : Geothermal : Mineral : Quarry Insert Map Wildlife Resources Insert Map Geology - 175 - GEOLOGY MAP LEGEND DIGITAL MAP UNIT THICKNESS OF UNCONSOLIDATED MATERIAL 3 AERIAL MAP UNIT RECONNAISSANCE GEOLOGIC MAP UNIT 2 GEOLOGIC AGE 2 AND FORMATION 10? 10? Unknown A. Unconsolidated Materials Floodplain Alluvium Qa Recent to Pleistocene 000 100 400 Terrace Alluvium Qt Recent to Pleistocene 001 Alluvial Fan/Bajada Gr. Qf, Qg Recent to Pleistocene 002 105 402 Undiff. Valley & Plain Qa, Qt Recent to Pleistocene 009 409 Landslides Q1 Recent to Pleistocene 012 412 Talus & Scree Qs Recent to Pleistocene 013 113 413 Lakebeds Qia, Qp Recent to Pleistocene 020 Evaporites Qia, Qp Recent to Pleistocene 021 121 421 Aeolian Ash Qw Recent to Pleistocene 030 130 THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN B. Consolidated Materials 6? ? 10? 18? UNKNOWN Tuffacious Sediments (poorly consolidated) QTts, Qts Deschutes Fm. (Pliocene- Pleistocene) Mascall- Dansforth Fm. (Pliocene) 602 702 692 Intermediate: Andesitic/Tuffs Tct Clarno Fm. (Eocene- Oligocene) 620 720 Tuffacious Sediments Anedsitic/Basaltic Vent Material Tjwv John Day Fm. (Oligocene- Miocene) 621 Andesite Flows Tcf, Tjf, Ta Clarno Fm./John Day Fm. 622 Andesitic & Frag. Rocks Tc Clarno Fm. 624 - 176 - DIGITAL MAP UNIT THICKNESS OF OVERBURDEN AERIAL MAP UNIT RECONNAISSANCE GEOLOGIC MAP UNIT 2 GEOLOGIC AGE 2 AND FORMATION 6 ? 10? 18? UNKNOWN Silicic: Silicic Tuffs & Tuffaceous Sed. Tjr, Tt John Day Fm. 630 730 Silicic Vent Materials Otsv Pleistocene to Tertiary 631 Silicic Flows Tjr, Tr John Day 632 732 Silicic Welded Tuffs Twr, Tjw, Ttw John Day 633 733 Undifferentiated Silicic Rocks Tj John Day 639 Basaltic: Basaltic Vent Materials QTbv, Qtbv, Tbvt, Tbv, Tcnmc Rim Basalts (Pleistocene) 640 740 Basalt Flows Qtb, Tbt, Tb, Tcr Columbia River Basalt (Miocene) 642 742 Intrusives: Andestic Rock Tmi, Tcmr 763 963 Silic Rock Tsi 664 964 Undifferentiated: Pre-Tertiary 690 Welded Tuffs & Sediments PT Insert Map Soils (Map Unit (morphology) and General Capability) - 178 - Legend for Soils (Map Unit Morphology) and General Capability Map Soil Association, Description, and Component Soils Symbol la. Powder-Courtrock Association: Deep and moderately deep, medium textured soils on floodplains. Alkaline soils occur in some poorly drained areas. Powder loam, Courtrock sandy loan, Metolius sandy loam, Veazie sandy loam, Polly loam. lb. Calabar-Damon Association: Poorly and somewhat poorly drained, medium and fine textured soils, some of which are alkaline. Calabar silt loam, Damon silty clay loam, Crooked sandy loam, Boyce silty clay loam, Ontko silty clay loam. 2. Ochoco-Prineville Association: Moderately deep, medium textured soils, with partially cemented pans, on old alluvial terraces. Ochoco sandy loam, Prineville sandy loam, Hack loam, Courtrock sandy loam. 3a. Ayres-Nouque Association: Shallow and moderately deep, medium textured, gravelly soils with strongly cemented pans, on slightly dissected alluvial fans. Ayres sandy loam, Nouque silt loam, Deschutes sandy loam, Shev loamy sand, Salisbury clay loam, Gribble cobbly loam. 3b. Ayres-Nouque Association (dissected): Similar to 3a, but moderately to strongly dissected. 4a. Deschutes-Arron-Redmond Association: Shallow, very shallow and moderately deep, medium textured soils, some of which are stony, on nearly level to gently rolling older lava flows. Deschutes sandy loam, Arron sandy loam, Redmond sandy loam, Deskamp loamy sand, Gosney very stony loamy sand, Bakeoven very cobbly loam, Rockland. - 179 - 4b. Deschutes-Gosney Association: Similar to 4a, but on rolling, moderately dissected terrain. Deschutes sandy loam, Gosney very stony loamy sand, Bakeoven very cobbly loam. 4c. Deschutes-Redmond Association: Shallow and moderately deep, medium and coarse textured soils in nearly level and concave areas of younger lava flows. Bare rock predominates on convex portions. Deschutes sandy loam, Redmond sandy loam, Bakeoven very cobbly loam, Rockland. 4d. Deskamp-Arron-Gosney Association: Similar to 4c, but bare rock predominates. Deskamp loamy sand, Arron sandy loam, Gosney very stony loamy sand, Rockland, Deschutes loamy sand. 5. Roba-Fopiano Association: Shallow and moderately deep, medium textured soils in gently rolling terrain formed from soft sedimentary rocks. Roba loam, Fopiano silty clay loam, Marsden silt loam. 6a. Ruckles-Anawalt Association: Very shallow and shallow, stony and very stony soils, many of which have clayey subsoils, on gently rolling to nearly level volcanic plateaus. Ruckles very stony silt loam, Anawalt stony silt loam, Bakeoven very cobbly loam, Olson stony loam. 6b. Anawalt-Ruckles-Lookout Association: Similar to 6a, but on rolling, somewhat dissected topography. Anawalt stony silt loam, Ruckles very stony silt loam, Lookout stony silt loam, Bakeoven very cobbly loam, Olson stony loam, Rockland. 6c. Anawalt-Ruckles-Rarey Association: Similar to 6a, but on steeply rolling, dissected topography. Anawalt stony silt loam, Ruckles very stony silt loam, Rarey loam, Rockley very cobbly loam, Bakeoven very cobbly loam, Rockland. 7a. Simas-Ginser-Tub Association: Moderately deep, shallow and deep clayey soils, on moderately dissected rolling terrain. Simas cobbly silty clay loam, Ginser very stony loam, Tub silt loam, Day clay, Prag very stony loam, Soft sedimentary rocks. - 180 - 7b. Simas-Tub-Soft Sedimentary Rock Association: Similar to 7a, but with numerous exposures of unconsolidated rock. Simas cobbly silty clay loam, Tub silt loam, Soft sedimentary rocks, Ginser very stony loam, Day clay, Prag very stony loam, Rockland. 8a. Anawalt-Merlin Association: Shallow and moderately deep clayey soils in steeply rolling, dissected terrain. Moderately deep, loamy soils occur on north slopes and in concave places. Rock outcrops are common. Anawalt stony silt loam, Merlin very stony loam, Rarey loam. 8b. Venator-Izee Association: Shallow, moderately deep and deep, medium textured soils on rolling terrain of strongly folded older rocks. Ventor shaly loam, Izee shaly loam, Rarey loam, Utley shaly loam. 9a. Simas -Tub-Ginser Association: Shallow and moderately deep, stony and very stony, medium and fine textured soils predominate. Moderately deep, stone-free, medium textured soils occur on some north slopes. Steeply rolling, dissected terrain predominates, and rock outcrops are common. Simas cobbly silty clay loam, Tub silt loam, Ginser very stony loam, Gem very stony loam, Prag very stony loam, Rarey loam, Curant silt loam, Rockland. 9b. Prag-Tub-Rarey Association: Similar to 9a, but north slopes make up +25% of the area. Prag very stony loam, Tub silt loam, Rarey loam, Ginser very stony loam, Simas cobbly clay loan. 9c. Searles-Elmore-Simas Association: Shallow, moderately deep and deep, stony, medium texture soils in steeply rolling and mountainous terrain underlain by rhyolite. Searles very stony loam, Elmore very stony loam, Simas cobbly silty clay loam, Tub silt loam, Lickskillet very stony loam, Rockland, Deskamp loamy sand. 10. Anatone-Klicker-Hall Ranch Association: A complex landscape consisting predominately of very shallow, stony and very stony, sparsely vegetated soils on nearly level to rolling plateaus. Moderately deep and deep, medium textured, timbered soils occur on north slopes and in canyons. Anatone very stony loam, Klicker very stony silt loam, Hall Ranch stony loam, Tolo silt loam, Snell very stony loam. - 181 - 11. Klicker-Hall Ranch-Anatone Association: A complex landscape consisting predominantly of moderately deep and deep, medium textured, timbered soils; with sparsely vegetated, very shallow and stony soils on south facing slopes. Klicker very stony silt loam, Anatone very stony loam, Hall Ranch stony loam, Tolo silt loam, Snell very stony loam. 12a. Hankins-Hankton Association: Moderately deep and deep, fine-textured, timbered soils in moderately dissected, rolling terrain, primarily above 500 feet elevation. Hankins cobbly loam, Hankton cobbly silt loam, Boardtree gravelly loam, Yawkey gravelly loam. 12b. Boardtree-Yawkey-Hankins Association: Similar to 12a, but north slopes predominate. Boardtree gravelly loam, Yawkey gravelly loam, Hankins cobbly loan, Hankton cobbly silt loam. 13a. Hankton-Hankins-Klicker Association: Moderately deep and deep, medium and fine- textured, stony, timbered soils in steeply rolling, dissected terrain. South slopes may have shallow, stony soils and lack timber. Hankton cobbly silt loam, Hankins cobbly loam, Klicker very stony silt loam, Ginser very stony loam, Yawkey gravelly loam, Snell very stony loam, Anatone very stony loam, Rockland. 13b. Hankton-Klicker-Ginser Association: Similar to 13a, but south slopes predominate. Hankton cobbly silt loam, Klicker very stony silt loam, Ginser very stony loam, Snell very stony loam, Anatone very stony loam, Rockland. 13c. Hall Ranch-Daxty Association: Shallow and moderately deep, gravelly, loamy soils on a strongly dissected plateau. Hall Ranch stony loam, Daxty very stony loam, Anatone very stony loam. 14a. Boardtree-Whistler Association: Moderately deep and deep, medium textured, timbered soils formed from volcanic ash over a variety of buried soils, primarily on north slopes above 4500 feet elevation. Boardtree gravelly loam, Whistler sandy loam, Yawkey gravelly loam, Hankins cobbly loam. - 182 - 14b. Hankins-Hankton-Boardtree Association: A mixture of units 14a and 13b. Hankins cobbly loam, Hankton cobbly silt loam, Boardtree gravelly loam, Klicker very stony silt loam, Yawkey gravelly loam, Ginser very stony loam, Snell very stony loam. 15a. Lickskillet-Rockland Association: Very steep, shallow and moderately deep, stony and rocky soils predominate. Canyons with more than 500 feet of local relief. Lickskillet very stony loam, Rockland, Bakeoven very cobbly loam, Lookout stony silt loam, Simas cobbly silty clay loam, Tub silt loam. 15b. Simas-Tub-Rockland Association: Similar to 15a, but includes areas of more gentle relief resulting from landslides. Simas cobbly silty clay loam, Tub silt loam, Rockland, Lookout stony silt loam, Gem very stony loam. Component soils are listed in order of decreasing importance. Crook County, Oregon NASA Flight 72-114 1:120,000 Insert Map Soil Type Capability ? Prineville Valley Area - 184 - SOIL TYPE CAPABILITY MAP LEGEND Soil Capability of General Soils of Crook County Study (O.S.U.) (For detailed description of soils, see Prineville Area Soil Survey) UNIT SYMBOL PERCENT SCS CAPABILITY CLASS % CLASS A (SCS I-IV) % CLASS B (SCS V,VI) % CLASS C (SCS VII, VIII) 1a 94 II 6 III 100 0 0 1b 32 III 12 IV 56 V 44 56 0 2 100 II 100 0 0 3a, 3b 58 II 8 III 34 VI 66 34 0 4a 46 II 10 III 31 VI 4 VII 9 VIII 56 31 13 4b 65 IV 35 VII 6 0 35 4c 74 II 13 VII 13 VIII 74 0 26 4d 40 III 25 VI 20 VII 15 VIII 40 25 35 5 100 VI 0 100 0 6a 100 VII 0 0 100 6b 12 VI 86 VII 2 VIII 0 12 88 6c 14 VI 77 VII 9 VIII 0 14 86 7a 70 VI 25 VII 5 VIII 0 70 30 7b 50 VI 31 VII 19 VIII 0 50 50 8a 20 VI 80 VII 0 20 80 8b 100 VI 0 100 0 8c 100 VI 0 100 0 - 185 - UNIT SYMBOL PERCENT SCS CAPABILITY CLASS % CLASS A (SCS I-IV) % CLASS B (SCS V,VI) % CLASS C (SCS VII, VIII) 9a 55 VI 40 VIII 5 VIII 0 55 45 9b 57 VI 43 VII 0 57 43 9c 3 III 33 VI 61 VII 3 VIII 3 33 64 10 5 V 95 VII 0 5 95 11 20 V 80 VII 0 20 80 12a 100 VII 0 0 100 12b 100 VII 0 0 100 13a 95 VII 5 VIII 0 0 100 13b 92 VII 8 VIII 0 0 100 13c 100 VII 0 0 100 14a 25 V 75 VII 0 25 75 14b 7 V 90 VII 3 VIII 0 7 93 15a 10 III 15 VI 50 VII 25 VIII 10 15 75 15b 67 VI 8 VII 25 VIII 0 67 33 - 186 - BEAR CREEK SOIL SURVEY (EXCERPT) (For a detailed description of soils, see Bear Creek Soil Survey) MAP UNIT SCS SOIL CAPABILITY CLASS SOILS CLASS FOR LEGEND MAP UNIT SCS SOIL CAPABILITY CLASS SOILS CLASS FOR LEGEND 94 D VIII C 151 B VI B 94 E VIII C 151 C VI B 96 CS VIII C 151 CS VII C 96 D VIII C 151 D VI B 96 DS VIII C 151 DS VII B 96 E VIII C 151 ES VII C 96 ES VIII C 154 B VI B 105 C VII C 154 C VI B 114 B VII C 154 CS VII C 114 C VII C 154 D VI B 114 DS VII C 154 DS VII C 116 B IV A 154 ES VII C 116 BS VI B 155 C VI B 116 C IV A 155 CS VII C 116 DS VI B 162 B IV A 118 B IV A 162 C IV A 118 C IV A 162 CS VII C 118 CS VI B 162 D IV A 118 D IV A 162 DS VII C 130 D VI B 162 E IV A 130 DS VI B 171 A VI B 133 C VI B 171 B VI B 133 CS VI B 171 C VI B 133 D VI B 171 CS VII C 133 DS VII C 171 D VI B 133 E VI B 171 DS VII C 133 ES VII C 171 ES VII C 150 C VI B 172 C VI B 150 CS VII C 172 CS VII C 150 D VI B 172 DS VII C 150 DS VII C 172 ES VII C 150 ES VII C 173 C VI B 173 DS VII C 175 B IV A 175 A IV A - 187 - TROUT CREEK SOIL SURVEY (EXCERPT) (Soils within Crook County only) (For a detailed description of soils, see Trout Creek Soil Survey) MAP UNIT SCS SOIL CAPABILITY CLASS SOILS CLASS FOR LEGEND MAP UNIT SCS SOIL CAPABILITY CLASS SOILS CLASS FOR LEGEND AgC IV A LaC IB A BaC VII C LcE VII C ByF VII C MaC IV A CrB IV A MbE VII C CtE VI B McD IV A CtF VII C MtB IV A DeE VI B Mx III A DoE VI B SeF VII C ErB IV A SlE VI B ErE VI B SmF VII C GnF VII C Wd II A GrD VI B - 188 - SOILS MORPHOLOGY, DEPTH, SLOPE % AREA AND ASSOCIATION MAP UNIT (MORPHOLOGY) DEPTH (INCHES) SLOPE (% GRADE) % AREA SOIL ASSOCIATION 1a Floodplain terrace 60+ 0 ? 3 3.3 Powder-Courtrock (loam) 1a Floodplain 40 ? 60 0 ? 3 1.3 Calabar ? Damon 1b Terrace 10 ? 20 7 ? 12 2 Ochoco-Prineville Sandy Loam 2 Alluvial Fans 10 ? 20 12 ? 20 4.5 Ayres-Nouque Deschutes (Sandy Loam) 3 Alluvial Fans (Slightly Dissected) 20 ? 40 12 ? 20 2.1 Desckamp-Arron-Gosney (Loamy Sand) 3 Alluvial Fans (Slightly Dissected) 20 ? 40 12 ? 20 0.8 Deschutes-Redmond Bakeoven (Cobbly Sandy Loam) 4a Lava Flows 20 ? 40 12 ? 20 4 Deschutes-Arron-Redmond (Sandy Loam) 4b Lava w/ rolling moderately dissected terrain 20 ? 40 12 ? 20 4 Deschutes-Arron-Redmond (Sandy Loam) 4c w/ lava ridges 20 ? 40 12 ? 20 4 Deschutes-Gosney (8a) 4d Lava, Barerock predom 20 ? 40 12 ? 20 0.4 Deschutes-Gosney (8a) 5 Rolling Topo 20 ? 40 20 ? 35 2.5 Roba-Fopiano (loam) 6a Volcanic Plateaus Gently Rolling 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 5 Simas-Ginser-Tub Silt 6b Volcanic Plateaus Rolling, Dissected 4.7 (Gravel-Clay-Siloon) 6c Volcanic Plateaus Steeply Dissected 35 ? 60 Simas-Tub Silt Sed Rx (Silt Loam) 7a Mod. Dissected Rolling 35 ? 60 Simas-Tub Silt Sed Tx (Silt Loam) 7b Mod. Dissected Rolling Unconsolidated Rock Outcrops 8a Steeply Rolling Dissected Terrain (Rock Outcrop common) 10 ? 20 35 ? 60 7 Ruckles-Anawait (Stony Silty Loam) 8a Steeply Rolling Dissected Terrain (Rock Outcrop common) 20 ? 40 12 ? 20 0.4 Deschutes Gosney (Sandy Loam) 8b Steeply Rolling Dissected Terrain (Rock Outcrop common) 10 ? 20 35 ? 60 7.4 Anawait-Ruckles Lookout (Stony Silty Loam) 8c Steeply Rolling Dissected Terrain (Rock Outcrop common) 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 4.7 Anawait-Ruckles-Rarey 8c Steeply Rolling Dissected Terrain (Rock Outcrop common) 10 ? 20 20 ? 35 2.7 Anawait-Merlin-Rarey - 189 - MAP UNIT (MORPHOLOGY) DEPTH (INCHES) SLOPE (% GRADE) % AREA SOIL ASSOCIATION 9a Steep Rolling Dissected Terrain Rock Outcrop common 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 12.0 Simas-Tub Silt-Ginser (Gravel Clay silty loam) 9a Steep Rolling Dissected Terrain Rock Outcrop common 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 0.9 Venator-Izee-Rarey (Shaley Loam) 9a Steep Rolling Dissected Terrain Rock Outcrop common 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 0.9 Venator-Izee 9b Steep Rolling Dissected Terrain Rock Outcrop common North slopes - 25% 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 1.3 Prag-Tub Silt-Rarey (Very stony-silty loam) 9c Steep Rolling Dissected Terrain 20 ? 40 12 ? 20 0.4 Deschutes-Gosney 9c Steep Rolling Mountainous 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 0.6 Searles-Simas TubSilt (Very strong loam) 10 Flat Plateaus Timbered Soil 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 8 Anatone-Klicker Hall Ranch (Stony Loam) 11 Flat Plateaus Timbered Soil 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 3.0 Klicker-Hall Ranch-Anatone (Stony, Silty Loam) 12a Mod. Dissected Rolling Terrain (5000 ft elev.) Timbered Soil 40 ? 60 35 ? 60 3.7 Hankins-Hankton Broadtone Howby 12b North Slopes Predom. 40 ? 60 35 ? 60 1.8 Broadtree, Hawkey Hawks 13a Steeply Rolling Dissected Terrain Timbered 40 ? 60 35 ? 60 5.7 Hankton-Hankins-Klicker (Silt Loam) 13b Steeply Rolling Dissected Terrain Timbered South Slopes Predom. 40 ? 60 35 ? 60 2 Hankton-Klicker Hankins 13c Steeply Rolling Dissected Terrain Timbered 20 ? 40 35 ? 60 0.6 Hall Ranch-Daxty 14a North Slopes above 4500 ft elev. 40 ? 60 35 ? 60 Broadtree-Whistler 14b Mixture of 14a & 13b 40 ? 60 35 ? 60 3.7 Hankins-Hankerton-Broadtree 15a Canyons with more than 500 ft. of local relief 20 ? 40 20 ? 35 1.8 Lickskillet-Rockland 15b Canyons with more than 500 ft. of local relief, includes more gentle relief from landslides 10 ? 20 35 ? 60 0.6 Simas-Tub-Rockland Insert Map Grazing Allotment Insert Map Private/Commercial Forest and Forest Types Insert Map Vegetation Land Use - 193 - VEGETATION/LAND USE MAP LEGEND (OSU LEGEND) RANGELAND TYPES I. HERBACEOUS TYPES 310 Grassland, steepe and prairie 314 Tussock/Bunch grasses 314.1 Tall grasslands 314.3 Undifferentiated 319 II. SHRUB-SCRUB TYPES 320 Halophytic shrub 324 Greasewood 324.3 Shrub steepe 325 Low Sagebrush 325.1 Low sagebrush, Longlobe sagebrush, Bluebunch wheatgrass, Idaho fescue 325.11 Stiff sagebrush, Sandberg?s bluegrass 325.12 Big Sagebrush types (Big sagebrush, Three tip sagebrush) 325.2 Big Sagebrush/Bluebunch wt. 325.21 Big Sagebrush/Idaho fescue 325.22 Alpine sagebrush 325.23 Big sagebrush/Giant wildrye 325.24 Silver Sagebrush types 325.3 Rabbitbrush types 325.4 Mixed shrub-steepe 325.5 Sclerphyllous Shrub 326 Curlleaf Mountain Mahogany 326.4 III. SAVANA-LIKE TYPES 330 Coniferous Tree over Herb 333 Juniper over grass 333.1 Western juniper/Bluebruch wt. 333.11 Western juniper/Idaho fescue 333.12 Coniferous Tree over low Shrub 336 Juniper over shrub 336.1 Western Juniper/low sagebrush 336.11 Western Juniper/big sagebrush 336.12 IV. FOREST AND WOODLAND TYPES 340 Conifer Forests 341 Juniper Types 341.1 Western Juniper/Big sagebrush/Bluebunch wheatgrass 341.11 Western Juniper/Big sagebrush/Bluebunch wheatgrass/Idaho fescue 341.12 FOREST TYPES I. HERBACEOUS TYPES 310 Meadows (Graminaea/Cyperaceae) 315 Dry graminaceous 315.1 Wet mixed 315.2 Graminaceuous Marshes 316 Tule Marshes 317 - 194 - FOREST TYPES CONTINUED II. FOREST AND WOODLAND TYPES 340 Ponderosa Pine 341.3 Ponderosa pine/Western juniper 341.31 Ponderosa pine/Douglas fir 341.32 Lodgepole Pine 341.4 Douglas Fir 341.5 Mixed Conifer 341.6 Spricue Fir 341.7 Subalpine Fir 341.71 AGRICULTURAL TYPES 500 I. FIELD CROPS 510 Cereal and grains 511 Forage 512 Drub, flavoring and spice 514 Undifferentiated 519 Dryland fields 519.1 Irrigated fields 519.2 II. PASTURE 540 Herbaceous 541 III. NON-PRODUCING, FALLOW, TRANSITION OR IDLE LANDS 560 Fallow cropland 561 Plowed 562 Harvested stubble 564 CULTURAL VEGETATION TYPES 400 I. HERBACEOUS TYPES 410 Cultural grassland, steepe, prairie 414 Undifferentiated 419 II. SHRUB-SCRUB TYPES 420 Shrub-steepe 425 Clearing of overstroy species 425.1 III. SAVANA-LIKE TYPES 430 Coniferous Tree over Herb 433 Juniper over grass 433.1 IV. UNDIFFERENTIATED 490 MISCELLANEOUS TYPES I. Barren Land (100) II. Water Resources (200) III. Urban (600) *Mixtures of vegetation types commonly occur and are designated with slash (/) lines. It is assumed that each unit of a mixed land type occurs in equal proportions. Vegetation land use has been identified using aerial photo interpretive techniques (OSU, 1973). - 195 - REVIEW AND REVISION PROCESSES It is recognized that as a result of changing conditions and future impacts, planning programs including the Comprehensive Plan, the Urban Growth Boundary and all implementing ordinances and supporting documents must be periodically reviewed and updated. This review and update shall be accomplished through a planning schedule which includes ongoing citizen involvement of area advisory committees in rural areas of Crook County and of subject advisory committees within the urbanized area of the Prineville Valley. These advisory committees shall be involved in making recommendations concerning daily land use proposals and workability of planning and zoning regulations; the activities of the advisory committees shall be subject to review and approval of the Citizen Advisory Committee for Citizen Involvement appointed jointly by the Prineville City Council and the Crook County Court (Deletion by Ordinance No. 45; 3/20/91). Technical plan and ordinance revision shall be accomplished through the City of Prineville and Crook County Planning Commissions and the governing bodies of the involved entities, and shall be based in part upon recommendations of the ongoing citizen committees. The Comprehensive Plan, Urban Growth Boundary, and implementing ordinances shall be evaluated in relation to changing public policies and circumstances, including community, social, economic and environmental needs; the workability of planning programs in carrying out the intent of the Statewide Planning Goals and the goals of the citizens of Crook County shall be considered. Opportunities shall be provided (in addition to the afore-referenced citizen advisory committee recommendations) for comment by all citizens and affected governmental units to insure coordination in formulation and implementation of policies. Notice of all major revisions and minor changes shall be given in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal #2, LAND USE PLANNING. In addition to periodic scheduled major update of the Plan, the Boundary, and the Ordinances (review to take place every other year in the winter months), minor revisions shall occur when public needs and desires change, and when development occurs at a different rate than contemplated by the plan. Minor revisions shall occur once per year under usual circumstances. At the time of major plan change, Boundary, and/or Ordinance revision, a public statement shall be issued concerning the need for major revision and shall be based upon examination of data and problems. Public need and justification for minor changes shall also be established prior to minor plan changes. It is the policy of Crook County to adopt policies and procedures required by state statutes and to adopt ordinances implementing those policies and procedures. Therefore, it is the policy of Crook County to incorporate into its land use regulations the procedures set forth in ORS 197.763 with respect to conduct of local quasi-judicial land use hearing, - 196 - notice requirements, and hearing procedures. It is also the policy of Crook County to review such procedures from time to time to maintain conformity to state procedural requirement. (Ordinance No. 55; 2/26/92) - 197 - MAP RESOURCE INFORMATION - LIMITATIONS Natural Resource and Development Limitation Maps derived from original aerial photographs may be slightly distorted due to transfer of information and change of scale. When detailed information is required, the map units from the aerial photographs should, therefore, be used. Slight discrepancies exist at boundaries indicated on these maps; the discrepancies are the result of professional judgment, and can be resolved in the field. - 198 - COMMON ABBREVIATIONS AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS ABBREVIATIONS AUM ? Animal Unit Month. BLM ? U.S. Bureau of Land Management BOR ? U.S. Bureau of Reclamation BTU ? British Thermal Unit DEQ ? State Department of Environmental Quality DU ? Dwelling Unit EFU ? Exclusive Farm Use Zoning as set forth by ORS Chapter 215 HSHLD ? Household I-O ? County Economic Input ? Output Study of 1978 LDCD ? State Land Conservation and Development Commission or Department OEDP ? County Overall Economic Development Plan and Program ORS ? Oregon Revised Statutes ORV ? Off Road Vehicle SCS ? U.S. Soil Conservation Service UGB - Urban Growth Boundary USFA ? U.S. Forest Service YCC ? Youth Conservation Corp. - 199 - DEFINITIONS OF TERMS Accepted Farming Practice: As defined in O.R.S. 215.203(2)(c), ?Accepted Farming Practice? means a mode of operation that is common to farms of a similar nature, necessary for the operation of such farms to obtain a profit in money, and customarily utilized in conjunction with farm use. Agricultural Economic Incentives: Economic incentives for agriculture refers to the provisions set forth in applicable State Statutes and Planning Goals relative to assessment and taxation of agricultural lands, limitations relative to agriculture, allowance of compatible non-farm uses, and limitations relative to the assessment of farm units for costs incurred in the provision of facilities and services for non-farm uses. Agricultural Land: As set forth in State Planning Goal #3, ?Agricultural Land? is land of predominately Class I, II, III, IV, V and VI soils as identified in the Soil Capability Classification System of the United States Soil Conservation Service, and other lands which are suitable for farm use taking into consideration soil fertility, suitability for grazing, climatic conditions, existing and future availability of water for farming irrigation purposes, existing land use patterns, technological and energy inputs required, or accepted farming practices. Lands in other classes, which are necessary to permit farm practices to be undertaken on adjacent or nearby lands, shall be included as agricultural land in any event. Agriculture Regulatory Incentives: As set forth in O.R.S. 215.253, regulatory incentives for agriculture refers to the provision set forth in said Statute that no state agency, city, county or political subdivision of the state may exercise any of its powers to enact local laws or ordinances or impose restrictions or regulations affecting any farm use land situated within an exclusive farm use zone established under O.R.S. 215.203 in a manner that would unreasonably restrict or regulate farm structures or that would unreasonably restrict or regulate accepted farming practices because of noise, dust, odor or other materials carried in the air or other conditions arising therefrom if such conditions do not extend beyond the boundaries of the exclusive farm use zone within which they are created in such manner as to interfere with the use of adjacent lands. Nothing in this reference is intended however to limit or restrict the lawful exercise by any state agency, city, county or political subdivision of the state of its power to protect the health, safety and welfare of the general citizenry. Buildable Lands: Refers to lands in urban and urbanizable areas that are suitable, available and necessary for residential use. Buffer or Buffer Area: Refers to an area or land use lying between two or more conflicting land uses which may include open space, screening, less intensive or more compatible uses, natural barriers, or other natural or manmade features that lessen or minimize the impact of one land use upon another. - 200 - Carrying Capacity: Level of use which can be accommodated and continued without irreversible impairment of natural resource productivity, the ecosystem and the quality of air, land, and water resources. Commercial Forest Lands: Are those lands capable of producing crops of marketable wood products and are not withdrawn from this use by statute or administrative regulation. Commercial forests can be managed to generally produce in excess of an annual growth of 20 cubic feet per acre of marketable lumber. This includes accessible and potentially accessible land and operable and potentially operable area. Conserve: To manage in a manner which avoids wasteful or destructive uses and provides for future availability. Core Area: Refers to that commercially developed area of the City of Prineville which is generally and predominately located within a 4-block radius of the intersection of Main and Third Streets and along said streets from the intersection thereof for approximately 6 blocks. County Input-Output Study (I-0 Study): A study completed in 1978 of the Crook County Economy analyzing all inputs and outputs of the total economy and disclosing the nature, interactions and interdependencies of all economic sectors within the total economy of the County. The study is intended to provide a factual basis for decisions relating to project increases or decreases within the more important sectors of the County?s economy and analyze this impact on the remainder of the economy. County Overall Economic Development Program (OEDP): Consists of an Annual Report on the County?s overall economic situation and developments prepared pursuant to guidelines set forth by the Economic Development Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, and thereof establishing eligibility for public and private economic development project funding from said federal agency. Cultural Area: Refers to an area characterized by evidence of an ethnic, religious or social group with distinctive traits, beliefs and social forms. Develop: To bring about growth or availability; to construct or alter a structure, to conduct a mining operation, to make a physical change in the use or appearance of land, to divide land into parcels, or to create or terminate rights of access. Dwelling Unit: Refers to a single housing unit designed for occupance by a single family or household unit. Encourage: Stimulate; give help to; foster; to give support to; be favorable to. Farm Use: As defined in O.R.S. 215.203(2), ?Farm Use? means the current employment of land including that portion of such lands under buildings supporting accepted farming practices for the purpose of obtaining a profit in money by raising, harvesting and selling crops or by the feeding, breeding, management and sale of, or the produce of, livestock, poultry, fur-bearing - 201 - animals or honeybees, or for dairying and the sale of dairy products or any other agricultural or horticultural use or animal husbandry or any combination thereof. Financial and Regulatory Incentives: Refers to (1) tax incentives and differential assessments, (2) maximizing land use potentials, (3) reasonable and efficient land use controls and procedures, (4) multiple use and joint development practices, (5) identification of financing sources and methods, (6) development alternatives, and (7) capital improvement programming and phasing. Forest Lands: (1) lands composed of existing and potential forest lands which are suitable for commercial forest uses; (2) other forested lands needed for watershed protection wildlife and fisheries habitat and recreation; (3) lands where extreme conditions of climate, soil and topography require the maintenance of vegetative cover irrespective of use; (4) other forested lands in urban and agricultural areas which provide urban buffers, wind breaks, wildlife and fisheries habitat, livestock habitat, scenic corridors, and recreational use. All forest lands within the county fall into one of the following classes: (a) Class 1 - Timber class, includes all forest land primarily suitable, for the production of timber (none in Crook County); (b) Class 2 - Timber and grazing class, includes all forest land primarily suitable for joint use for timber production and the grazing of livestock, as a permanent or semi-permanent joint use, or as a temporary joint use during the interim between logging and reforestation; (c) Class 3 - Agricultural class, includes all forest land primarily suitable for grazing and other agricultural use. Forest Uses: Refers to (1) the production of trees and the processing of forest products; (2) open space, buffers from noise, and visual separation of conflicting uses; (3) watershed protection and wildlife and fisheries habitat; (4) soil protection from wind and water; (5) maintenance of clean air and water; (6) outdoor recreational activities and related support services and wilderness values compatible with these uses; and (7) grazing land for livestock. Historic Areas: Refers to lands with sites, structures, and objects that have historical significance. Household: Refers to one or more persons occupying a single housing unit. Impact: The consequences of a course of action; effect of a goal, plan or decision. Implementation Measures: The means used to carry out the Comprehensive Plan and Goals and Policies thereof. There are of two general types: (1) Management implementation measures such as ordinances, regulations or project plans, and (2) site or area specific implementation measures such as permits and grants for construction, construction of public facilities or provision of services. Insure: Guarantee; make sure or certain something will happen. Key Facilities: Basic facilities that are primarily planned for by local government but which also may be provided by private enterprise and are essential to the support of more intensive development including schools, transportation, water supply, sewage and solid waste disposal. - 202 - Maintain: Support, keep, and continue in an existing state or condition without decline. Natural Area: Includes land and water that has substantially retained its natural character and land and water that, although altered in character, is important as habitats for plant, animal or marine life, for the study of its natural, historical, scientific or paleontological features, or for the appreciation of its natural features. Natural Disaster and Hazard Areas: Refers to areas that are subject to natural events that are known to result in death or endanger the works of man, such as stream flooding, ground water, erosion and deposition, landslides, earthquakes, weak foundation soils and other natural hazards unique to a specific area. Natural Resources: Air, land and water and the elements thereof which are valued for their existing and potential usefulness to man. Non-Commercial Forest Lands: Non-commercial forest land is land incapable of producing 20 cubic feet per acre per year of industrial wood products. Non-Forest Land: Non-forest land is land that has never supported forests and lands formerly forested but not developed for such non-forest uses as crops, improved pasture and residential areas. Open Space: Consists of lands used for agricultural or forest uses, and any land area that would, if preserved and continued in its present use (a) conserve and enhance natural or scenic resources; (b) protect air or streams or water supply; (c) promote conservation of soils, wetlands, beaches or tidal marshes; (d) conserve landscaped areas, such as public or private golf courses, that reduce air pollution and enhance the value of abutting or neighboring property; (e) enhance the value to the public of abutting or neighboring parks, forests, wildlife preserves, nature reservations, or sanctuaries or other open space; (f) enhance recreation opportunities; (g) preserve historic areas; and (h) promote orderly urban development. Pollution: The violation or threatened violation of applicable state or federal environmental quality statutes, rules and standards. Potential Yield: The maximum sustained yearly cutting level attainable with intensive forestry practices. Preserve: To save from change or loss and reserve for a special purpose. Productivity Classes: Productivity classes refer to general land productivity as a function of fertility and moisture availability. Productivity is referred to as site class or site index in the U.S.F.S. technical literature. Protect: To save or shield from loss, destruction, or injury or for future intended use. - 203 - Provide: To prepare, plan for, and supply what is needed. Public Facilities and Services: Projects, activities and facilities which the appropriate public agency determines to be necessary for the public health, safety and welfare. Quality: The degree of excellence or relative goodness. Recreation Areas, Facilities and Opportunities: Provide for human development and enrichment and include but are not limited to: open space and scenic landscape; recreational lands; history; archeology and natural science resources; scenic roads and travelways; sports and cultural events; camping, picnicking and recreational lodging; tourist facilities and accommodations; trails; waterway use facilities; hunting; angling; winter sports; mineral resources; active and passive games and activities. Recreation Needs: Refers to existing and future demand by citizens and visitors for recreation areas, facilities and opportunities. Rural Facilities and Services: Refers to facilities and services which the appropriate public agency or governing body determines to be suitable and appropriate solely for the needs of rural use, and not at levels supporting urban uses. Rural Land: Rural lands are those which are outside the Urban Growth Boundary and are: (a) Non-urban agricultural, forest or open space lands or, (b) Other lands suitable for sparse settlement, small farms, or acreage homesites with no or hardly any public services, and which are not suitable, necessary or intended for urban use. Rural Service Center: A concentrated assemblage of urban type development including residential, commercial and industrial uses in a generally rural area which provides a minimum level of needed and desirable goods and services to the rural area within which such center is located. Scenic Areas: Refers to lands that are valued for their aesthetic appearance. Social Consequences: The tangible and intangible effects upon people and their relationships with the community in which they live resulting from a particular action or decision. State Planning Goal: The mandatory statewide planning goals adopted by the State Land Conservation and Development Commission pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 197.005 to 197.430. Strip Commercial Areas: Those predominately commercially developed areas along the Madras and Ochoco Highways leading into the City of Prineville. - 204 - Sustained Yield (as defined in Multiple Use Act): Sustained yield of the several products and services means the achievement and maintenance of perpetuity of a high level annual or regular periodic output of the various renewable resources of the National Forest without impairment of productivity of the land. Transportation: Refers to the movement of people and goods. Transportation Disadvantaged: Refers to those individuals who have difficulty in obtaining transportation because of their age, income, physical or mental disability. Transportation Facility: Refers to any physical facility that moves or assists in the movement of people and goods, excluding electricity, sewage and water. Transportation System: Refers to one or more transportation facilities that are planned, developed, operated and maintained in a coordinated manner to apply continuity of movement between modes and within and between geographic and jurisdictional areas. Urban Facilities and Services: Refers to key facilities and to appropriate types and levels of at least the following: police protection; fire protection; sanitary facilities; storm drainage facilities; planning, zoning, and subdivision control; health services; recreation facilities and services; energy and communication services; and community governmental services. Urban Growth Boundary (UGB): A boundary line separating urban and urbanizable lands from rural lands and encompassing an incorporated city and adjoining and area urban uses. The boundary is also a tool for identifying an area within which urban type growth is most likely to occur as an expansion of existing urban development and certainly the area within which such development is most desirable. Urban Land: Urban areas are those places having an incorporated city. Such areas may also include lands adjacent to and outside the incorporated city and include such lands that: (a) have concentrations of persons who generally reside and work in the area, and (b) have supporting public facilities and services. Urbanizable Land: Urbanizable lands are those lands within the Urban Growth Boundary and which are identified and (a) determined to be necessary and suitable for future urban uses, (b) can be served by urban services and facilities, and (c) are needed for the expansion of an urban area. APPENDIX ?A? Ordinance No. 43 CROOK COUNTY GOAL 5 RESOURCES (MINERAL AND AGGREGATE ELEMENTS) December 14, 1990 Table of Contents Section One: Introduction to the Goal 5 Process Page 1 (Mineral and Aggregate Elements) Section Two: Step One ? Inventory 5 Section Three: Step Two ? Identification of Conflicting Zoning Uses and Applicable Requirements of Other Statewide Planning Goals 16 Section Four: Step Three ? Economic, Environmental, Social and Energy Consequences 23 Section Five: Step Four ? Programs to Resolve the Conflicts Concerning Goal 5 Resources 28 Section Six: Step Five ? Adoption of Measures to Implement the Goal 5 Requirements and Achieve the Goal 5 Program 34 APPENDICES: Appendix 1 ? Flowchart of the Goal 5 Rule Process Appendix 4 ? Site Maps and Supporting Documents Appendix 5 ? ESEE Analyses and Consequences Determinations on all 3A/3B/3C Sites in Crook County Appendix 6 ? Federal Sites on Federal Property - 1 - Section One INTRODUCTION TO THE GOAL 5 PROCESS (MINERAL AND AGGREGATE ELEMENTS) A. INTRODUCTION TO OREGON?S STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 5 AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE RULE 1. Oregon?s Statewide Policy. Goal 5 establishes a state policy ?to conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources.? (See Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 15.) These natural resources includes mineral and aggregate resources. The intent is to protect these non-renewable resources through ?the Goal 5 process? for use both now and in the future. The Statewide Planning Goal 5 states that ?programs shall be provided that will (1) insure open space, (2) protect scenic and historic areas and natural resources for future generations, and (3) promote healthy and visually attractive environments in harmony with the natural landscape character. (See Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 16.) This Goal 5 further provides: Where no conflicting uses for such resources have been identified, such resources shall be managed so as to preserve their original character. Where conflicting uses have been identified the economic, social, environmental and energy consequences of the conflicting uses shall be determined and programs developed to achieve the goal.? The Goal 5 Planning Guidelines section states: 3. natural resources . . . should be conserved and protected ...? 6. In conjunction with the inventory of mineral and aggregate resources, sites for removal and processing of such resources should be identified and protected. The Goal 5 Implementation section states: 2. The conservation of both renewable and non-renewable natural resources and physical limitations of the land should be used as the - 2 - basis for determining the quantity, quality, and location, rate type of growth in the planning area. 3. The efficient consumption of energy should be considered when utilizing natural resources. 9. Areas identified as having non-renewable mineral and aggregate resources should be planned for interim, transitional and ?second use? utilization as well as for the primary use. 2. The Goal 5 Administrative Rule (OAR 660-16-000 to 660-16-025). The Goal 5 administrative rule was designed to carry out the requirements of Goal 5 for all types of resources including mineral and aggregate resources. To meet the Goal 5 rule for mineral and aggregate resource sites Crook County must accomplish the following process. STEP 1 Inventory resource sites. Known resource sites must be inventoried and designated in one of three categories, ?significant?, or the higher quality sites must be listed and the list adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan. The lower quality sites are ?not significant? and are to be left off the Plan Inventory. Those sites for which there is inadequate information to determine their significance are listed in a special category. STEP 2 Identify uses which could conflict with the resource. Crook County then must identify all existing and potential uses which, if allowed, could interfere with or impose limits on mineral extraction activities. STEP 3 Analyze the economic, social, environmental and energy consequences of allowing, limiting or prohibiting the mining and conflicting uses. This analysis is known as the ?ESEE analysis and must be adopted as part of Crook County?s Comprehensive Plan. Crook County must use this analysis to decide how to resolve the conflicts for any given resource site or group of similar sites. STEP 4 Decide on a program which resolves any conflicts and achieves the Goal. Crook County must resolve conflicts with mineral and aggregate resource sites by deciding what level of protection and what uses are appropriate for each site. This decision must be stated in Crook County?s Comprehensive Plan, and it must be based on the ESEE consequence analysis and Goal 5?s requirement to protect those resources. STEP 5 Adopt measures to implement the program. Crook County must adopt policies and zoning regulations to implement the decision in STEP 4. Zoning regulations must specify permitted uses, conditional uses, and standards for review. The zoning regulations established by Crook County must be sufficient to resolve the conflicts identified in STEP 2 and it must be adequate to carry out the program adopted in STEP 4. Crook County?s standards must be clear and objective. - 3 - 3. Definition Section of Statewide Planning Goals (1990). Goal 5 requires that Crook County complete an analysis of the economic, social, energy and environmental consequences of allowing any conflicts that impact on a goal 5 resource. The Definition Section of the Statewide Planning Goals provides the following definitions to be used in the Goal 5 context: CONSERVE. To manage in a manner which avoids wasteful or destructive uses and provides for future availability. IMPACT. The consequences of a course of action; effect of a goal, guideline, plan of decision. PRESERVE. To save from change or loss and reserve for a special purpose. PROTECT. Save or shield from loss, destruction, or injury or for future intended use. SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES. The tangible and intangible effects upon people and their relationships with the community in which they live resulting from a particular action or decision. A flowchart of the Goal 5 rule illustrating the process described above and followed herein is found in Appendix 1. B. OTHER STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. Goal 1: Citizen Involvement Many citizens of Crook County have given generously of their time and energy to help complete the county?s Comprehensive Plan and its implementing regulations. They have also so contributed to the completion of this Goal 5 portion of the periodic review process. One of the main thrusts of Goal 1 is fostering the continuation of that citizen contribution. This focus of Goal 1 is to help protect against narrow special interests that would frustrate good land use planning and over-run the interests of the many. 2. Goal 2: Land Use Planning Goal 2 provides a planning mechanism designed to assure security and stability in land use planning. The factual base required for all decision making assures that - 4 - plans and projects will receive thorough scrutiny before being granted or denied. Final decisions are to be based on the greatest good for the greatest number of people. PART I - PLANNING . . . All land-use plans shall include identification of issues and problems, inventories and other factual information for each applicable stateside planning goal, evaluation of alternative courses of action an ultimate policy choices, taking into consideration social, economic, energy and environmental needs. Goal 2 is the foundation and guide for the process leading to ultimate implementation of the goal. Under the ?Major Revisions? and ?Minor Changes? sections of the ?Guidelines? portion of Goal 2 the following instructive and important language is provided: E. MAJOR REVISIONS AND MINOR CHANGES IN THE PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES The citizens in the area and any affected governmental unit should be given an opportunity to review an document prior to any changes in the plan and implementation ordinances. There should be at least 30 days notice of the public hearing on the proposed change. 1. Major Revisions Major revisions include land use changes that have widespread and significant impact beyond the immediate area such as quantitative changes producing large volumes of traffic; a qualitative change in the character of the land use itself, such as conversion of residential to industrial use; or a spatial change that affects large areas or many different ownerships. The plan and implementation measures should be revised when public needs and desires change, ? 2. Minor Changes Minor changes, i.e., those which do not have significant effect beyond the immediate area of the change, should be based on special studies or other information which will serve as the factual basis to support the change. The public need and justification for the particular change should be established. - 5 - Section Two STEP ONE INVENTORY GOAL 5 RESOURCES (MINERAL AND AGGREGATE RESOURCES) A. INTRODUCTION TO INVENTORY ELEMENT REQUIRED BY THE GOAL 5 RULE 1. Inventory Process. The first step in the Goal 5 Rule Process is to complete an inventory of all goal 5 mineral and aggregate resources in Crook County. Crook County initiated its inventory process for the Statewide Planning Goal 5 mineral and aggregate resources with the collection of available data on its mineral and aggregate resources. This data was collected from as many sources as possible including experts in the field, local citizens and landowners. This inventory is included in the Plan, and describes the location, quality and quantity of the identified significant resource types. Crook County then classified its resources into various resource types. The mineral and aggregate resource types that have been identified in Crook County are as follows: 1) basalt (BAS); 2) cinders (CIN); 3) sand (SAN); 4) gravel (GRV); 5) bentonite (BEN); and 6) minerals (gold, cinnabar, gypsum, uranium, magnesium, etc.) (MIN). 2. Analysis of Inventory Data. Following the inventory of its resources, Crook County then analyzed and refined the available data and made a determination whether there was sufficient information on the location, quality and quantity of each resource site to properly complete the Goal 5 process for each site. - 6 - 3. Determination of Significance. Based on the evidence and Crook County?s analysis of this data, Crook County then made a determination as to which of the resource sites having adequate reliable information were of significance. Crook County then included those significant sites on its final comprehensive plan inventory. The process for completing the inventory, analyzing and refining the data, and making the final determination on the significance of the each mineral and aggregate resource site was conducted pursuant to, among other Oregon statutes and regulations, Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 215 and Oregon Administrative Rule 660, Division 16. 4. Inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan Inventory. All sites determined by Crook County to be significant are included in this Plan and designated in a category signifying that determination. All sites having inadequate data with which to determine significance are included in this Plan is a special category signifying that determination. B. CROOK COUNTY?S GOAL 5 INVENTORY PROCESS Crook County has collected available information on all known mineral and aggregate resources in Crook County. This data includes information on the location, quality and quantity of each resource site. The information is summarized and recorded in Appendix 2. Appendix 2 contains an inventory worksheet and a site map for each Goal 5 resource. Each inventory work sheet and the site map contains (if available) the information that is described in the following subsections of this section. The information contained on the worksheet and site map has been used to make the determination whether the resource shown is ?not important enough to be included in the Plan Inventory,? is ?significant? and therefore to be included in the Plan Inventory, or finally whether there is enough information available with which to make one determination or the other. 1. Resource Location. a. Definition of Impact Area. The impact area is that area surrounding and near a Goal 5 mineral and aggregate resource site wherein the presence or application of a conflicting use that is allowed outright or conditionally in the surrounding broad zoning district would adversely impact the resource site by limiting the mining or processing of the resource. b. Description of Impact Area. Unless otherwise indicated in the text of this Plan or on the respective resource site and impact area map, the impact area is that property extending outward from the resource site boundary to a distance of five hundred (500) feet. - 7 - Note: The impact area will be identified on each map with a shading. This shading is for reference only. The rationale for the 500 foot boundary for the impact area is based upon the distance from the property line of a property that is the site of a conditional use permit. This distance serves as the basis for notice to adjacent property owners of the proposed conditional use. This distance is determined to be that distance from a proposed use that best represents the point at which the interests of the proposed conditional use applicant and the adjacent owners are balanced; thus that distance is the point at which the adjacent land owners will be least adversely affected by the proposed conditional use. If the perimeter of the site is greater than a perimeter 500 feet inward of the property line, then the perimeter of the impact area will be confined, where possible, within the property boundaries. In other words, to the extent possible, the perimeter of the impact area will not be greater than the legal description of the property within which the resource is located. c. Supporting Evidence of Location. This determination of location of each resource site is based on the best information available to Crook County at the time of the determination. The information that has been officially received and used by Crook County in this analysis is stored in the public records of the County. This information includes at least: a) a legal description of the resource site; b) the highway/mile post designation (if available); c) a description of the impact area (if different); and d) a map of the boundaries of the resource site and of the impact area to be affected (if different). 2. Resource Quality and Ranking System. In order to determine the quality of each basalt, cinder, and gravel Goal 5 mineral and aggregate resource site, Crook County took into consideration, among other factors, (1) all available information concerning test results and (2) the resource site?s relative value, as compared to other examples of the same resource existing in at least Crook County. All sand has potential value, and has not been given a ranking value. In this Comprehensive Plan, that relative value is represented by a numerical ranking system as follows: - 8 - 1 = resource material meeting at least the following ODOT specifications: a) resistance to abrasion b) sodium sulphate soundness c) air degradation 2 = resource material not meeting the rank of 1, but is such quality that it is used for roads; 3 = resource material that is used for roads and for fill; and 4 = resource material that is used only for fill material. Note: This numerical ranking of quality will be attached to and form a part of the significant Goal 5 mineral and aggregate site identification system that is described in a later part of this Goal 5 mineral and aggregate section. The ranking designation will attach to and be carried by each site identification designation throughout the Goal 5 process. a. Supporting Evidence of Quality. This determination of quality on each resource site is based on the best information available to Crook County at the time of the determination. The information that has been officially received and used by Crook County in this analysis is stored in the public records of the county. 3. Resource Quantity. Crook County included in its determination of the quantity of each Goal 5 mineral and aggregate resource site the consideration of the relative abundance of the resource (of any given quality). The level of detail provided in the Comprehensive Plan depended on how much information was available or ?obtainable? at the time of the determination and the quality of that information. a. Supporting Evidence of Quantity. Crook County has made a determination on location, quality and quantity based on the best information available to Crook County at the time of determination. This usually was the information provided by owner/operators. The information that has been officially received and used by Crook County in this analysis is stored in the public records of the county. C. INVENTORY ANALYSIS AND TYPES OF SITES. Based on the data collected, analyzed and refined by Crook County, as outlined above, Crook County has made a determination with respect to each resource site as to which one of three basic options that site most accurately is to be equated with. Those three basic options are as follows: - 9 - 1. OAR 660-l6-000(5)(a) 1A SITES. ?Not Significant?. Based on the best information that is available on location, quality and quantity, Crook County has determined that this particular resource site is ?not significant?, and therefore not important enough to warrant inclusion on the Comprehensive Plan inventory, or is not required to be included in the inventory based on the specific Goal standards. These sites are designated in this Plan as ?1A? sites. 2. OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) 1B SITES. ?Significance Not Yet Determined?. When some information is available, indicating the possible existence of a resource site, but that information was not adequate for Crook County to identify with particularity the location, quality and quantity of the resource site, then Crook County included these sites in this special category. These sites upon which not enough information is available to make a determination yet as to significance are designated in this Plan as ?1B? sites. Crook County will place these 1B sites in its Plan Inventory of possible or ?possibly significant? resource sites, but Crook County will not proceed through the remainder of the Goal 5 rule process. The inclusion of this special 1B category in Crook County?s Comprehensive Plan will serve to notify the owner of the need to assess and document the value of the resource before conflicting uses become established in the area. Crook County?s policy, relative to these 1B resource sites, will address each resource site. This plan policy will allow each 1B site to proceed through the Goal 5 process when adequate information is available on the site. The following timeframe for this review is as follows. a. Timeframe for 1B Site Review. When Crook County is provided adequate and sufficient data relative to a Goal 5 mineral or aggregate resource site that has been classified in this Comprehensive Plan in the 1B site option, then Crook County will proceed with the Goal 5 process as outlined in OAR 660 Division 16 for a determination whether that site is to be reclassified and, if so, in what classification option that site should placed. Crook County will commence that analysis and determination within one of the three following timeframes: (1) within thirty days of receipt of the data, if the operator or owner requests that the process begin within that timeframe; (2) within thirty days of the request of the owner or operator, if Crook County is in receipt of adequate and sufficient information relative to the site; (3) during the next regularly scheduled local periodic review process. - 10 - b. Inclusion as a significant site in Plan. If Crook County determines that the 1B site needs to be reclassified, then Crook County will amend the Plan inventory to reflect that new classification. c. Interim Policy Regarding 1B Sites. In the interim, Crook County will prohibit mineral and aggregate extraction, and will limit conflicting uses within the impact area around those sites. 3. OAR 660-l6-000(5)(c) 1C SITES. ?Significant Sites?. When information is available on location, quantity and quality, and Crook County determines a site to be significant or important as a result of the data collection and analysis process, then the site will be included in its Comprehensive Plan Inventory. These sites are designated in this Plan as ?1C? sites. The Plan inventory will indicate the location, quantity and quality of each 1C resource site. This Comprehensive Plan Inventory list of significant 1C resource sites will be subjected to the remainder of the Goal 5 process. D. POLICY REGARDING EXPANSION OF EXISTING RESOURCE SITE OPERATIONS Crook County?s Plan policy is to classify each significant resource site according to current available data on location, quality and quantity, and regulate each site according to its classification. Crook County will not allow expansion of any site without additional data. Therefore, ?in order to expand an existing permit, operator must provide quantity and quality best information available to update plan data.? This may or may not require an ESEE analysis depending on the data submitted or any significant changes. E. CROOK COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INVENTORY LIST 1. Explanation of the Resource Site Identification System. Each site has been given a unique identification number. The identification number has been designed to provide the following information and in the following order: The first two digits describe the level of the Goal 5 process (1=inventory level, 2=conflict determination level, 3=ESEE consequences and conflict resolution level). The next digit (a numeral) is employed in only those resources that have a need for ranking the resource for highway uses. In the examples below this numeral is designated by the letter ?n?. (See pages 1-3 and 1-4 for a detailed description of the numerals) 1A - site is inventoried as an insignificant site 1B - site is inventoried as an indeterminate site - 11 - lCn - site is inventoried as a significant site 2An - site is determined to be without conflicts 2Bn - site is determined to have conflicts (Each of these sites will be classified as a 3A, 3B or 3C site.) 3An - site is classified as more important relative to conflicts 3Bn - site is classified as less important relative to conflicts 3Cn - site is classified as a site to be balanced with the conflicts The information following the ?dash? above contains the three letter identifier and a second ?dash? describing the resource type. They are BAS-, CIN-, SAN-, GRV-, BEN-, and MIN-, meaning basalt, cinders, sand, gravel, bentonite and minerals respectively. (These are described in detail on page 1-10.) The final numeral(s) represent the unique identifier for that particular site. For example, the following number has the described significance. 1C2-BAS-24 The site in on the inventory list (?1); the site is a significant site (?C?); the resource has a quality ranking of ?2? indicating that the resource does not meet certain ODOT specs to be ranked as the bhighest quality resource, but is of good enough quality to be used on roads; the site is of the basalt type (?BAS?); and finally, the number 24 indicates that the site is number 24 in the series of such 1C basalt sites. 2. 660-16-000(5)(a) 1A SITES: These Goal 5 mineral and aggregate resource site are provided here for the sake of completeness only; they are not included in the Plan Inventory because they are not important enough to be placed in it. The Comprehensive Plan Inventory includes only the ?special category? 1B sites and the ?significant? 1C sites: a. 1A Basalt (BAS) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME lAn-BAS-1 Weberg #1 b. 1A Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory [none] - 12 - c. 1A Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory [none] d. 1A Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory [none] e. 1A Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory [none] f. 1A Mineral (gold or cinnabar) (MIN) Resource Inventory [none] 3. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INVENTORY of OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) ?SPECIAL CATEGORY? 1B SITES: The following Goal 5 mineral and aggregate resource sites do not have enough available information to make a determination of significance at this time: a. 18 Basalt (BAS) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME lBn-BAS-l Krider #3 lBn-BAS-2 Pieratt b. 1B Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory [none] c. 1B Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory [none] d. 1B Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1B4-GRV-1 Alves #2 e. 1B Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory [none] - 13 - f. 1B Mineral (gold or cinnabar) (MIN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME B-MIN-1 Freeport-McMoran 4. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INVENTORY OF OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) ?SIGNIFICANT? 1C SITES: Inventory List of Goal 5 mineral and aggregate resource sites that Crook County has determined to be significant resource sites: a. 1C Basalt (BAS) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1C1-BAS-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-3-4 1C1-BAS-2 Oregon State Highway Division #7-15-4 1C1-BAS-3 Oregon State Highway Division #7-16-4 1C1-BAS-4 Oregon State Highway Division #7-14-4 1C1-BAS-5 Oregon State Highway Division #7-39-4 1C2-BAS-6 Oregon State Highway Division #Not Assigned 1C1-BAS-7 Oregon State Highway Division #7-52-4 1C1-BAS-8 Oregon State Highway Division #7-40-4 1C1-BAS-9 Oregon State Highway Division #7-21-4 1C2-BAS-10 Oregon State Highway Division #7-43-4 1C2-BAS-11 Oregon State Highway Division #7-37-4 1C2-BAS-12 Oregon State Highway Division #7-33-4 1C2-BAS-13 Oregon State Highway Division #7-31-4 1C1-BAS-14 Oregon State Highway Division #7-26-4 1C1-BAS-15 Oregon State Highway Division #7-18-4 1C1-BAS-16 Richter 1C1-BAS-17 Alves #1 (Northwest Basalt) 1C1-BAS-18 Butler (Northwest Basalt) 1C1-BAS-19 Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 1C1-BAS-20 Coats #1 (Powell Butte) 1C1-BAS-21 Krider #1 1C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 1C3-BAS-23 Stahancyk (Prineville Sawmill) 1C2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 1C1-BAS-25 Modular Crushing (Taggart) 1C2-BAS-26 Juniper Canyon (County) 1C1-BAS-27 Weberg #2 1C3-BAS-28 Tweedt (County) 1C3-BAS-29 Hackleman (County) 1C2-BAS-30 Congleton (County) 1C2-BAS-31 Jagi Pit (County) 1C3-BAS-32 Rickman Pit (County) 1C2-BAS-33 Jones Pit (County) - 14 - 1C3-BAS-34 Puitt (County) 1C3-BAS-35 Camp Creek Note: The Oregon State Highway Division uses an internal three-part number code to designate its sites; the three parts are respectively: For example Crook County?s 1C1-BAS-l site is an Oregon State Highway Division site that is identified internally by the Division as site #7-3-4. The ?7? signifies _____; the ?3? signifies ______, and the ?4? signifies ______. b. 1C Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1Cn-SAN-l O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1Cn-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1Cn-SAN-3 Pieratt 1Cn-SAN-4 Williams c. 1C Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1C2-GRV-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-13-4 1C1-GRV-2 Oregon State Highway Division #7-41-4 1C1-GRV-3 Oregon State Highway Division #7-38-4 1C2-GRV-4 Oregon State Highway Division #7-36-4 1C1-GRV-5 Oregon State Highway Division #7-25-4 1C1-GRV-6 Oregon State Highway Division #7-9-4 1C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 1C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C1-GRV-10 Pieratt d. 1C Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1Cn-CIN-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-4-4 1Cn-CIN-2 Pieratt - 15 - e. 1C Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1C-BEN-1 Coats 1C-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific 1C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 1C-BEN-4 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) f. 1C Mineral (gold and cinnabar) (MIN) Resource Inventory [none] g. 1C Federal sites on federal lands [See Appendix 6] 5. Resource Site Maps and Supporting Documents. [See Appendix 4] F. CROOK COUNTY?S POLICY FOR AND STATEMENT REGARDING THE PROCESS OF UPDATING ITS INVENTORY. 1. The Inventory Update Process. Crook County will update its Comprehensive Plan Inventory at periodic review to consider either information published after the acknowledgment of the Plan (Periodic Review Factor 1a) or new inventory information presented for consideration (See OAR 660-19-057(2)). 2. The Statement of Crook County. Crook County has addressed the location, quality and quantity requirements of the Goal 5 rule in its completion of the resource inventory process. - 16 - Section Three STEP TWO IDENTIFICATION OF CONFLICTING ZONING USES AND APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS GOAL 5 RESOURCES (MINERAL AND AGGREGATE ELEMENTS) A. INTRODUCTION TO THE CONFLICTING USES AND APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS ELEMENT OF THE GOAL 5 RULE. Step Two of the Goal 5 Rule Process is the identification of conflicting uses within the impact area and applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals. For each site determined to be a 1C ?significant? Goal 5 mineral or aggregate resource site, Crook County has identified the existing and potential uses, and applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals that may conflict with these sites. The process of identifying uses or applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals that may interfere with or impose limitations on a significant 1C Goal 5 mineral or aggregate resource site was done primarily by examining (a) the existing and potential uses that are allowed in and that are recognized in the broad zoning districts established by Crook County; and (b) the existing and potential applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals that exist or could come into existence near the resource site. B. CONFLICTING USES AND APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS IDENTIFICATION PROCESS: 1. Conflicting Uses. The first consideration regarding conflicts, requires Crook County to determine whether there are any existing or potential zoning uses that present or would, if allowed, present a conflict with the resource site. Crook County has made this determination and has listed these zoning use conflicts herein. - 17 - a. Definition of Conflicting Use: Conflicting uses are those existing or potential uses, allowed outright or conditionally within a zoning district, which, if allowed within the impact area surrounding a resource site, could negatively impact that Goal 5 resource site by impeding the extraction of the resource, or which could impose limitations on efficient and economic mining activities. Information on existing conflicting uses will be site- specific and the identification of conflicting zoning uses will include both existing and potential future uses. b. Consideration of Reverse Impacts. Where conflicting zoning uses have been identified, Goal 5 resource sites may impact those uses; therefore, Crook County will consider these negative impacts by the resource on the use in the following sections when analyzing the economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) consequences. c. Definition of Impact Area. The impact area is that area surrounding and near a Goal 5 mineral and aggregate resource site wherein the presence or application of a conflicting use that is allowed outright or conditionally in the surrounding broad zoning district would adversely impact the resource site by limiting the mining or processing of the resource. d. Description of Impact Area. Unless otherwise indicated in the text of this Plan or on the respective resource site and impact area map, the impact area is that property extending outward from the resource site boundary to a distance of five hundred (500) feet. 2. Applicable but Conflicting Requirements of Other Statewide Planning Goals. a. Definition of applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals. The second consideration regarding conflicts, requires Crook County to determine whether there are any existing or potential requirements of other applicable Statewide Planning Goals, including other goal 5 resources, that present or would, if allowed, present a conflict with the resource site. The Goal 5 Rule requires that these Statewide Planning Goals be considered at this stage of the process. Statewide Planning Goals are state policies on land use, resource management, economic development and citizen involvement. This determination has been completed, and if identified, Crook County has listed these Goal conflicts herein. A conflicting applicable requirement of another Statewide Planning Goal is one of the resources or elements whose management or development is provided for in the Statewide Planning Goals and, which if allowed, would negatively impact a Goal 5 mineral or aggregate resource. - 18 - b. Considering Reverse Impacts. Where conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals have been identified, Goal 5 resource sites may adversely impact those other goal resources. Crook County will consider both the impacts of that resource on the Goal 5 resource and the Goal 5 resource?s impacts on the onter Goal resource in the following sections when analyzing the economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) consequences. Crook County has considered the applicability and requirements of these other Statewide Planning Goals within the environmental, social economic and energy analyses, where appropriate, at that stage of the process. OAR 660-16-005(2). 3. Significant Adverse Affects on Acceptable Neighboring Farm/Forest Practices or Farm/Forest Costs. The third consideration regarding conflicts, requires Crook County to determine whether allowing the mining operation would force, or potentially force, a significant change on neighboring farm or forest practices or costs (ORS 215.296). This determination has been made and, if identified, Crook County has listed these impacts or potential impacts herein. Specifically, Crook County has made determinations whether approving the conditional use of mining mineral or aggregate would -- a. force a significant change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands devoted to farm or forest use, or b. significantly increase the cost of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands devoted to farm or forest use. This determination was based on the best information available to the County at the time of the determination. Crook County recognizes that such a determination does not take into consideration changes that may occur over time. Upon receipt of information that changes have occurred after a determination has been made, and that these changes are of such a nature and magnitude making that determination inaccurate, Crook County will take appropriate measures to make a new determination. Such re-determination will be performed according to this Plan and its implementing ordinances. C. TWO CLASSIFICATIONS OF INVENTORIED SITES: Crook County has determined that each inventoried 1C ?significant? resource site is either -- - 19 - (a) a site for which NO conflicting zoning uses or applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals have been identified [i.e., an OAR 660-16-005(1) 2A site], or is (b) a site for which conflicting zoning uses or applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals HAVE BEEN identified [i.e., an OAR 660-16-005(2) 3A/3B/3C site]. 1. 2A SITE. If there are no conflicting zoning uses or applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals for an identified significant resource site, Crook County has adopted policies and procedures in this plan and its implementing ordinances which insure preservation of this resource site classification. Crook County will preserve these resource sites. OAR 660-16-005(1). 2. 3A/3B/3C SITES. For those sites for which conflicting zoning uses or applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals have been identified, Crook County has determined the economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) consequences of the conflicting zoning uses or applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals. These consequences are the subject of a following section. Both the impacts on the resource site and the impacts on the conflicting use and applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals have been considered in analyzing the ESEE consequences. D. List of 2A sites (sites without conflicts) in Crook County 1. (no non-federal 1C sites within Crook County are classified as a 2A site) (all federal sites on federal property are 2A sites) (see Appendix 6) E. List of 3A/3B/3C sites (sites having conflicts) in Crook County 1. (all of Crook County?s 1C sites have identified conflicting uses or applicable but conflicting statewide planning goals, and are thus 3A/3B/3C sites; see previous listing of 1C sites.) F. Potential Conflicting zoning uses (by zoning ordinance) in the following broad zoning designations and applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals, for 3A/3B/3C SITES: - 20 - 1. EXCLUSIVE FARM USE ZONES (EFU-1, -2, -3) a. Uses Permitted Outright Farm dwellings b. Conditional Uses Public or private schools Churches Commercial activities in conjunction with farm use Secondary farm dwellings Private parks Campgrounds Fishing and hunting preserves Public parks and playgrounds Home occupations Boarding horses for profit Non-farm dwellings Personal use airports c. Applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals 2. EXCLUSIVE FOREST USE ZONES (EFU-4) a. Uses Permitted Outright Dwellings in conjunction with farm or forest uses b. Conditional Uses Public and private parks Campgrounds Community centers Personal use airports Home occupations Boarding of horses for profit Recreational dwellings c. Applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals 3. PARK RESERVE ZONES (P-R) a. Uses Permitted Outright Public reserve areas Public wildlife reserve - 21 - Public management area Single family dwelling b. Conditional Uses Public and private picnic or campgrounds Public and private group camping facilities Water supply and treatment facilities Planned unit developments Commercial recreation uses Public marinas Public resorts c. Applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals 4. RECREATION RESIDENTIAL MOBILE ZONES (RR(M)-2) a. Uses Permitted Outright Single family dwellings Public parks Public recreation area Public community areas Public use buildings for recreation Subdivisions Planned unit developments Land partitionings b. Conditional Uses Private parks Campgrounds Hunting and fishing preserves Dude or guest ranches Mobile home parks Water supply and treatment facilities Airports Home occupations c. Applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals 5. HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONES (H-M) a. Uses Permitted Outright Residences for caretakers Veterinary clinics or kennels - 22 - Agricultural products processing Food processing b. Conditional Uses Resumptions of residential use c. Applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals - 23 - Section Four STEP THREE ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND ENERGY CONSEQUENCES GOAL 5 RESOURCES (MINERAL AND AGGREGATE ELEMENTS) A. INTRODUCTION TO THE ESEE CONSEQUENCES ELEMENT OF THE GOALS RULE. 1. Inventory. Crook County has completed its inventory of all the mineral aggregate resource sites within Crook County. Based on the location, quality and quantity of those resource sites, Crook County has made a determination of which of these sites were ?significant or important.? These ?significant? sites have been designated as 1C sites in this Comprehensive Plan Inventory. OAR 660-16- 000(1)(c). 2. Conflicting Zoning Uses and Applicable but Conflicting Requirements of Other Statewide Planning Goals Have Been Identified. Crook County has made a determination of which of these significant 1C sites have conflicting zoning uses within its respective designated impact area and also has identified those applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals, if there are any, for each resource site. 3. Economic, Environmental, Social and Energy (ESEE) consequences. Those sites that did not have conflicting zoning uses or applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals within its respective impact area were designated 2A sites. OAR 660-16-005(1). Those sites that had conflicting zoning uses within its respective impact area, or had applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals, were designated as one of the 3A/3B/3C sites. OAR 660-16-005(2). These 3A/3B/3C sites were then analyzed to determine the economic, environmental, social and energy (ESEE) consequences of allowing the conflicting uses or applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals with respect to the resource site. The ESEE analyses and consequences are set forth in Appendix 5 of this section. - 24 - The ESEE analyses are gathered together into three groups as follows: a) Generic ESEE analyses for existing sites that do not contain any conflicting zoning uses or applicable but conflicting statewide planning goal requirements; (Appendix 5.1) b) Generic ESEE analyses for existing sites which have conflicting zoning uses or applicable but conflicting statewide planning goal requirements; (Appendix 5.2) c) Site-specific ESEE analyses for new sites; these sites have conflicting zoning uses or applicable but conflicting statewide planning goal requirements. (Appendix 5.3) These ESEE analyses provide the basis for the decisions of Crook County. Crook County has therein weighed the values of competing uses and the consequences of permitting or prohibiting resource uses and conflicting uses. These ESEE analyses presents these values and consequences to assure informed decision making. The ESEE analyses consider not only the consequences associated with protecting the resource but also consider the extraction and processing of the mineral and aggregate resource. Crook County has addressed the consequences of allowing, and of not allowing these related uses. Crook County has also addressed the consequences of allowing and not allowing the conflicting uses or applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals. B. CATEGORIES OF 660-16-005 RESOURCES. 1. OAR 660-16-005(1) 2A Resources Sites (No conflicts present). When a site is determined to have no conflicting uses or applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals, the site is classified as a 2A mineral and aggregate resource sites. The program with respect to all such sites is as follows: All 2A Sites: Because there are no conflicting uses or applicable but conflicting requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals with respect to the resource site, it is, therefore, the intent of Crook County to ?Preserve the Resource Site.? 2. OAR 660-16-005(2) 3A/3B/3C Resources. All sites having conflicting uses or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals have been determined to fall within on of the three group ?3? categories (3A/3B/3C) of mineral and aggregate resource sites. - 25 - The programs with respect to the 3A/3B/3C sites are described later in this section. ESEE analyses are either site-specific or generic depending on the significance and extent of the resource and the nature of the conflicting uses or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals. ESEE analyses are grouped as follows with respect to existing and new sites: a. All EXISTING 3A/3B/3C sites that allow for a generic ESEE analysis because there are no existing or potential conflicts; b. All EXISTING 3A/3B/3C sites that require a site-specific ESEE analysis because there are existing or potential conflicts; and c. All NEW 3A/3B/3C sites that require a site-specific ESEE analysis because there are existing or potential conflicts. D. DESCRIPTION OF THE ESEE ANALYSIS PROCESS ITSELF. 1. The ESEE analysis conducted for the appropriate sites are limited in scope to the impact areas which are identified in the Inventory Section and are identified as those sites having some form of conflict. Performing the ESEE analysis will enable the County to make a decision as how to resolve the conflicts based on the nature and type of conflict. The site designation options for such a decision are designating each of the sites either as a 3A, 3B or 3C site, depending on the importance of the competing interests. The analysis will also result in reasons to explain the decisions made for each site. Crook County recognizes that there are two types of mineral and aggregate sites: existing sites and new sites. For the existing sites, Crook County may rely on historical data as it relates to any identified conflict in the surrounding impact area. While that is no guarantee for future conflicts, it establishes a benchmark in which to weigh potential impacts. OAR 660-16-005 requires the economic, social, environmental and energy consequences to be considered when reviewing impacts both to and from Goal 5 resource sites. As background, the following discussion describes these four factors, but in a general way. It is typical of the analytical process used by Crook County to make the site-specific decisions. a. Economic Consequences. Those persons most likely to benefit from the development of aggregated resources include the landowners, operators, developers and those employed by them. Crook County might benefit indirectly through lower priced aggregate to be used for road building projects, etc. - 26 - Preserving the identified mineral and aggregate resources adds to the available supply of these resources which tends to keep prices lower than prices might otherwise be. Several factors may produce negative economic consequences, such as increased truck traffic. These negative consequences may include accelerated rate of deterioration of the roads over which the resource is hauled, the costs for rehabilitation or resurfacing of the roads may be quite a burden on the taxpayers in the county, and the potential need for increased police regulation. Crook County also recognizes that allowing the mining of aggregate and minerals may have adverse impacts on other resource uses outside the impact area defined by the conflicting zoning uses. b. Social Consequences. Social benefits of the mining activity may include an adequate supply of high quality aggregate to maintain and expand the roads of Crook County. Employment opportunities may result from mining efforts. Several factors may produce negative social consequences. Social costs may include loss of scenic value, reduced recreational opportunities, degradation of habitat for fish and wildlife. In rural areas large scale aggregate extraction may upset traditional values associated with farming and ranching. The rural quality of life might suffer in the vicinity of the extraction and processing site from such operations as increased truck traffic, truck and on-site operation noises and dust. c. Environmental Consequences. Allowing surface mining activities may have some indirect environmental benefits. Such benefits might include the application of the product to protect environmentally endangered areas such as eroded hill sides and river banks. Many if not most of the consequences of allowing mining activities might have a negative impact on the environment. The reclamation projects which follow the mining activity was designed to mitigate such deleterious effects on the environment. Surface mining may reduce available cover and forage which may cause increased competition among wildlife species for the remaining forage and cover. This might upset the food chain. Some wildlife may be forced to relocate to find adequate food and shelter which may lead to an upsetting of the balance of nature in the new settlement because of increased competition from the newcomer species. For example, increased traffic associated with mining, especially in rural areas where mines are often found, may increase wildlife mortality rates. - 27 - Allowing mining might ultimately improve the wildlife habitat. When current habitat is mainly sagebrush an Juniper trees, reclamation efforts that included planting other food sources may enhance the food and cover. d. Energy Consequences. Allowing development (such as rural residential development) that might preclude or diminish mining at a site might create a greater energy consumption because the mineral and aggregate resources necessary for that development might have to come from sites located further away. This increase in energy consumption might also apply to the fact that more of the transportation system might need upgrading and rehabilitating. The further away the supply source, the more the number of miles of roads will be adversely impacted. The text above describes some of the kinds of factors that could go into an ESEE analysis and the effects of allowing mining or a conflicting zoning use or an applicable but conflicting requirement of other Statewide Planning Goals. The discussion above is only an illustration and does not form the basis of or apply to any ESEE analysis that is included in this Plan. Each ESEE analysis will have its own analysis and consequences. NOTE: This Goal 5 process, with regard to mineral and aggregate, is being conducted under and pursuant to an enforcement order. The enforcement order requires that Crook County complete its periodic requirement in two separate and distinct processes, the one being limited to only the mineral and aggregate element of the Goal 5 rule, and the other being the balance of the Goal 5 resources and the rest of the Statewide Planning Goals. This two-pronged approach is also designed to be completed at differing time levels. This bifurcated requirement, with respect to the mineral and aggregate resources, could result in conclusions being made that have not adequately taken into consideration the other Goal 5 resources and the other Statewide Planning Goals. Therefore Crook County reserves the right to reconsider the conclusions and determinations made in this portion of its periodic review if it becomes clear that the balance of the periodic review process indicates that the conclusions in this portion are not correct or adequate. If this becomes the case, Crook County will take those conflicts into account and will reassess, to the degree that the conflicts apply, the determinations made herein. - 28 - Section Five STEP FOUR PROGRAMS TO RESOLVE THE CONFLICTS CONCERNING GOAL 5 RESOURCES (MINERAL AND AGGREGATE RESOURCES) A. THE RESOLUTION PROGRAM ELEMENT OF THE GOAL 5 RULE. 1. Conflict Resolution Statement. Step Four of the Goal 5 Rule Process is developing a program to resolve conflicts and achieve the Goal. Based on the determination of the ESEE consequences Crook County has ?develop[ed] a program to achieve the Goal.? Crook County has ?resolved? conflicts with specific Goal 5 mineral and aggregate sites in one of the four ways described in detail below for all sites having adequate information on: (a) the location, quality, and quantity of the resource site; (b) the nature of any conflicting zoning uses and conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals; and (c) the ESEE consequences. 2. Program for 2A sites. Crook County has also developed a program for those significant 2A sites that do not have any existing or potential conflicts. B. DECIDING ON A PROGRAM TO RESOLVE CONFLICTS. Four Programs to Resolve Conflicts. In general, Crook County has four programs for resolving conflicts under the Goal 5 process. For each of the programs described below, the ESEE analyses of Crook County explain and justify the conclusion and decision made by Crook County. 1. FULL PROTECTION OF THE RESOURCE SITE [OAR 660-16-005(2)] ?Preserve the Resource Site?: Based on the determination that there are no existing or potential conflicting uses or no existing or potential conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals, Crook County will preserve these sites. In these cases the aggregate will be preserved and protected for mining. These sites are designated within the Comprehensive Plan as ?2A? sites. a. Reasons which support this decision are presented herein, and Crook County?s plan and zoning designations shall be consistent with this decision. - 29 - b. List of 2A sites in Crook County: [All federal sites on federal property. Crook County has identified as 2A sites only those federal sites which are on federal land; they are provided in Appendix 6] [Crook County has not identified any non-federal 2A sites; therefore, all of Crook County?s 1C sites have been identified as 2B sites (i.e., 3A/3B/3C sites, see below)] 2. FULL PROTECTION OF THE RESOURCE SITE [OAR 660-16-010(1)] ?Protect the Resource Site?: Based on the analysis of the ESEE consequences and other Statewide Goals, Crook County determined that the resource site should be designated a 3A site and protected and all conflicting zoning uses and conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals prohibited on the site and possibly within the site?s respective impact area. This determination was based on the following conclusions: (a) the resource site is of such importance, relative to the conflicting uses and conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals, and (b) the ESEE consequences of allowing conflicting uses and conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals are so great Zoning regulations will allow the mining outright, and zoning regulation restrictions will prohibit all conflicting uses and conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals on the resource site and within the respective impact area. These sites are designated within the Comprehensive Plan as ?3A? sites. There are two sub-groups within this 3A classification: (1) those having no potential or actual conflicts and (2) those having potential but no actual conflicts. a. Reasons which support this 3A decision are presented herein and in the respective ESEE analyses. Crook County?s plan and zoning designations shall be consistent with this 3A decision. b. The following is a list of the first sub-group of 3A sites in Crook County. Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis on this group of 3A sites. That Generic ESEE analysis is found in Appendix 5.1. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3A sites have potential but no actual conflicting uses or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: - 30 - ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3A1-BAS-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-3-4 3A1-BAS-2 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-15-4 3A1-BAS-3 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-16-4 3A1-BAS-4 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-14-4 3A1-BAS-5 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-39-4 3A2-BAS-6 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #Not Assigned 3A1-BAS-7 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-52-4 3A1-BAS-8 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-40-4 3A1-BAS-9 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-21-4 3A2-BAS-10 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-43-4 3A2-BAS-11 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-37-4 3A2-BAS-12 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-33-4 3A2-BAS-13 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-31-4 3A1-BAS-14 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-26-4 3A1-BAS-15 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-18-4 3A1-BAS-16 Richter 3A1-BAS-17 Alves #1 (Northwest Basalt) 3A1-BAS-18 Butler (Northwest Basalt) 3A1-BAS-20 Coats #1 (Powell Butte) 3A2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 3A1-BAS-25 Modular Crushing (Taggart) 3A2-BAS-26 Juniper Canyon (County) 3Al-BAS-27 Weberg #2 3A3-BAS-28 Tweedt (County) 3A3-BAS-29 Hackleman (County) 3A2-BAS-30 Congleton (County) 3A2-BAS-31 Jagi Pit (County) 3A3-BAS-32 Rickman Pit (County) 3A3-BAS-34 Puitt (County) 3A3-BAS-35 Camp Creek 3A2-GRV-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-13-4 3A1-GRV-2 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-41-4 3A1-GRV-3 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-38-4 3A2-GRV-4 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-36-4 3A1-GRV-5 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-25-4 3A1-GRV-10 Pieratt 3A-SAN-3 Pieratt 3An-CIN-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-4-4 3An-CIN-2 Pieratt - 31 - 3A-BEN-1 Coats 3A-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 3A-BEN-4 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) c. The following is a list of the second sub-group of 3A sites in Crook County, however this 3A list differs from the preceding in that this sub- group contains those 3A sites concerning which Crook County has identified as having actual or potential conflicting uses or conflicting but applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals. Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis with respect to these sites. That Generic ESEE analysis is found in Appendix 5.2. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3A sites have actual or potential conflicting uses or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3A3-BAS-23 Stahancyk (Prineville Sawmill) 3A2-BAS-33 Jones Pit (County) 3A-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3A-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3A-SAN-4 Williams 3A1-GRV-6 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-9-4 3A3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3A3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3A3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3A-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific 3 . NO PROTECTION TO THE RESOURCE SITE [OAR 660-16-010(2)] Allow fully all zoning uses and applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals that conflict with the 3B resource site: Based on the analysis of the ESEE consequences and other Statewide Goals, Crook County has determined that the conflicting uses and conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals should be allowed fully, notwithstanding the possible impacts on the resource site. In these cases, the mineral or aggregate mining may be disallowed completely and/or the conflicts may be allowed fully. This approach is used when the conflicting use or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals for a particular site is of sufficient importance, relative to the resource site. These sites are designated within the Comprehensive Plan as 3B sites. - 32 - a. Reasons which support this 3B decision are presented herein and in the respective ESEE analyses. Crook County?s plan and zoning designations shall be consistent with this 3B decision. b. List of 3B sites in Crook County: [none] 4. BALANCING CONFLICTS [OAR 660-16-010(3)] ?Limit uses and applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals that conflict with the Resource Site?: Based on the analysis of the ESEE consequences and other Statewide Goals, Crook County has determined that both the resource site and conflicting zoning uses and conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals are important relative to each other. Therefore, the ESEE consequences should be balanced so as to allow the conflicting use or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals, but in a limited way so as to protect the resource site to some desired extent. Limitations or conditions may be placed on the mining and/or on the conflicting uses, but only those necessary to resolve the conflicts as described in the ESEE analysis. These limitations must be ?clear and objective.? Finally, as a result of that analysis, Crook County has designated these sites as 3C sites. To implement this 3C decision, Crook County has designated with certainty: 1. the uses and activities that are allowed fully, 2. the uses and activities that are not allowed at all, 3. the uses that are allowed conditionally, 4. the specific standards or limitations that are to be placed on the permitted and conditional uses and activities for each resource site, and 5. clear and objective standards for the limitations. Whatever mechanisms are used, they are specific enough so that affected property owners are able to determine what uses and activities are (a) allowed, (b) not allowed, or (C) allowed conditionally and under what clear and objective conditions or standard. a. Reasons which support this 3C decision are presented herein and in the respective ESEE analyses. Crook County?s plan and zoning designations shall be consistent with this 3C decision. - 33 - b. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a site-specific ESEE analysis on each resource site and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C sites. Those Site-Specific ESEE analyses are found in Appendix 5.3. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have potential or actual conflicting uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3A1-BA5-19 Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3C1-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 - 34 - Section Six STEP FIVE ADOPTION OF MEASURES TO IMPLEMENT THE GOAL 5 REQUIREMENTS AND ACHIEVE THE GOAL 5 PROGRAM (MINERAL AND AGGREGATE ELEMENTS) A. Step 5 of the Goal 5 Rule Process is the adoption of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Policies and implementing regulations. The purpose of these amendments is to ?achieve the Goal.? The Goal is ?[t]o conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources.? Crook County?s Comprehensive Plan policies and zoning regulations declare Crook County?s intent regarding significant aggregate and mineral resource sites and implements these decisions. For 3C sites Crook County?s zoning regulations provide for review of proposed mining activities and also review of proposed conflicting zoning uses in a specified impact area. B. The Plan and zoning regulations of Crook County will contain clear and objective criteria for decision making. Performance standards will be measurable and not subject to interpretation. Buffer standards will be included, detailing height, slope, planting material, and maintenance requirements. Setbacks will be measurable distances. C. Approval standards in the Plan and zoning regulations will include provisions for amendments for reviewing and possible inclusion of uninventoried sites prior to issuing a mining permit. APPENDIX 1 FLOWCHART OF THE GOAL 5 RULE PROCESS Appendix 1 - 1 Appendix 1 - 2 APPENDIX 4 SITE MAPS AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS For information regarding: LOCATION: see pages 1-2, 1-3 QUANTITY: see page 1-4 QUALITY: see pages 1-3, 1-4 DECISION: see pages 1-4 through 1-10 Appendix 4 - 1 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Weberg #1 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec. 30, T 17 S., R 25 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Abandoned basalt rock pit RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 40 acres Pit Size: approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: Source ran out on site RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None Relative Value: DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) X OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) Appendix 4 - 2 Appendix 4 - 3 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Krider #3 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 30, T 17 S., R 17 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt rock in a ?heaped? state of diced basalt RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 40 acres Pit Size: None Relative Abundance: Engineer conducted ?windshield? survey, and amount was not estimated due to the hillside which makes it difficult to estimate the depth. No comparison can be made when lack of information requires a ?1B? category RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None Relative Value: Test results not known - material source which is used for road and has a ranking of No. 2 is considered by Crook County to be significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) X OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) Appendix 4 - 4 Appendix 4 - 5 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Pieratt - Horse Butte LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/2 Sec. 36, T 17 S., R 15 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt overlayed by sand and soil overburden and interspersed with alluvial sand and gravel RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 320 acres Pit Size: None Relative Abundance: No known depth or extent of deposit is known - applicant estimates at least 18 million cubic yards RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None. Relative Value: DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) X OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) Appendix 4 - 6 Appendix 4 - 7 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Alves #2 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 Sec. 14, T 14 S., R 14 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Area is a river gravel site underlying a silty loam field DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0052 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 160 acres Pit Size: Approximately one acre for plant site Relative Abundance: No known depth or extent of the gravel deposits are known, therefore, no comparison can be made to other similar resources. River gravel deposits are common to allevial floodplains of area. There are several other gravel deposits both to the east and west with no test results, no comparison can be made as to its relative value. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None Relative Value: DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) X OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) Appendix 4 - 8 Appendix 4 - 9 CROOK COUNTY MINERAL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Freeport-McMoran LOCATION: Legal Description: Sec. 21-23, 26-28, 32-35, T 18 S., R 18 EWM, Sec. 2-4, T 19 S., R 18 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Exploration for Gold DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0067 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: Not enough information to estimate Pit Size: None Relative Abundance: Twenty drill sites have been drilled in Bear Creek. Small old gold mines of undetermined amounts have existing in past. Lack of information makes it impossible to determine abundance. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Privately held Relative Value: No other sites to compare to, nor is test data available at this time. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) X OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) Appendix 4 - 10 Appendix 4 - 11 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-3-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-1 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 SE 1/4, Sec. 21, T 15 S., R 15 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy. M.P. 12.5 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Columbia River basalt formation. OWNERSHIP: Resource site under State ownership. DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0064 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage And Amount: 52.8 acres with an estimated 500,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 9.2 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 16.8% loss; OSHD Degrad. P20 = 17.9%; Ref. Ht. = 1 in. Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value to private resource site. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 12 Appendix 4 - 13 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-15-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-2 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec. 7, T 14 S., R 19 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy. M.P. 34.8 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt formation. OWNERSHIP: Under State Highway Division DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0053 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 4.6 acres - 100,000 cubic yards. There are few basalt pits available in area. Pit Size: 4 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Ranking No. 1 Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 29% loss Specific Gravity = 2.63 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 14 Appendix 4 - 15 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-16-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-2 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 Sec. 36, T 13 5., R 18 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy. M.P. 40.1 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt formation OWNERSHIP: Under State Highway Division DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0051 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 6 acres - No estimate of volume given Pit Size: 4 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 29% loss; Specific Gravity = 2.63 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 16 Appendix 4 - 17 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-14-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-4 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 Sec. 36, T 14 S., R 17 E., and NE 1/4 Sec. 1, T 15 S., R 17 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy M.P. 30 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt outcropping. OWNERSHIP: Under State Highway Division RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 11.3 acres with estimated 300,00 cubic yards Pit Size: 1 acre Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 3% loss Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have s significant value, for Krider #2. No known rock sites meet ODOT specifications in the Bear Creek drainage. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 18 Appendix 4 - 19 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-39-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-5 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 4, T 17 S., R 20 E. Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Hwy. M.P. 33.26 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt rock OWNERSHIP: Under BLM DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0045 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 22 acres with estimated > 1,000,000 cubic yards of material Pit Size: 18.2 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 13.6% loss OSHD Degrad. P20 = 13.4%, Ref. Ht. = 1.3 in., Sodium Sulfate Soundness = 12% Ave. Loss Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 20 Appendix 4 - 21 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division # Not Assigned COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-6 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 Sec. 11, T 14 S., R 18 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy., M.P. 37 adj. east Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt outcropping OWNERSHIP: Under State Highway Division RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 11 acres with estimated 1,000,000 cubic yards Pit Size: Presently undeveloped Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None at this time Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Rock test results not known material source which is used for road construction and has a ranking of No. 2 is considered by Crook County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 22 Appendix 4 - 23 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-52-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-7 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 Sec. 22, T 13 S., R 20 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Highway, 15 miles east; M.P. 34.79 on Walton Lake Road Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt formation OWNERSHIP: Under BLM DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0055 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 40 acres with estimated 1,000,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 35 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 25.67% loss; OSHD Degrade, P20 = 18.4 avg.; Ref. Ht. = 0.4 in avg.; Sodium Sulphate Soundness 4.7% loss Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 24 Appendix 4 - 25 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-40-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-8 LOCATION: Legal Description: S 1/2 SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec. 6, T 17 S., R 21 Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Secondary, M.P. 38.4 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt formation OWNERSHIP: Under BLM DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0013 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 20 acres with estimated 125,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 10 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 18.1% loss; Specific Gravity = 2.91 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 26 Appendix 4 - 27 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-21-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-9 LOCATION: Legal Description: Sects. 32 & 33, T 16 S., R 16 E. Highway/Mile Post: Crooked River Highway, M.P. 15.7 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt formation OWNERSHIP: Under BLM DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0036 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 30 acres with estimated 1,000,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 3 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 18.64% loss; OSHD Degrad., P20 = 17.6% avg; Ref Ht. 0.6 in avg.; Sodium Sulfate Soundness 4.8% avg. loss RELATIVE VALUE: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality -Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 28 Appendix 4 - 29 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-43-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-10 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 SEC. 7, T 17 S., R 23 E. Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Secondary, M.P. 52.5 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt formation OWNERSHIP: Under State Highway Division RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 20.19 acres with estimated 130,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 2 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 19% loss Specific Gravity = 2.85 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available I on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 30 Appendix 4 - 31 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-37-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-11 LOCATION: Legal Description: S 1/2 Sec. 29, T 16 S., R 19 E. Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Secondary, M.P. 25.9 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt formation OWNERSHIP: Under State Highway Division RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 0.72 acres with estimated 10,000 cubic yards Pit Size: Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None at this time Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Test results not known material source which is used for road and has a ranking of No. 2 is considered by Crook County to be significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 32 Appendix 4 - 33 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-33-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-12 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 Sec. 13 AND NE 1/4 SEC. 24, T 16 S., R 17 E. Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Secondary, M.P. 16.45 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt formation OWNERSHIP: Under State Highway Division RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 14.9 acres with estimated 140,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 2 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: OSHD Degrad., P20 = 9.7; Ref. Ht. = 0.4? Sodium Sulfate 0.26% loss Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available I on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 34 Appendix 4 - 35 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-31-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-13 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 Sec. 20, T 15 S., R 17 E. Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Hwy. M.P. 7.03 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site. DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Ownership is under State Highway Division RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 20.4 acres with estimated 700,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 2 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 17.6% loss; OSHD Degrad., P20 = 15.2%; Ref. Ht. = 0.2 in.; Sodium Sulfate Soundness 2.4% loss rock Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 36 Appendix 4 - 37 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-26-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-14 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 Sec. 26, T 14 S., R 14 E. Highway/Mile Post: O?Neil Secondary, M.P. 8.15 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Ownership under State Highway Division RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 10.55 acres with estimated 550,000 cubic yards Pit Size: No existing pit Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 15.4% loss; Specific Gravity = 2.78 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 38 Appendix 4 - 39 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-18-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-15 LOCATION: Legal Description: S 1/2 NE 1/4 and N 1/2 SE 1/4 Sec. 35, T 12 S., R 19 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy, M.P. 48.1 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Ownership under State Highway Division RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 30 acres with 230,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 13.2% loss; OSHD Degrad., P20 = 11.7%, Ref. Ht. = 1.2 in.; Specific Gravity = 2.66 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 40 Appendix 4 - 41 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Richter COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-16 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 12, T 16 S., R 14 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Hard basalt rock on the west slopes of Powell Butte OWNERSHIP: Private ownership DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0060 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 40 acres Pit Size: 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler - 15.2% - Coarse, 11.2% - Fine; Sand Equivalent - 86 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 42 Appendix 4 - 43 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Northwest Basalt - Alves #1 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-17 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 12; NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 13, T 14 S., R 14 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Hard basalt ridge which is well diced with little or no overburden OWNERSHIP: Private ownership RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 80 acres Pit Size: Approximately 2-3 acres cleared Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: County has received them as part of another hearing Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 44 Appendix 4 - 45 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Northwest Basalt ? Butler COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-18 LOCATION: Legal Description: T 14 S., R 14 E., Sec. 16 Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Existing hard rock basalt rock quarry with approximately 15 cubic feet depth of basalt OWNERSHIP: Private ownership RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 80 acres with estimated 6,500,000 cubic yards Pit Size: approximately 20 acres excavation with additional 5 acres stockpile and plant site Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Abrasion - 13.9% loss Sodium Sulphate Soundness - 1.3% loss Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 46 Appendix 4 - 47 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Krider #1 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-21 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec. 31, T 17 S., R 17 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Consists predominately of relatively fine aggregate (less than six (6) inches in size), based on material exposed at the surface. The rock is considerably ?diced? on the surface. The rock removed thus far has been removed with a Caterpillar. It is likely that more intact rock occurs within the hillside. RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 40 acres Pit Size: <1 acre used only for ranch work to date Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 28.1% loss Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 48 Appendix 4 - 49 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Krider #2 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-22 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec. 32, T 17 S., R 17 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Consists of a coarser rock with cobble and boulder sized pieces scattered over the slope of the hillside. The loose rock is in the form of talus which is essentially a rock fall off of higher, exposed areas on the hillside. Some of the loose rock is weathered and breaks easily. It is likely that higher quality rock occurs within the hillside. RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 40 acres Pit Size: None Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 17.9% loss Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 50 Appendix 4 - 51 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Stahancyk (Prineville Sawmill) COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-BAS-23 LOCATION: Legal Description: N 1/2 NE 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec. 6, T 14 S., R 16 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Fractured soft basalt type rock OWNERSHIP: Private Ownership DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0033 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 20 acres Pit Size: approximately 4 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None known Relative Value: Ranking No. 3 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 52 Appendix 4 - 53 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Modular Crushing COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-24 LOCATION: Legal Description: N 1/2 NW 1/4 Sec. 14, T 15 S., R 16 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt quarry on the side of a hill OWNERSHIP: Private Ownership DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0012 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 80 acres Pit Size: approximately 8 to 10 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None available Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Test results not known - material source which is used for road and has a ranking of No. 2 is considered by Crook County to be significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 54 Appendix 4 - 55 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Modular Crushing (Taggart) COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-25 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 Sec. 16, T 15 S., R 16 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Large hillside basalt quarry. Basalt is hard and needs to be ?shot? OWNERSHIP: Private Ownership DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0027 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 40 acres with estimated volume to be 1,500,000 cubic yards. Pit Size: approximately 8 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Rock meets state ODOT specifications -has been used for State and County jobs in the past Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTIONS: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 56 Appendix 4 - 57 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Juniper Canyon (County) COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-26 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 NW 1/4 NW 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 34, T 15 S., R 16 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Fractured basalt rock OWNERSHIP: Private Ownership RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 80 acres with at least 50,000 cubic yards Pit Size: approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None available - County has used rock from this source as base rock for roads. Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Test results not known - material source which is used for road and has a ranking of No. 2 is considered by Crook County to be significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 58 Appendix 4 - 59 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Weberg #2 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-27 LOCATION: Legal Description: W 1/2 NW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 32, T 17 S., R 25 EWM, E 1/2 NE 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec. 31 Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt rock pit established adjacent to abandoned County pit. Pit was opened primarily for Federal Highway job, but will remain open on limited basis. OWNERSHIP: Private Ownership DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0057 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: Approximately 40 acres with 200,000 cubic yards removed with no engineering estimate available Pit Size: Approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Meets Federal Highway specifications. Used for Federal project No. F.H. 120-1(1) Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. Appendix 4 - 60 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 61 Appendix 4 - 62 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Tweedt (County) COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-BAS-28 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 3, T 17 S., R 20 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt Rock diced OWNERSHIP: Private ownership/County lease RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 20 acres with estimated 50,000 cubic yards volume Pit Size: Approximately 2 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None, material used by the County for base rock only Relative Value: Ranking No. 3 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 63 Appendix 4 - 64 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Hackleman (County) COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-BAS-29 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 35, T 19 S., R 22 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Basalt surface outcropping OWNERSHIP: Ownership under BLM/County permit RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 20 acres, Roadmaster estimates 200,000 cubic yards Pit Size: Approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None. County uses this source for base rock only Relative Value: Ranking No. 3 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 65 Appendix 4 - 66 Appendix 4 - 67 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Coats #2 - Northwest Basalt COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-19 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec. 3, NW 1/4, SW 1/4 Sec. 2, T 14 S., R 14 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: The resource is a hard durable diced basalt rock with talus slopes of 20-40% OWNERSHIP: Private Ownership DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0065 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 80 acres, approximately 28,000,000 cubic yards Pit Size: Proposed for 20 acres by owner Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Abrasion 17.2% loss; Oregon Air Degradation 13.3% loss Sodium Sulphate Soundness: Coarse 1.5%; Fine 3.7% Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 68 Appendix 4 - 69 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Coats #1 - Powell Butte COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-BAS-20 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec. 21, T 15 S., R 15 E. Highway/Mile Post: M.P. 23.6, Highway 126 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Existing Basalt rock quarry with pit on low lying ridge not visible from highway OWNERSHIP: Private Ownership DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0062 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 40 acres Pit Size: approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler - 16.8% loss - test was from State pit immediately adjacent Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. This resource has a ranking value of No. 1 (meeting ODOT?s specifications) and therefore is deemed by the County to have a significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 70 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Congleton (County) COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-30 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 Sec. 35, T 16 S., R 23 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Dices basalt rock OWNERSHIP: Ownership under County DOGAMI I.D.: #07-007 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 20 acres, estimated 50,000 cubic yards Pit Size: Approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None, material used by the County for base and oil rock Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Test results not known - material source which is used for road and has a ranking of No. 2 is considered by Crook County to be significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000 (5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 71 Appendix 4 - 72 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Jagi Pit (County) COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-BAS-31 LOCATION: Legal Description: Sec. 24, T 18 S., R 21 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Fractured hard basalt rock quarry OWNERSHIP: Ownership under County RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: . . .with approximately 200,000 yards Pit Size: approximately 3 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None - County uses this site for base and oil rock Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Test results not known - material source which is used for road and has a ranking of No. 2 is considered by Crook County to be significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 73 Appendix 4 - 74 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Rickman Pit (County) COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-BAS-32 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 Sec. 3, T 19 S., R 19 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: OWNERSHIP: Ownership under County. DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0009 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: . . .estimated 50,000 cubic yards Pit Size: Approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None, material used by the County f or base rock only Relative Value: Ranking No. 3 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 75 Appendix 4 - 76 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Camp Creek COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-BAS-35 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 Sec. 19, T 17 S., R. 22 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Multiple bench basalt excavation site has talus slopes OWNERSHIP: Private Ownership DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0041 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 20 acres with estimated 50,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of availalbe sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None - County previously used. Currently for ranch purposes only. Relative Value: Ranking No. 3 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 77 Appendix 4 - 78 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Puitt (Crook County) COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-BAS-34 LOCATION: Legal Description: Sec. 11, T 16 S., R 25 E. Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Fractured basalt rock OWNERSHIP: Ownership under County RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 20 acres, estimated 100,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Abrasion 31.8% loss; Sand Equivalent ? 65; OAR 16.9% Relative Value: Ranking No. 3. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 79 Appendix 4 - 80 CROOK COUNTY BASALT RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Jones (Crook County) COUNTY I.D.: #1C-BAS-33 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec. 31, T 17 S., R 17 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Site is a hard basalt quarry site OWNERSHIP: Ownership under County RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 20 acres with Roadmaster estimates 50,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are limited resource sites of high quality basalt and gravel which meets ODOT. This site contains enough quantity of rock to be considered significant when compared to the number of available sites in Crook County. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None available - County has used this site for base rock and oil rock on County roads. Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Test results not known - material source which is used for road and has a ranking of No. 2 is considered by Crook County to be significant value. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 81 Appendix 4 - 82 CROOK COUNTY SAND RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) COUNTY I.D.: #1C-SAN-4 LOCATION: Legal Description: Sec. 22, T 14 S., R 15 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Site is a gravel and sand deposit underlying rangeland and irrigated pasture land. RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 20 acres Pit Size: approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are several other sand operations in the area. There are sand deposits interspersed with gravel deposits, actual amount unknown at this time. No comparison is available between the other sites. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None Relative Value: Ranking No. 3. Site is utilized for concrete and fill material. No comparison of quality to other sources available. Ranking No. 3 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 83 Appendix 4 - 84 CROOK COUNTY SAND RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Prineville Sand and Gravel COUNTY I.D.: #1C-SAN-2 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 Sec. 25, T 14 S., R 16 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Sand and gravel operation. Material is a river-ground gravel which needs crushing for certain uses. DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0014 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 30 acres Pit Size: approximately 10 acres Relative Abundance: Sand deposits are interspersed with gravel deposits. Amount of sand unknown at this time, estimated to be from 250,000 to 500,000 cubic yards. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None available - Graduation test Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Site is used for concrete and fill. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 85 Appendix 4 - 86 CROOK COUNTY SAND RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: O?Neil Sand and Gravel COUNTY I.D.: #1C-SAN-1 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 19, T 14 S., R 14 EWM, NE 1/4 Sec. 30 Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Site is one of the oldest extraction sites in the County. Resource consists both of river gravel and sand. Some areas have been reclaimed. DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0040 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 80 acres Pit Size: approximately 3-4 acres Relative Abundance: Few sand and gravel operations are in the western portion of the County. No comparisons available between them. Approximately 500,000 cubic yards for sand. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Sand has passed DEQ test and other appropriate tests - test results are as follows: Relative Value: Ranking No. 1. Resource sand and gravel used primarily for concrete and related uses. This is one of few areas in region of the County. No comparison relative to other sites available. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 87 Appendix 4 - 88 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-13-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-GRV-1 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 36, T 14 S., R 17 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy., M.P. 29.4 adj. north Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 2.83 acres, with 30,000 cubic yards Pit Size: undeveloped Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in the area. They all appear to be in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Site is utilized for concrete, fill and roadway work. No comparison of quality to other sources available. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 89 Appendix 4 - 90 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-41-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-GRV-2 LOCATION: Legal Description: S 1/2 NW 1/4 Sec. 12, T 17 S., R 21 E. Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Secondary, M.P. 43.6 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 4.17 acres, with 40,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 1 acre Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in the area. They all appear to be in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 20% loss; Specific Gravity = 2.94 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 91 Appendix 4 - 92 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-38-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-GRV-3 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec. 35, T 16 S., R 19 E. Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Secondary, M.P. 29.1 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 3.51 acres, with 50,000 cubic yards Pit Size: Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in the area. They all appear to be in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 6.4% loss; Specific Gravity = 2.75 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 93 Appendix 4 - 94 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-36-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C2-GRV-4 LOCATION: Legal Description: NW 1/4 NE 1/4 Sec. 30, T 16 S., R 19 E. Highway/Mile Post: Paulina Secondary, M.P. 25 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 21.6 acre, with 40,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 2 acres Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in the area. They all appear to be in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 24.5% loss; Specific Gravity = 2.84 Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Site is utilized for concrete, fill and roadway work. No comparison of quality to other sources available. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 95 Appendix 4 - 96 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-25-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-GRV-5 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec. 28, T 14 S., R 14 E. Highway/Mile Post: O?Neil secondary, M.P. 6.4 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 3.09 acres, 30,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 1 acre Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in the area. They all appear to be in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 18.1% loss; Specific Gravity - 2.75 Relative Value: Ranking No. 1 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 97 Appendix 4 - 98 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-9-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C-GRV-6 LOCATION: Legal Description: W 1/2 SE 1/4 Sec. 36, T 14 S., R 16 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy. M.P. 23.6 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0069 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 10.2 acres, 100,00 cubic yards Pit Size: 2.6 acres Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in the area. They all appear to be in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Los Angeles Rattler 17.8% loss; OSHD Degrad. P20 = 12.8; Ref. Ht. = 1.2 in. Sodium Sulfate Soundness 6.4% avg. loss Relative Value: Ranking No. 1 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 99 Appendix 4 - 100 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-GRV-7 LOCATION: Legal Description: Sec. 22, T 14 S., R 15 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Site is a gravel deposit underlying rangeland and irrigated pasture land. Gravel is river type gravel which is rounded. Crushing is necessary for certain uses. RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 20 acres, based upon 10 depth approximately 300,000 cubic yards. Pit Size: approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in the area. They all appear to been in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Site is utilized for concrete, fill and roadway work. No comparison of quality to other sources available. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 101 Appendix 4 - 102 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: O?Neil Sand and Gravel COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-GRV-9 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 SW 1/4 Sec. 19, T 14 S., R 14 EWM, NE 1/4 Sec. 30 Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Site is one of the oldest extraction sites in the County. Resource consists both of river gravel and sand. Some areas have been reclaimed. DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0040 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 20 acres Pit Size: approximately 3-4 acres Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in the area. They all appear to be in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None Relative Value: Ranking No. 3. Resource sand and gravel used primarily for concrete and related uses. This is one of few areas in region of the County. No comparison relative to other sites available. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 103 Appendix 4 - 104 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Prineville Sand and Gravel COUNTY I.D.: #1C3-GRV-9 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE 1/4 Sec. 25, T 14 S., R 16 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Sand and gravel operation. Material is a river-ground gravel which needs crushing for certain uses. RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 15 acres, 1,000,000 cubic yards. Pit Size: approximately 10 acres Relative Abundance: There are several other sand and gravel operations in area. They all appear to be in the same alluvial deposit. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: None Relative Value: Ranking No. 2. Site is used for concrete, fill and roadway work. No comparison of quality to other sources available. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 105 Appendix 4 - 106 CROOK COUNTY GRAVEL RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Pieratt-Horse Butte COUNTY I.D.: #1C1-GRV-10 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 Sec. 36, T 17 S., R 15 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Gravel Deposit is an alluvial sand and gravel deposit overlayed by a sandy overburden RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 160 acres with approximately 3.7 million cubic yards Pit Size: none yet Relative Abundance: There are no sand or gravel pits in the southwest portion of the County RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: LA Rattler 25.9%; Oregon Air Degradation 19.7% Relative Value: Sediment Height 1.7?; Sodium Sulphate 3.2% Ranking No. 1 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 107 Appendix 4 - 108 CROOK COUNTY CINDERS RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon State Highway Division #7-4-4 COUNTY I.D.: #1C-CIN-1 LOCATION: Legal Description: S 1/2 S 1/2 SW 1/4 SE 1/4 Sec. 9, N 1/2 N 1/2 NW 1/4 NE 1/4 and SE 1/4 NE 1/4 NW 1/4 Sec. 16, T 15 S., R 15 E. Highway/Mile Post: Ochoco Hwy., M.P. 14.44 Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0034 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 32.5 acres, >1,000,000 cubic yards Pit Size: 19.5 acres Relative Abundance: RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Relative Value: Ranking No. 2 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 109 Appendix 4 - 110 CROOK COUNTY CINDERS RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Pieratt - Horse Butte COUNTY I.D.: #lCn-CIN-1 LOCATION: Legal Description: SE 1/4 Sec. 36, T 17 S., R 15 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Gravel Deposit is an alluvial sand and gravel deposit overlayed by a sandy overburden RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 80 acres with approximately 2.9 million cubic yards Pit Size: existing approximately 12 acres Relative Abundance: RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Relative Value: Ranking No. 2 DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 111 Appendix 4 - 112 CROOK COUNTY BENTONITE RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Coats COUNTY I.D.: #1C-BEN-1 LOCATION: Legal Description: W 1/2 Sec. 26, NE 1/4 Sec. 27, NW 1/4 Sec. 35, T 20 S., R 20 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: 500 feet outward from resource site DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Bentonite Clay RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 400 acres, in varying degrees of quality throughout the area Pit Size: None Relative Abundance: RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Bag 1 = average swell 8.5%; Bag 2 = average swell 15.3%; Bag 3 = average swell 15%; Bag 4 = average swell 9% Relative Value: DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 113 Appendix 4 - 114 CROOK COUNTY BENTONITE RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Alaska Pacific COUNTY I.D.: #1C-BEN-2 LOCATION: Legal Description: Sec. 17, 21 and 22, T 16 S., R 20 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Bentonite Clay RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 200 acres Pit Size: None presently Relative Abundance: Engineer/geologist estimates 20 billion tons of Bentonite exists in broad areas in region in varying degrees of quality. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Swell, ml/g Permeability 89-1 18 9.4x10-8th 89-3 19 < 1xl0-8th pwr Relative Value: Geologist claims this bentonite can be used for most industrial and pharmaceutical purposes. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 115 Appendix 4 - 116 CROOK COUNTY BENTONITE RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) COUNTY I.D.: #1C-BEN-3 LOCATION: Legal Description: NE SW 1/4 Sec. 4, T 19 S., R 21 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Bentonite Clay RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: approximately 10 acres Pit Size: approximately 3 acres Relative Abundance: Estimated 50,000 cubic yards Bentonite occurs frequently over a large area in Camp Creek drainage. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Not available Relative Value: Bentonite used in oil drilling mud, hay pellets, pond liner. No comparisons with other sites DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 117 Appendix 4 - 118 CROOK COUNTY BENTONITE RESOURCE INVENTORY SHEET NAME: Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) COUNTY I.D.: #1C-BEN-4 LOCATION: Legal Description: SW 1/4 Sec. 25, T 18 S., R 21 EWM Highway/Mile Post: Impact Area: DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCE: Circular bentonite outcropping DOGAMI I.D.: #07-0058 RESOURCE QUANTITY: Estimated Acreage: 10-15 acres Pit Size: approximately 5 acres Relative Abundance: With 8 foot layer - approximately 100,000+ cubic yards. Bentonite occurs frequently over a large area in Camp Creek drainage. RESOURCE QUALITY: Test Results: Not available Relative Value: Previous use was for Kitty litter -currently is used as filler and binder for pelleting of hay cubes - as well as for stockpond liner. No comparison with other sites. DECISION OPTION: Based on information that is available on location, quantity and quality - Crook County determines the following option: OAR 660-16-000(5)(a) OAR 660-16-000(5)(b) OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) X Appendix 4 - 119 APPENDIX 5 ESEE ANALYSES AND CONSEQUENCES DETERMINATIONS ON ALL 3A/3B/3C SITES IN CROOK COUNTY Appendix 5 - 1 CONSEQUENCES OF PROTECTING AND UTILIZING THE MINERAL AND AGGREGATE RESOURCE INTRODUCTION As previously described in Section Four of this document, the County has grouped the mineral and aggregate sites into three (3) categories. This section deals with the two (2) Generic ESEE analysis for existing and/or approved sites within the County. There are currently 48 sites that are either active, or have been approved for mining activity of aggregated, sand and gravel, cinders, and bentonite production. All but two have applied to DOGAMI for reclamation permits. Developing an ESEE analysis pursuant to OAR-16-005 can be difficult. The rule states that a conflicting use, if allowed, could negatively impact a Goal 5 site. The difficulty in the developing this document is the lack of documented problems in the County between Mineral and Aggregate operations and any existing uses. Because the potential exists in the future that a problem may result, the County through this analysis will protect the existing resource sites for current and future use. The following analyses are common to all existing and approved resource sites. ECONOMIC Aggregate is relatively cheap to produce, but very expensive to transport. The cost of aggregate, asphaltic concrete and portland cement concrete is thus directly proportional to, and most heavily dependent upon, the distance between the site of production and the location of the customer?s job. By preserving a site for the future resource production, this site still has the ability to provide economic benefits to the community in the form of continued production of farm or forest products. Most existing sites were located relative to transport costs and, therefore, not allowing them to continue or expand will cause increased costs to the residents of the County. SOCIAL Social benefits include an adequate supply of high operation, it shall apply to the County and comply with all the applicable clear and objective standards. (3) The applicant for an expanded site shall submit the necessary information to the County regarding the quantity and quality of the resource. Appendix 5 - 2 (4) Any request for a conflicting use allowed by the Zoning Ordinance as identified in this document within the Impact Area must go through the notification and public hearing process. (5) Any use allowed subject to #2 above shall sign a statement similar to that provided for in ORS 215.293 that the landowner will not complain about accepted mining practices on adjacent Goal 5 site as long as that site remains in compliance with all applicable governing statutes. Appendix 5.2 - 1 APPENDIX 5.2 GENERIC ESEE ANALYSIS AND CONSEQUENCES DETERMINATIONS (ON 10 3A SITES) 3A3-BAS-23 Stahancyk (Prineville Sawmill) 3A2-BAS-33 Jones Pit (County) 3A-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3A-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3A-SAN-4 Williams 3A1-GRV-6 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-9-4 3A3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3A3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3A3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3A-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific Appendix 5.2 - 2 GENERIC CONSEQUENCES OF PROTECTING AND UTILIZING THE MINERAL AND AGGREGATE RESOURCE There are currently sites that are either active, or have been approved for mining activity of aggregate, sand and gravel, cinders and bentonite production. All but two have applied to DOGAMI for reclamation permits. Developing an ESEE analysis pursuant to OAR-16-005 can be difficult. The rule states that a conflicting use, if allowed, could negatively impact a Goal 5 site. The County has identified those sites which have an existing conflicting use. The conflicting uses are resource and non-resource dwellings. ID No. Location Name 1C3-BAS-23 Stahancyk (Prineville Sawmill) 1C2-BAS-33 Jones Pit (County) 1C-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C-SAN-4 Williams 1C1-GRV-6 OR State Hwy Div. #7-9-4 1C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 1C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific The County as previously discussed, does not have any documentation of problems with the conflicting uses affecting the resource site, or the resource site affecting the conflicting uses. The following list includes the potential conflicting uses. FARM DWELLINGS Conditional Uses Public or private schools Churches Commercial activities in conjunction with farm use Appendix 5.2 - 3 Secondary farm dwellings Private Parks Campgrounds Fishing and hunting preserves Public parks and playgrounds Home occupations Boarding horses for profit Non-farm dwellings Personal Use Airports Public Reserve Areas Public wildlife reserve Single Family dwellings Public and private picnic or campgrounds Public and private group camping facilities Planned unit developments Commercial recreation uses Public marinas Public resorts Residences for caretakers Veterinary clinics or kennels Agricultural products processing Food processing The following are the potential conflicting uses the County has identified for the previously mentioned sites: FARM DWELLINGS Public or private schools Churches Commercial activities in conjunction with farm use Secondary farm dwellings Private parks Campgrounds Fishing and hunting preserves Public parks and playgrounds Home occupations Boarding horses for profit Non-farm dwellings The following analyses are common to the previously mentioned approved resource sites. ECONOMIC Aggregate is relatively cheap to produce, but very expensive to transport. The cost of aggregate, asphaltic concrete and portland cement concrete is thus directly proportional to, and most heavily dependent upon, the distance between the site of production and the location of the Appendix 5.2 - 4 customer?s job. By preserving s site for the future resource production, this site still has the ability to provide economic benefits to the community in the form of continued production of farm or forest products. Most existing sites were located relative to transport costs and, therefore, not allowing them to continue or expend will cause increased costs to the residents of the County. SOCIAL Social benefits include an adequate supply of high quality aggregate to maintain and expand the County road network, as well as provide for the construction material in the County?s development. ENVIRONMENTAL There is always land disturbance associated with mineral and aggregate removal. The existing sites listed here have reclamation permits to insure the land is put back to some use and is environmentally safe. ENERGY The existing sites have provided the area with the best available energy savings due to locational factors. Closing of these sites by allowing conflicting uses would not only increase the cost of the material, but also increased energy consumption from site to the market place. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS At this time, there are no known competing statewide planning goals which are in conflict. The zoning for most of these sites are in Exclusive Farm or Forest Use. Unless demonstrated with documentation, there appears to be no existing conflicts. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The existing sites provide economic benefit to the County, and have not yet demonstrated any negative social or environmental impacts. Rules and Standards shall be developed in the Zoning Ordinance that meet OAR 660-16- 000(3) requirements. The recommendations for the sites are: (1) The sites themselves be listed as a 660-16-010(1) Site ?3A?. (2) Any request for a conflicting use allowed by the Zoning Ordinance as identified in this document within the Impact Area must go through the notification and public hearing process. (3) Any use allowed subject to #2 above shall sign a statement similar to that provided for in ORS 215.293 that the landowner will not complain about accepted Appendix 5.2 - 5 mining practices on adjacent Goal 5 sites as long as that site remains in compliance with all applicable governing statutes. (4) If an existing pit wishes to expand its are of operation, it shall apply to the County and comply with all the applicable clear and objective standards. (5) The applicant for an expanded site shall submit the necessary information to the County regarding the quantity and quality of the resource. Appendix 5.3 - 1 APPENDIX 5.3 SITE-SPECIFIC ESEE ANALYSES AND CONSEQUENCES DETERMINATIONS (ON 4 3C SITES) 3A1-BAS-19 Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3C1-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 Appendix 5.3 - 2 SITE: Krider #1 and #2 CONSEQUENCES OF PROTECTING AND UTILIZING THE MINERAL AND AGGREGATE RESOURCE EXISTING AND POTENTIAL CONFLICTING USES The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the Impact area, thereby negating any affect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them. Farm Dwellings Public or private schools Churches Commercial activities in conjunction with farm use Secondary farm dwellings Private parks Campgrounds Fishing and hunting preserves Public parks and playgrounds Home occupations Boarding horses for profit Non-farm dwellings Personal use airports Based upon the description in the ENVIRONMENT Section, it is apparent that the land within the Impact Area and/or the Resource Site itself does not lend itself to any functional use of the potential conflicting uses. Economic Property values on adjacent lands are always a concern with a mining operation. The Bear Creek Drainage primarily consists of large family farm operations and large B.L.M. rangeland. The limited number of sales makes it hard to estimate loss or increase of value due to mining activity. The applicant owns the entire impact area. Because of the ownership pattern in the area, the size of holdings, the impact to the property value is limited to the site operator. The economic consequences of not allowing mining at this site, in favor of the potential conflicting uses, would be an increased cost in the remaining supply of aggregate in the area due to lack of competition. Appendix 5.3 - 3 There are two (2) immediate uses to the resource: (1) Bureau of Reclamation project at Bowman Dam; and (2) State Highway 27 improvements. The remoteness of the area has prevented projects from being completed because the cost of bring in materials was not practical. There are no existing pits with suitable quality or quantity within at least a 20 mile distance. Not allowing the site will potentially reduce the economic return of the land, which consists primarily of Class VIII soils, and therefore, is not agricultural as opposed to economic return from an aggregate operation. There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact areas as allowed by the Zoning Ordinance, therefore, no consequences can be analyzed with the resource site. Social The County cannot identify any social impacts because there are no conflicting uses within the scope of the Impact Area. There are presently two (2) homesites approximately two (2) miles from the proposed site. Both of these homesites are ?second homes? to people who do not live in the vicinity, and are occupied only occasionally. Neither homesite could be affected visually or audibly by any activities conducted at these sites. (These homesites are nine miles away by driving distance, and are further isolated by the rim of Bear Creek Gorge.) One other residence is located three (3) miles to the west. It also has an absentee owner who frequents the location less than five (5) days per year. Regardless, no activities at these sites could remotely affect this residence. The homesite owned and occupied by this petitioner is located within ~ mile of the mineral sites, but poses no problem, for obvious reasons. To further emphasize the remoteness of these sites, it should be noted that there are a total of two (2) residences on Highway 27 from the Bowman Dam to Highway 20, near Brothers (25 miles). These sites have no conflict with the social environment. Lastly, neither one of the two sites will be within visual view to the general public from the public highway. Environmental The mineral sites in question will be improved by their development as aggregate sites. Presently they appear as large mounds of diced basalt - resembling mining tailings. As sites are virtually void of vegetation, with the exception of isolated ?sage? and ?rabbit brush?. The Appendix 5.3 - 4 mounds are so severe to to prevent any use other than as aggregate sites. These mounds are void of any ?deer trails? and apparently provide no habitat to the area?s fauna. During on-site road construction, there most likely would be dust occurring. Proper road grading, construction and maintenance would be necessary to minimize any road dust problems. Energy There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. Not allowing mining also would have adverse energy consequences by requiring additional energy consumption in that resources located greater distances than this site from consumer market areas would have to be utilized. This is especially true when examining the energy costs to the Bowman Dam rehabilitation and for Highway 27 upgrading and maintenance. OTHER GOAL 5 RESOURCES Outside the impact area is a reported Golden Eagle nest. ODFW has determined that the nest has been abandoned. One of the mining sites may fall within the impact area of the Golden Eagle nest, however, ODFW has stated that unless the eagle site is reused, they don?t have a problem with the mining site. The Impact Area for an active Golden Eagle?s nest is 400 meters or almost 1300 feet. The Department?s recommendations have been adopted as part of the State Appointed Hearings Officer?s decision to approve the aggregate sites. Therefore, the County concludes that the potential exists for some future conflict, but the appropriate agencies have taken appropriate measures to safeguard the resource. The County finds that if the nesting site is again reactivated for use, the appropriate consideration will be given as requested by ODFW. The Department of Fish and Wildlife states the area is a general wintering area for the local deer herd population. It is not a crucial wintering area as shown on the adopted Comprehensive Plan maps. The County does not consider this to be a significant Goal 5 Resource area. Appropriate density factors have been adopted in the current EFU-1 Zone to mitigate any potential problems. By following the Department of Fish and Wildlife?s guidelines for operators, minimal disturbance could be expected to affect the local deer herd and, therefore, not disrupt the general public?s perception of protecting the wildlife. Appendix 5.3 - 5 OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 3 As previously described, the site is located in an area of large cattle operations and public grazing lands. No evidence has been presented to the County that development of these resource sites would impact or compete with the Agricultural Goal or increase the costs or affect the accepted farming practices in the area. (ORS 215.296). Goal 12 - Transportation State Highway 27, which runs through the area has the longest stretch of unimproved state highway in the State of Oregon. The major reason was lack of aggregate which meets ODOT specifications within a reasonable distance to make the project cost effective. The development of this resource site then should have only positive effects upon the Transportation Goal. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) The Site, if evaluated solely on the Impact Area alone would be classified a ?3A? site. There are no existing or potential conflicting uses which can either impact the resource, or be impacted by the resource in Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy terms. Because the issue of other competing resource goals (i.e. Golden Eagles? Nest) is raised, the site under final analysis is considered a ?3C? for that consideration. The State appointed Hearings Officer imposed a condition upon the approval of the site that requires a re-evaluation should the abandoned Golden Eagle?s nest become active again as a Goal 5 Resource site. (2) The mineral and aggregate resource shall be protected by prohibiting future incompatible land uses identified as a conflicting use in this document on the resource site and in the impact area. (3) To insure minimal impact upon the general wintering area (which is not a significant Goal 5 Resource), and the potential for future overlap of an Eagle?s Nest, the following requirements shall apply to the sites as agreed on by ODFW and the property owner; (a) Time and seasonal restrictions on extraction and processing (as recommended by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife); (b) Time and seasonal restrictions on extraction and processing (as recommended by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife); (c) Limitation on extraction to 10 acres at a time, with ongoing incremental reclamation (subject to review and approval by the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries). Appendix 5.3 - 6 (4) In the future, if information becomes available that there is a Goal 5 Resource conflict overlapping this Aggregate Impact area, the consequences may necessitate a review of standards and conditions as indicated by the new ESEE analysis. As indicated in #1, no conflicting uses will be allowed within the confines of the Resource Site and Impact Area as determined by the ESEE for conflicting uses. Appendix 5.3 - 7 SITE: Coats #2 - Northwest Basalt CONSEQUENCES OF PROTECTING AND UTILIZING THE MINERAL AND AGGREGATE RESOURCE EXISTING AND POTENTIAL CONFLICTING USES The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the Impact area, thereby negating any affect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them Farm Dwellings Public or private schools Churches Commercial activities in conjunction with farm use Secondary farm dwellings Private parks Campgrounds Fishing and hunting preserves Public parks and playgrounds Home occupations Boarding horses for profit Non-farm dwellings Personal use airports Economic Property values on adjacent lands are always a concern with a mining operation. The Lone Pine Valley primarily consists of family farm operations. The limited number of land sales makes it hard to estimate loss or increase of value due to mining activity. Because of the ownership pattern in the area, the size of holdings, location of this site relative to the ownership pattern, the effect to the property value is limited to the site operator within the impact area. The economic consequences of not allowing mining at this site, in favor of allowing the conflicting uses, could result in increased cost in the remaining supply of aggregate in the area due to lack of competition. Appendix 5.3 - 8 Much has been submitted regarding the major Highway 97 project in the neighboring Deschutes and Jefferson Counties. The distance is short to the O?Neil/Lone Pine area in relation to the job sites. Mr. Coats has been successful in obtaining the bid for a phase of the Highway project. Not allowing mining on this site will affect, initially, the Central Oregon region in the amount bid f or work. Given the location of the site, northern Deschutes County stands to lose the most. Not allowing this site will potentially reduce the economic return on the land, which consists primarily of Soil Class VII and VIII and therefore is not agricultural, as opposed to economic return from an aggregate operation. There are no existing conflicting uses allowed by the Zoning Ordinance within the impact area. Social The County cannot identify any social impacts because there are no conflicting uses within the scope of the Impact Area. A small portion of the site would be, if allowed, actively mined at any one time, (such as 10 acres), preserving this site for mining will not significantly reduce the amount of open space in the neighborhood. Neither should it significantly impact the scenic views or vistas afforded in the area; this due to the geographic location behind a hill. The closest homesite to the resource site are farm related dwellings owned by the resource site owner. They are approximately 1/3 mile to the west of the site and outside the Impact Area. Environmental There are no existing conflicting uses on site therefore, no impacts are attributed to the Environment. During on-site road construction, there most likely would be dust occurring. Property road grading, construction and maintenance would be necessary to minimize any road dust problems. There is no surface water on this site that would be impacted by mining operations on this site. Properly designed drainage for the haul road would be required as the road from the excavation slopes downward and through irrigated farmland. There would be no negative consequences on water quality or availability of water in the area from surface mining at this site. Appendix 5.3 - 9 Energy There are no existing conflicting uses on the resource site or within the impact area. Not allowing mining would have adverse energy consequences by requiring additional energy consumption in that resources located greater distances than this site from consumer market areas would have to be utilized. Mr. Coats intends to operate a commercial pit for sales of rock to the general public. Because of its high quality, the primary use of the rock will undoubtedly be in state and federal highway construction. (Mr. Coats also owns R.L. Coats Construction, which is engaged in the road and highway construction business.) In addition to highway construction, the rock on the proposed site will be suitable for ready mix concrete applications, which do not always require that ODOT specifications be met. The adverse consequences of allowing mining operations would be an increase in energy consumption. Energy would be consumed in the form of fuel expenditures needed to run the heavy equipment and processing equipment as well as fuel expended in transportation of the products to market areas. OTHER GOAL 5 RESOURCE The Department of Fish and Wildlife states the area is a general wintering area for the local deer herd population. It is not a crucial wintering area as shown on the adopted Comprehensive Plan maps. Therefore, the County determines that it is not a significant conflicting Goal 5 Resource. The State Department of Fish and Wildlife stated that as long as the operation was confined below the rimrock area with limited wintertime operations, they stated the impact to the local deer herd would be negligible. The Crooked River National Grasslands is located adjacent to the northern permit boundary. The area to be quarried is several thousand feet from the northern permit boundary. This location will also serve to significantly reduce any impacts beyond the 500 feet impact area. There is nothing of record of any past hearings to suggest any economic impact (either positive or negative) would result to the deer wintering range. Questions have been raised about the possibilities of evidence of native cultures using the area from 10,000 years ago to as recent as 150 years ago. The evidence of their use of this land is found mainly in the ?lithic scatters? which are the leftovers of tool manufacture. The Lone Pine Area needs to have a special category for this potential conflicting Goal 5 Resource as a site identified under OAR 660-16-000(5)(b). An inventory process has never been done in the Lone Pine Valley, yet there are many of these sites which the local ranchers claim they can point out to the USFS and BLM archeologists. There are large Indian caves on the west side of the valley. There are indications that the pass which includes the proposed Coats site was used by the Indians to travel from this valley to the Crooked River and back. Appendix 5.3 - 10 OTHER STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS Information has been provided by surrounding land owners concerning the importance of agriculture to the area with details on the types of crops, kinds of traffic and farming practices. (Attachment - ESEE analysis). The approximately 3200 acres of quality soil in the Lone Pine district generates nearly $3,505,000 in gross farm income. This is based on $2000 per acre from potatoes, $500 per acre from alfalfa, $1200 per acre from mint, $750 per acre from grass seed and $300 per acre from grain. Also shipped are approximately 1100 calves with a value of $250,000. Sales of llamas also provide for approximately $50,000. The breeding and management of llamas are claimed to be highly sensitive to surrounding high noise levels. On pages 3-6 of the Document, the farming practices of the various types of crops are listed which also relates to the Transportation Goal as well as the accepted farming practices. Testimony indicates that one crucial factor in the farming practices is the timing of the various crop harvest, which requires movement on the roads. The following are the periods: Cutting of hay - mid-June, end of July-early August, September Potato harvest - October Mint harvest - September - this activity has the widest time exposure based upon the mint distillery?s ability for processing Cattle movement - irregular time periods - depends upon condition of pastures The farming practices associated with the Resource Site and the Impact area is confined to limited cattle grazing and possibly one has pasture. The limitations on the active mining site should not pose any impact to the incidental grazing. Transportation Goal Lone Pine is a relatively small geographic bowl of intensified farming with only one main road accessible as a travel route for farming equipment and cattle. The use of this road for these purposes is both traditional and historic. Under the current Comprehensive Plan, the following are significant because of the limited options of the Lone Pine area for its transportation network. ?Findings? paragraph 2 points out the direct correlation between traffic volumes and traffic accident rates. This problem would be amplified due to slower moving farm implements and higher speed gravel trucks. Under ?Policies? page 79 ?Streets and road shall be classified in accordance with the function served or designated; such classification shall have improvement standards established therefore, and planning decisions associated therewith shall take into account the inter- relationships of such functions and adjoining land uses?. In addition, the number and location of major transportation facilities shall be designed to direct urban expansion to those areas identified as necessary and suitable for urban and suburban development. Appendix 5.3 - 11 Such facilities in rural areas shall be designed to provide necessary transportation service to accommodate designated rural uses, but so designed to discourage incompatible urban or suburban uses?. Page 80 states ?Major and minor collector roads - Major and minor collector roads carry internal traffic within areas having a single land use. Collector roads join arterial roads and minor traffic generations such as school and shopping centers. Collectors should not form a continuous road network. Collector roads in Crook County include: Lone Pine road, etc (a major collector). CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS In view of the value of the size and quality of the mineral and aggregate resource, the potential savings in hauling costs if the resource at this site is extracted and processed, the mineral and aggregate resource merits protection. The Northwest Basalt area is unique because of the size of this fairly uniform basalt formation. The scope of this ESEE is limited to the ownership of R.L. Coats. There are issues to this resource site which goes beyond the site and conflicting use impact area itself. The statutory language of ORS 215.296 are examples of these. Based upon the information available, there are no impacts to the Resource Site from the neighboring farm practices, nor will the Resource site increase the cost of accepted farm practices in the area. All uses in the EFU area of Lone Pine are under the same transportation policies and rules. The transportation and safety issue is properly covered under other plan provisions. Any proposed use must comply with them, as well as all uses must comply with future amendments to that Goal. The actual site of the mining activity does not provide an impact to the surrounding area nor does the surrounding area impact upon it. The only potential is the issue raised about the past Indian historic uses of the region. The site, if evaluated solely on the Impact Area alone would be classified a ?3A? site. Because the issue of other competing Goal 5 Resources is raised and put in a special inventory category, the site is designated as a ?3C? site. The potential conflicting Goal 5 resources on the site shall be protected by such measures as: (1) No conflicting uses will be allowed within the confines of the Resource Site and Impact Area as determined by the ESEE for conflicting uses. (2) An archeological survey and study to be completed by a recognized archeologist on the Resource site. This study shall be submitted with the request for a mining permit. Appendix 5.3 - 12 If the study results in the determination that area contains significant historic artifacts, and ESEE Analysis shall be conducted prior to any further permitting of a proposed mining operation. This ESEE will then determine how the area is to be preserved, and under what conditions. (3) Time and seasonal restrictions on extraction and processing (as recommended by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife); (4) Sound buffering and visual screening of the surface mining operation (as recommended by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife); (5) Limitation on extraction to 10 acres at a time, with ongoing incremental reclamation (subject to review and approval by the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries); and (6) Placement of processing operations and equipment at a location on the site which will permit such operations within the sound and dust level limitations required by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. Appendix 5.3 - 13 ESSE ANALYSIS ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES: High profits to the pit owner. We reject the improvable and unlikely idea that the county at large would benefit through lower gravel prices. A specific quarry may give an operator an advantage in the bidding process but the additional money generated has historically gone to the owner not the county. Cheaper gravel is an idealistic thesis not a fact. The negative impacts to tourism would be felt. A portion of Lone Pine was recently added to the scenic tour route ? from O?Neil junction to the Terrebonne Y ? for both bicycles and automobiles as per the enclosed folders from Prineville Chamber of Commerce. The present use of Lone Pine road by bicycle groups has not caused serious hazards mostly because the farm traffic is slower. It would be virtually impossible to insure that Lone Pine road would be safe for bicycles with the addition of heavy gravel truck traffic. The Rimrock Scenic Rail Tour also crosses O?Neil road. Road deterioration and consequent repair costs due to heavy truck traffic would be increased dramatically. Law enforcement services would also rise. Heavy activity at the pit site itself and the attendant truck and vehicular traffic will impact the local deer herds on both side of the narrow valley. The result would be less income from hunting and a general reduction in recreational opportunities. The approximately 3200 acres of quality soil in the Lone Pine district (excluding the Coats ranch) generates nearly $2,750,000 in gross farm income. This is based on $2000 per acre from potatoes, $500 per acre from alfalfa, $1200 per acre from Mint, $750 per acre from grass seed and $300 per acre from grain. We also ship about 550 calves with a value of $250,000. Any proposal which threatens this valuable resource in any way must be critically analyzed. Current statutes under EFU-2, which we are, has a provision to establish 40 acre parcels under certain conditions. Once a parcel is legally established even under the best of intentions there is no guarantee it will remalin under that use. If 40 acres can be more profitably sold for rural residential use than for farming, that is what will happen. Appendix 5.3 - 14 Appendix 5.3 - 15 Appendix 5.3 - 16 SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES: Social consequences from the goal plan page of definitions says ?the tangible and intangible effects upon people and their relationships with the community in which they live resulting from a particular action or decision.? Social benefits including an adequate supply of high quality aggregate to maintain and expand the county road network are already provided for. There is no demonstrated present need to open a new facility because rock is short in this area. We already have approximately 125,000,000 cubic yards of highest quality rock available in exisiting approved pits, all within the economic haul zone of the proposed pit. If employment levels are to rise from expanded gravel processing due to expanded demand, they can rise in the existing pits. We don?t need a new pit to make this happen. We feel that the proposed quarry would very heavily impact accepted farming practises of this area. Lone Pine is a relatively small geographic bowl of intensified farming with only one main road accesable as a travel route for our farming equipment and cattle. The use of this road for these purposes is both traditional and historic . ?Findings? paragraph 2 points out the direct corelation between traffic volumes and traffic accident rates. This problem would be amplified due to our slower moving farm implements and higher speed gravel trucks. (comprehensive plan page 77). Under ?Policies? page 79 ?Streets and roads shall be classified in accordance with the function served or designated; such classification shall have improvement standards established therefor, and planning decisions associated therewith shall take into account the inter-relationships of such functions and adjoining land uses?. ?All plans for transportation systems shall consider as a major determinant the carring capacity of affected air, land, and water resources, and shall be in conformance with applicable policies of this plan relative to natural resources, hazards, scenic resources, agriculture, forestry and urbanization specifically. In addition, the number and location of major transportation facilities shall be designed to direct urban expansion to those areas identified as necessary and suitable for urban and suburban development. Such facilities in rural areas shall be designed to provide necessary transportation service to accomodate designated rural uses, but so designed to discourage noncompatible urban or suburban uses?. Page 80- Major and minor collector roads- Major and minor collector roads carry internal traffic within areas having a single land use. Collector roads join arterial roads and minor traffic generations such as school and shopping centers. Collectors should not form a continuous road network. Collector roads in Crook county include: Lone Pine road, etc. (a major collector) Under goal 12 guidelines A3 ?No major transportation facility should be planned or developed outside unban boundaries on class I and II agricultural land. . .etc.? Also goal 12 guidelines A4 ?Major transportation facilities should avoid dividing existing economic farm units. . .etc?. Appendix 5.3 - 17 Under goal 12 guidelines B2 ?Plans for new or for the improvement of major transportation facilities should identify the positive and negative impacts on: (1) Local land use patterns, (2) environmental quality, (3) energy use and resourses, (4) existing transportation systems and (5) fiscal resources in a manner sufficient to enable local governments to rationally consider the issues posed by the construction and operation of such facilities.? Obviously points (1) and (4) of the above have particular application to the Lone Pine Valley. Points A3 and A4 above are directly concerned with this project. To document the local ranchers use of Lone Pine road under accepted farm practices we submit the following exhibit A. We take each fo the major crops grown and break down the traffic for that crop from preparation to harvest. Obviously (using potatoes as an example) 10 growers with 26 acres each generates more traffic than 1 grower with.260 acres. Our figures are arrived at by using the exact field acreages grown here in the Lone Pine area. We then ?walked through? the entire season to list each trip. 1989 growing season. POTATOES 260 acres 1000 total road exposures Land Preparation - soil sampling 124 trips burning ditches moving sprinkler pipe out of way rototilling, plowing, discing delivery and spreading of fertilizer & chemicals inncorporating chemicals Planting - Setting up seed trucks 68 trips use of loader to fill planter planter traffic itself replacing and positioning of sprinkler pipe Cultivation - cultivate and cover early 14 trips hand weeding crews with portable toilets cultivate late (sometimes twice) Digging - operation of digger itself 214 trips run 3-4 potato trucks per digger placement of portable toilets Shipping - setting up shipping points- conveyor, loaders, etc 420 bobtails loads 160 semi loads ALFALFA 1020 acres 960 Total road exposures Land preparations- burn ditches and fence rows 164 trips spread fertilizer and chemicals poison gophers harrow fields lay out sprinkler pipe Mow, rake, bale three times, turn headlands 280 trips Harrowbed three times 535 trips Appendix 5.3 - 18 Shipping 360 bobtail trucks 155 semi loads Fall work pick up sprinkler pipe 26 trips fence for grazing MINT 1280 acres 2604 total road exposures PLANTING dig roots 380 trips truck to new field rototill, plow, disc, harrow plant new roots lay out sprinkler pipe Fertilizer and chemicals 160 trips Swathing 62 trips chopping tubs delivered to still 1920 trips shipping barrels taken to buyer 36 trips fall work discing as necessary 46 trips picking up sprinkler pipe GRASS SEED 192 acres 107 total road exposures Planting burning ditches and fence rows plow, disc, harrow seeding the stand lay out sprinkler pipe Fertilizer and chemicals - hand weeding crews also portable toilets 26 trips Swathing 12 trips Combining spotting trucks 8 trips Shipping 28 semi trucks 28 trips Burning Proper equipment 8 trips Fall fertilizer and chemicals 6 trips Fall work - pick up sprinkler pipe 5 trips fence for sheep grazing GRAIN 500 acres 321 total road exposures Preparation plow, disc 78 trips burn ditches and fence rows fertilizer seeding - support trucks lay out sprinkler pipe Combining spot trucks for harvester 12 trips Shipping 25 semi loads 8 trips Appendix 5.3 - 19 Fall work pick up sprinkler pipe 106 trips baling straw harrowbedding fencing for grazing plow and disc residue GRASS PASTURE 42 acres 64 total road exposures Spring work - burn ditches, fences, fields 16 trips fertilizer lay out sprinkler pipe Mow, rake, bale 22 trips Harrowbed 0 Pick up sprinkler pipe 16 trips fence for grazing harrow manure and gopher mounds LIVESTOCK 575 Range Cattle 1200 Feed lot 192 total road exposures Fall calving feed trucks 2 times daily 165 trips Spring cattle drives to summer ranges Summer moves to different pastures Early Fall move cattle home to wean move cows back to range bring cows home 15 cattle drives Shipping calves 27 semi loads 27 trips Farm pickup trucks- average 77 daily (peak use in summer and at harvest). Lowest use of roads during fall hunting season and middle of winter. These figures are from 6 ranches as represented by dots on the map marked EXHIBIT B. No figures have been included from the Coates ranch. Each trip may not represent travel the full length of the road. Some trips depending on relative field location may be for only short distances. All trips listed do touch or use Lone Pine road itself. We have not included traffic figures for: Calvary Christian Academy School Local residents using automabiles to go to town, etc. Miscellaneous pass through traffic Hunters Pleasure horse riders at Skull Hollow Various other users of federal lands Scenic route users Bicycle tours Appendix 5.3 - 20 Truck traffic from Butler and O?Neil pits Retreat house visitors Forcing us off the road would also result in many new on farm roads being created to avoid the competition and hazards. This in turn would remove a portion of the involved field being taken out of production, a further loss in revenue. LCDC does not want us to use the ?intangible factors? particularly ?livability? or quality of life but an operation of this magnitude impacts local residents is a way which is obvious to all. Appendix 5.3 - 21 Appendix 5.3 - 22 Since we are served by only one major collector and our uses of this road span many years we feel very strongly that these uses are now accepted farm practices. Our young people are involved in many of these road trips moving equipment and cattle. Any exposure to concentrated gravel truck traffic constitutes a real threat to their safty. Should we be forced to hire more experienced help our expenses would be higher. This translates to a loss of revenue to us. Worse yet would be delays in getting things done. Timing is so critical to agriculture success that we cannot afford this loss of time. Even though there is no pit in operation yet we still suffered a major disruption at the Lone Pine school site on October 29, 30 and 31 as spelled out in the letter from the school principle marked exhibit D. You can imagine what a full scale quarry of the magnitude proposed would do the school. Since LCDC has yet completed its Goall2 project and there are no Oregon Administrative Rules in place concerning transportation we are proceeding with the understanding that current Comprehensive Plan Policies remain in effect. An opening statemnet in goal 12 refers to ?the insurance that private development occurs in harmony with public transportation facilities?. We, of course, have a specific interest ? the Lone Pine road ? and how that major collector would be impacted by the proposed quarry. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES Goal 5 ? Natural resources, etc. One of the main requirements of this goal is the mandate to survey the quantity and quality of these resources. The native cultures from 10000 yrs to 150 yrs ago were free roaming and the evidence of their use of this land is found mainly in the ?lithic scatters? which are the leftovers of tool manufacture. This inventory process has never been done in the Lone Pine Valley yet there are many of these sites which we local ranchers can point out to the USFS and BLM archeologists. We also have the large indian caves on the west side of the valley. There are indications that the pass which includes the proposed Coates site was used by the indians to travel from this valley to the Crooked River and back. We recommend that any development be put on hold until this important resourse can be inventored and located. The local Jananese Creek deer herd winters in the vicinity of the proposed pit. Maps submitted by the applicant put a portion of the operation in the exact sections which the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife said would be impacted. As a result they (DOFW) previously testified that operations at this site would be restricted to a period of between March and November. Appendix 5.3 - 23 Appendix 5.3 - 24 High speed gravel trucks do not generally attempt to avoid deer in the road. If they do they usually tip over ar run off the road because of the momentum of the load. This aspect is an additional threat to our deer herds. Can anyone dispute that a large quarry operation would cause a loss of scenic value? Dust and noise would inpact us the length of the valley and beyond because our only road goes right through the middle of the valley. Even though the above are intangibles they are allowed for in the definition of social consequences. Historical (particularly archeological) areas and sites are to be inventoried and qualified under Goal 5. Dr. Lee Gibson the Oregon State Archeologist has stated that the Lone Pine Valley with its indian caves and lithic sites is a rich resource which should be properly surveyed and tested in order to achieve that portion of Goal 5. He feels that the county (as it can) require a complete archeological survey prior to granting permission to proceed with any large scale disruptive activity. To complete our presention we now add input from other statewide Land Use Planning. Goals: GOAL 2 LAND USE PLANNING This goal provides security and stability for all. The factual base for decision and actions assures that plans and projects will recieve thorough scruting before being allowed or denied. Final decisions then are based on the greatest good for the greatest number of people. GOAL 2 PART 1 PLANNING PARAGRAPH 3??All land use plans shall include identification of issues and problems, inventories and other factual information for each applicable statewide planning goal, evaluation of alternative courses of action and ultimate policy choices, taking into consideration social, economic, energy and environmental needs?. Goal 2 is a foundation or guide from which to proceed with the implementation of the goal process. A. Have the issues and problems been solved clearly identified? The overriding issue is whether or not to allow mineral and aggregate operations to proceed at the discretion of any landowner with the only authority remaining with the county being limitations of conditions of operation imposed by the Planning Commission. This is almost the same thing as saying that planning per se with regard to mineral and aggregate is taken out of the planning commission?s hands. The position of LCDC as per the letter from Gabriella Lang to Greg Wolf (Exhibit 28) seems to be that all we can do in Crook County is to modify a gravel operation, we can?t allow or deny it. Thier attitude (LCDC) is that the OAR?S are superior to the ORS?S. According to attorneys for Thousand Friends of Oregon this is simply not the case. There is no language in the applicable ORS?S which gives or intends to give any of their authority to a subservient body. They Appendix 5.3 - 25 (attorneys) went on to say that in their opinion Goal 5 is a ?mess? and should be dismantled and put back together properly. Authority for local jurisdictions should remain with the local governing bodies. OAR 660-16-010 is incomplete as written. It leaves out one additional option which is apparent to all and belongs in the language as option 3D-to preserve the site as important to the future but not important enough under ESEE needs to operate in the present. The three existing options 3A preserve the site (prohibit conflicting uses), 3B allows conflicting uses, 3C limits conflicting uses ? all address the issue from the aspect of dominance of the resource site over any other uses since they are all conflicting. Other goals don?t enjoy reciprocal advantage. Goal 3 covering agriculture does not have any language whereby other uses conflict with it. OAR 660-16-005 does say ?where conflicting uses have been identifies, Goal 5 resource sites may impact those uses. These impacts must be considered in analyzing the economic, social, environmental and energy (ESEE) consequences?. OAR 660-16-005 (2) repeats the dictates of Goal 2 ?the applicability and requirements of other statewide planning goals must also be considered, where appropriate, at this stage of the process. A determination of the ESEE con-consequences of identified conflicting uses is adequate if it enables a jurisdiction to provide reasons to explain why decisions are made for specific sites.? LCDC appears to be comming from a ?one size fits all? mentality and the farther we get into the rut the more difficult it becomes to deal with specific situations. As an example I can point to the article from the Capital Press dated 11/2/90 marked as exhibit E. In colunm 5 they identify criteria in their (LCDC.s) secondary lands proposal of 500 pounds of forage per acre. We all know that this will not fir conditions in a vast area of Central Oregon. Niether will the criteria of 50 cubic feet of annual fiber growth per acre. Nevertheless these are statewide criteria. Our own planning director put in 15 plus trips to LCDC locations working toward more flexible criteria but the ?universal over all? concept prevailed. The long term problem directly related to this issue is in the minds of the local residents (for example in this case of Lone Pine). If the perception is that one person can force local government to allow him to do as he wishes with his property they cannot be denied the same privledges. This could lead eventually to a reduction of agricultural income and an increase in non farm activity. To allow a large commercial development in a small confined farming area and think that it will not alter future operations is just not realistic. B. Mineral and aggregate inventories are up to date, agricultural acreages and incomes are known. Other aspects of Goal 5 specifically, the archcology of the area has not been satisfied. Fish and Wildlife needs attention. Goal 12, Appendix 5.3 - 26 transportation, deserves more prominance in this evaluation process. Goals 1, citizen involvement and 6, air, land and water resources have not been plugged in here. What we are trying to say here is that it dosen?t make sense to plunge ahead with the implementation of one aspect of one goal when much more work is needed on so many other goals which have a major impact on specific developments. You don?t build a house from the roof down. C. Evaluation of alternative courses of action and ultimate policy choices is what we are trying to accomplish under ORS 215, 283, 296, 298 and the appropriate OAR?S. D. Taking into account ESEE needs. ?Needs is a direct quote from the Goal 2 language. The actual ESEE analysis was submitted earlier. GOAL 1 CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT Many of our citizens have given generously of their time and energy to help with the formation of County and Statwide land use objectives. The main thrust of Goal 1 appears to be for that contribution to continue. On the other hand the only thing standing in the way is discouragement through cynicism or the belief that their efforts can be overrun by special interests. This could be taken as a conflicting use under the intent of Goal 1. I cannot think of a more detrimental effect to Goal 1 than to have a particular individual with extensive resources and influence be able to persue his own ends and eventually subvert the goal process to his own purposes. You cannot ?Encourage active citizen participation in planning? on the one hand while appearing to carry the ball for a private interest. We realize that it is not sufficient to raise objection based on the ?we don?t like it? approach. Tangible arguments must be used regardless of the particular Goal. Goal 1 presents a challenge however in that there are no concrete values to measure success or failure for public enthusiasm. GOAL 3 TO PRESERVE AND MAINTAIN AGRICULTURAL LANDS ?Conversion of rural agricultural land to urbanizable land shall be based on consideration of the following factors: 1. Environmental, energy, social and economic consequences 2. Demonstrated need consistent with LCDC goals 3. Unavailability of the proposed use with related agricultural land 4. Compatability of the proposed use with related agricultural land 5. Retention of Class I, II, III, and IV soils in farm use. Appendix 5.3 - 27 Our response to the above factors on a point by point basis is as follows: 1. ESEE analysis? previously submitted 2. Demonstrated need- The language and intent of this factor are consistent with Crook County?s comprehensive plan and policy. Under that plan the applicant bears the burden of proving that his project fills a public need and that the negative impacts to surrounding property is less than the need. 3. Unavailability of alternative-in this particular case there are at least two alternative sites capable of providing the quality and quantity projections and both were made available to the applicant. He chose to refuse a reasonable offer by one owner and did not contact the other owner. They are both in the same basalt deposit as his own propert and are both zoned for mining. 4. Compatability with local agriculture-- We are served by one road into and out of the valley. The accompany chart labled exhibit A shows the use of Lone Pine Road by local farmers over a full season. The busiest times of course are the growing seasons and harvest seasons. Childern of the ranchers are involved in many of these road exposures and if, for safty reasons, they could no longer do these things we would be forced to use hired help and thereby increase our costs. This would constitute an infringement on traditional farming practices. On 10/4/90 Channel 2 aired a program at 5:15 PM with Randy Riplinger during which he interviewed a land appraiser. During that segment the appraiser stated that traffic and the type of traffic has a definate effect on the value of property. 5. Retention of soils - No comment at this time. GOAL 6 AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCES QUALITY Goal 6 - ?To maintain and inprove the quality of air, water and land resources of the state?. DEQ regulations state that a new noise source (an area in which the noise emitted was not in existance prior to a proposal to begin noise emission) cannot exceed the ambient noise level by 10 decibels. It is obvious that large generators, conveyors, rock crushers, trucks, etc. are going to emit noise levels well above the DEQ limits. John Hector of DEQ testified earlier that the equipment involved will not meet these standards. In summary we feel that a through study in this case, based on the following goals is necessary under the requirements of the goals process. Goal 1 Citizen involvement Goal 2 Land use planning Goal 3 Agriculture lands Goal 5 Natural resources Goal 6 Air, water, land quality Goal 12 Transportation Appendix 5.3 - 28 Def: Preserve ? to save from change or loss and reserve for a special purpose. Protect ? save or shield from loss, destruction or injury or for future intended use. Neither of the above infers or implies in any way that they mean to develop or allow in the present tense. APPENDIX 6 FEDERAL SITES ON FEDERAL PROPERTY Appendix 6 - 1 Appendix 6 - 2 Appendix 6 - 3 Appendix 6 - 4 Appendix 6 - 5 Appendix 6 - 6 Appendix 6 - 7 Appendix 6 - 8 Appendix 6 - 9 Appendix 6 - 10 Appendix 6 - 11 Appendix 6 - 12 Appendix 6 - 13 Appendix 6 - 14 The EFU-1 (Post-Paulina) Zone is the County?s most restrictive. There are no conflicting uses within the impact areas as allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. Due to the topography of the site, it is not conductive for any development allowed by the Zoning Ordinance. (2) Other Goal 5 Resources The Department of Fish and Wildlife states the area is a general wintering are for the locate deer herd population. It is not a crucial wintering area as shown on the adopted Comprehensive Plan maps. There is nothing of record of any past hearings to suggest any economic impact (either positive or negative) would result to the deer wintering range. SOCIAL (a) Impacts to the Resource The County cannot identify any social impacts to the resource if not allowed to be utilized. (b) Impacts to the Conflicting Uses (1) Ordinance Conflicts There are presently two (2) homesites approximately two (2) miles from the proposed site. Both of these homesites are ?second homes? to people who do not live in the vicinity, and are occupied only occasionally. Neither homesite could be affected visually or audibly by any activities conducted at these sites. (These homesites are nine miles away by driving distance, and are further isolated by the rim of Bear Creek Gorge.) One other residence is located three (3) miles to the west. It also has an absentee owner who frequents the location less than five (5) days per year. Regardless, no activities at these sites could remotely affect this residence. The homesite owned and occupied by this petitioner is located within 1/2 mile of the mineral sites, but poses no problem, for obvious reasons. To further emphasize the remoteness of these sites, it should be noted that there are a total of two (2) residences on Highway 27 from the Bowman Dam to Highway 20, near Brothers (25 miles). These sites have no conflict with the social environment. There are no conflicting uses within the scope of the Impact Area. Appendix 6 - 15 (2) Other Goal 5 Resources By following the Department of Fish and Wildlife?s guidelines for operators, minimal disturbance could be expected to affect the local deer herd and, therefore, not disrupt the general public?s perception of protecting the wildlife. Outside the impact area is a reported Golden Eagle nest. When further information is available from Fish and Wildlife, the County will examine whether there is a conflict with its Impact Area. ENVIRONMENTAL (a) Impacts to the Resource The mineral sites in question will be improved by their development as aggregate sites. Presently they appear as large mounds of diced basalt resembling mining tailings. (See enclosed photographs.) As sites are virtually void of vegetation, with the exception of isolated ?sage? and ?rabbit brush?. The mounds are so severe to to prevent any use other than as aggregate sites. These mounds are void of any ?deer trails? and apparently provide no habitat to the area?s fauna. During on-site road construction, there most likely would be dust occurring. Proper road grading, construction and maintenance would be necessary to minimize any road dust problems. Allowing mining at this site would have the short-term consequences of limiting available habitat for wildlife. Removing the vegetation from the mining site would reduce available food and cover, causing avoidance of the area by wildlife. Since developing these sites involve reducing ?mounded? minerals, rather than pit mining, there are no adverse effects with regard to runoff or ground waters. It becomes immediately apparent that any environmental effects would be of a positive nature. (b) Impacts to the Conflicting Uses (1) Ordinance Conflicts Allowing non-farm residential development on these rural resource lands would also increase the use of the transportation system. As opposed to surface mining, however, these types of developments have a much greater life span; and, therefore, would have a greater impact over a longer period of time. (2) Other Goal 5 Resources Better forage could be introduced that could enhance the site for deer winter range or other wildlife. Adding new cover could also enhance the wildlife use of the site. Appendix 6 - 16 ENERGY (a) Impacts to the Resource The number of trucks that will enter and leave the site on a regular basis will depend upon several factors. For example, if processing is not permitted at this site, the number of trucks will be substantially greater than if processing is allowed. This is due to the fact that trucks leaving the site with the raw material must return with the fines and other residual materials that result from processing. The adverse consequences of allowing mining operations would be an increase in energy consumption. Energy would be consumed in the form of fuel expenditures needed to run the heavy equipment and processing equipment as well as fuel expended in transportation of the product to market areas. Not allowing mining also would have adverse energy consequences by requiring additional energy consumption in that resources located greater distances than this site from consumer market areas would have to be utilized. This is especially true when examining the energy costs to the Bowman Darn rehabilitation and for Highway 27 upgrading and maintenance. (b) Impacts to the Conflicting Uses (1) Ordinance Conflicts Allowing non-farm residential development on these rural resource lands would also increase the use of the transportation system. As opposed to surface mining, however, these types of developments have a much greater life span; and, therefore, would have a greater impact over a longer period of time. (2) Other Goal 5 Resources OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Besides the agricultural Goal 3, no other Goals apply within the Impact Area. As previously discussed the site is primarily Class VII and some Class VIII. Conclusion and Recommendations In view of the value of the size and quality of the mineral and aggregate resource, and the potential savings in hauling costs if the resource at this site is extracted and processed, the mineral and aggregate resource merits protection. The other Goal 5 resources at the site, particularly wildlife habitat, are also significant and should be protected. Appendix 6 - 17 These sites are very important to the County as due to the lack of available rock sites, its remoteness, the lack of the State to cost effectively upgrade the 25 miles of gravel and dirt road of the State Highway 27. The following is therefore recommended: (1) The mineral and aggregate resource (Goal 5) shall be protected by prohibiting future incompatible land uses, such as non-farm residential development on the Northwest Basalt site and in the impact area through Zoning restriction. (2) The conflicting Goal 5 resources on the site shall be protected by such measures (implemented in the Zoning Ordinance) as: (a) Time and seasonal restrictions on extraction and processing (as recommended by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife); (b) Time and seasonal restrictions on extraction and processing (as recommended by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife); (c) Limitation on extraction to 10 acres at a time, with ongoing incremental reclamation (subject to review and approval by the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries); and (d) Placement of processing operations and equipment at a location on the site which will permit such operations within the sound and dust level limitations required by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. (e) The above measures will be reflected in revised Zoning Ordinance Criteria and Standards. STANDARDS - 1 - BEFORE THE COUNTY COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF CROOK STATE OF OREGON IN THE MATTER of Comprehensive ) Plan and Ordinance Review ) RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Crook County Comprehensive Plan provides for review, re-evaluation and revision by its own terms; and WHEREAS, ORS 215.050 provides that the County governing body may from time to time revise the Comprehensive Plan and zoning, subdivision and other ordinances applicable to all of the land in the County; WHEREAS, the Crook County Comprehensive Plan adopted by the County Court and the implementing ordinances thereof have been in effect for over one year; and WHEREAS, it appears to this County Court that certain policies and direction given by the intent of the Plan need to be reviewed due to new information available, change of public policies and circumstance, including community, social, economic and environ-mental needs; and IT APPEARING to the County Court that after observing the implementing ordinances (Zoning and Land Development), changes most likely need to occur to make them more workable; WHEREAS, the County Court recognizes that any changes in the Plan shall be done in accordance with the Statewide Planning Goals and in partnership with the City of Prineville; RESOLVED that the Crook County Court in cooperation with the Prineville City Council review the Comprehensive Plan and Implementing Ordinances through a jointly appointed advisory review committee, whose recommendations shall then follow the adopted Citizen Involvement process. DATED: 2 JANUARY, 1980 ______________________________ COUNTY JUDGE ______________________________ COUNTY COMMISSIONER ______________________________ COUNTY COMMISSIONER - 1 - IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF CROOK IN THE MATTER OF ADOPTION ) OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ) RESOLUTION FOR CROOK COUNTY, OREGON ) WHEREAS, the Crook County Planning Commission has prepared a Comprehensive Plan for Crook County consisting of a report and maps which set forth the objectives and policies used to develop it and include the following elements: 1. A land use element which designates the proposed general distribution and general location and extent of the uses of land for housing, business, industry and other categories of public and private uses of land, correlated with other elements of the plan. 2. A separate transportation element to consit of the general location and extent of existing and proposed state highways, county arterials, county feeder roads, city major arterials, city collector streets, airports and railroads, all correlated with other elements. 3. A rural-resource element which designates the pro-posed general distribution and general location and extent of development of rural areas and natural resources within the County; including lands for agriculture, forest management, parks and recreation, recreation-residential, landscape management, multi-purpose and special use, correlated with other elements of the plan. 4. An initial housing element which identifies the general character of housing problems, obstacles to the solution of housing problems, short-range housing objectives, and the planning activities and implementing actions required to meet housing objectives. 5. Statements setting forth the policies of the plan concerning population growth and economic activity, resource management and conservation, transportation and urban development and projections of future population growth, all correlated with other elements of the plan. 6. Supporting maps, diagrams, charts, tables, descriptive material and analysis of basic studies used in developing the plan; and WHEREAS, in preparing the Comprehensive Plan, the Commission consulted with a Citizen?s Advisory Committee for Planning concerning the development of basic policies under- lying proposals of the plan and in the selection of proposals to be included in the plan; and WHEREAS, the County Planning Commission held three public hearings on policies and proposals of the plan; and - 2 - WHEREAS, in the judgement of the County Court, the public interest, welfare and safety of the County will be served best by the adoption of said plan; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the County Court of the County of Crook adopts all portions of the Comprehensive Plan and hereby authorizes the County Judge and Clerk of the County to certify said Plan to the County Planning Commission; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County Court, with the advice, counsel and participation of the jurisdictions concerned shall conduct a biennial review of said plan prior to the end of each even-numbered fiscal year beginning in the year 1976 to further define and keep current the policies and proposals of the Plan. Adopted this 7th day of June, 1973. ______________________________ COUNTY JUDGE ______________________________ COMMISSIONER ______________________________ COMMISSIONER ATTEST: _________________________________ COUNTY CLERK Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 1 Adopted: June 22, 1992 Exhibit A to Crook County Ordinance No. 70 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Taylor Plan Amendment Introduction. The following findings are adopted to resolve disputed issues and explain the rationale for the adopted amendments to the Crook County Comprehensive Plan. This plan amendment action is taken in conjunction with the Decision, Findings and Order Modifying Approval of Mining Permit Application, and the contemporaneous agreement between the County and Ms. Taylor. The Plan amendment findings are based on the Goal 5 interpretive rule, OAR 660-16-000 to 660- 16-025 and the provisions of relevant statewide planning goals. A. Determination of Significance or Importance of Site. 1. OAR 660-16-000(5)(c) requires a local government to include a Goal 5 resource on its list of protected sites if information is available on the location, quality and quantity of the resource and the local government has determined the site to be significant or important. 2. There is sufficient information in the record to make these determinations. There was no contest that the site contains a significant quantity of basalt rock of high quality. The opponents argued that the Grizzly Mountain is a significant landmark Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 2 Adopted: June 22, 1992 and that no further aggregate mining sites are necessary. Goal 5 and its implementing administrative rule, however, do not make current resource need a factor in the decision to list a site and protect it under Goal 5. Goal 5 requires that all mineral and aggregate resource sites be inventoried. Need is a factor only in the listing of ?land needed or desirable for open space? under the Goal provisions. 3. The site which is listed is that shown as ?Area 1? on the Century West Map (Figure 3) attached to the Coats plan amendment application of October 7, 1991. The specific boundary of the resource site, will be determined through a survey as part of the mining permit issued contemporaneously herewith. This boundary shall be contained within the applicant?s property. The resource site is approximately 40 acres in size, according to Figure 3. 4. The Geotechnical Evaluation by Century West (Exhibit 6) shows that the resource site contains approximately 600,000 cubic yards of basalt. Both the quality of the aggregate and its quantity compel a determination of significance. 5. These conclusions are consistent with the previous actions of the County Court in listing this site on its Goal 5 inventory. The listing allowed in the subject action is solely for the 40 acre site identified above. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 3 Adopted: June 22, 1992 B. Identification of Conflicting Uses. 1. OAR 660-16-005 requires identification of conflicting uses to a listed Goal 5 resource site. The rule defines a ?conflicting use? as ?one which, if allowed, could negatively impact a Goal 5 resource site.? 2. The evidence in the record shows that there are no current land uses or Goal 5 resources (other than potential wildlife habitat) on or near the site which would limit or prevent mining the excavation area. The County Court incorporates by reference the findings of the Planning Commission in Exhibit ?B? of the proposed Recommendation, page 3. 3. The mining site and surrounding area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use, EFU-2. Soils on the mining site area consist of Gribble Cobbly Loam. These soils have low to moderate fertility and have a capability unit classification of VI. They can be used for grazing, but are not suitable for cultivation. There are slopes of five to ten percent. Most of the soil is subject to erosion and is not suitable to cultivation. The nearby lands could be used for grazing. The carrying capacity of the land is, however, marginal. Grazing uses of the site and nearby area could co-exist with mining activity of the site, and, would not prevent or limit use of the land for aggregate extraction. These uses, then are not ?conflicting uses? except to the extent the site owner chooses to allow agricultural uses instead of aggregate extraction uses for the mining site. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 4 Adopted: June 22, 1992 4. There are potential conflicting uses allowed by state law or the existing zone for the subject site and the adjacent lands. These uses, if allowed, would prevent or inhibit mining by physically occupying the mining site or because of incompatibility with adjacent concurrent mining uses. The EFU zoning by statute or local ordinance allows for schools, churches, utility facilities necessary for public service, farm dwellings, dwellings in conjunction with farm uses, solid waste disposal site, public roads, private parks and campgrounds, community centers, commercial activities in conjunction with farm uses, golf courses, airports, commercial utility facilities for the generation of power, horse breeding, dog kennels, forest product processing, transmission towers, and destination resorts as permitted or conditional uses in this zoning district. 5. Certain of these uses, while potentially allowable, are not likely to occur on or near the site under any circumstances. The remoteness of the area, the sloped and rocky nature of the terrain, and the population of the region make the site and nearby areas not likely to be the location of a school, church, solid waste disposal site, community center, airport, park, campground, or destination resort. Analysis of the consequences of allowing these uses would exalt form over substance. There are no utility facilities, public roads, or solid waste disposal areas planned on or within 500 feet of the site. Transmission towers would not be conflicting use if they were sited outside of any excavation or storage area. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 5 Adopted: June 22, 1992 6. Thus, the potential conflicting uses for the site and the nearby area which are practically possible are: residential uses, commercial activities in conjunction with farm uses, horse breeding, dog kennels, and forest product processing. The mining site and property located within 500 feet is the area used by the County in other ESEE analyses of aggregate sites as the ?impact area? or area which incompatible uses would conflict with the resource use. Given the minimum lot sizes required by zoning law, the size of the Taylor parcel (165 acres), property ownership in the vicinity (federal and private land holdings) and type of use at issue here, the mining site and land within 500 feet is a reasonable ?impact area? for analyzing the consequences of allowing conflicting uses. 7. Because the resource site does not include the crest of Grizzly Mountain between the mining activity and the Prineville Valley or any rimrock, there is no potential conflicting use of the site as necessary open space to preserve the scenic view of the northwestern slope of the hill from the Prineville Valley. 8. For the reasons stated in Finding D6(c) below, a potential conflicting use of the site exists because of the possibility that Native American artifacts will be discovered on the site or the site might be found to be historically significant. C. Economic, Social, Environmental and Energy Consequences of Conflicting Uses. 1. ESEE Consequences of Conflicting uses. OAR 660-160-5 requires analysis of the economic, social, environmental and energy consequences of allowing the Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 6 Adopted: June 22, 1992 conflicting uses. The rule notes, however, that, ?A determination of the ESEE consequences of identified conflicting uses is adequate if it enables a jurisdiction to provide reasons to explain why decisions are made for specific sites.? A highly- detailed ESEE analysis here, then, is not necessary. The site and nearby area are not particularly suitable for any of the identified conflicting uses (except for the potential use of the site as an archeological resource). The site is not better and, in many cases, is worse than any of several thousand other rangeland parcels for the active conflicting uses. It is very unlikely that any of the potential conflicting uses would be developed on the site or with the impact area. The owner of the resource site and the impact area is only interested in using the area for mining and agriculture. The key value for this site is its mineral resource. The development of any of these purported conflicting uses is speculative; analysis of the effects of unknown and potential development is speculative. Thus, there is no need for and limited ability to develop a substantial ESEE analysis. 2. The administrative rule prescribing the appropriate analysis is poorly written and has been the source of much confusion to the parties in this case. Although Goal 5 refers to determining ?the economic, social, environmental, and energy consequences of the conflicting uses,? the administrative rule contemplates additional analysis of the impacts of the Goal 5 resource site on conflicting uses. Moreover, the rule alludes to considering ?at this stage in the process? the ?applicability and requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals.? Yet the rule gives no guidance as to when such goal analysis is ?appropriate?. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 7 Adopted: June 22, 1992 3. The confusion generated by the poorly worded Goal 5 rule has been the most significant factor contributing to the delays in adjudicating and evaluating the merits of the plan amendment and mining permit proposals for the subject site. 4. The Court interprets Goal 5 and its implementing rule to require, in the context of this case, sufficient analysis of the consequences of allowing conflicting uses on the site and in the impact area as contrasted with the consequences of permitting the aggregate mining to justify a decision on whether to allow, limit or preclude conflicting uses. 5. The subject conflicting uses are those allowed by the zoning which involve uses of land which are incompatible with simultaneously using the land for mining purposes, or, which if present on nearby land would be affected by adjacent mining activity to such an extent that limitations on mining would be sought. All of these uses would produce similar demands for limitations on mining uses. These uses are identified in Findings B1 to B8 (residential uses, commercial activities in conjunction with farm uses, horse breeding, dog kennels, and forest product processing). 6. Some of the ESEE consequences of allowing conflicting uses to mining are generic. The most significant economic and social consequences of allowing these conflicting uses would be inhibition or limitation on mining use of the resource site. Loss or limitation of mining use of the site could cause higher costs for aggregate needed for local or regional supply, less competition for construction Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 8 Adopted: June 22, 1992 contracts for nearby public works by the pit owner, less mining employment at the site, lower property values for the site with consequent lower property tax assessments and revenue, and inability to exact public benefits as a condition of mining approval. 7. Allowance of the conflicting uses on or near the site could also have effects on farming in the area or region. To the extent that some of these uses would attract traffic (e.g., commercial activities in conjunction with farm use, forest produce processing), there could be conflicts with wildlife on the access road through the National Grasslands. 8. Beyond these generic consequences, it is difficult to predict more precise energy, environmental, social and economic consequences of a conflicting use to mining without a specific proposal to examine. Generally, use of the site or the impact area for a forest processing plant would have considerable consequences: infrastructure impacts (need for electrical service to site, improved access roads, degradation to the access road through the National Grasslands due to increase in heavy vehicle traffic, additional water service to site, waste disposal problems with industrial byproducts); environmental impacts (stormwater runoff from building and parking, waste disposal issues, air contamination effects); social impacts (increase in employment, commuting trips from Prineville and Madras, pressure to allow more residences in area) ; economic impacts (potential loss of viability of agricultural uses in area; economic effects of greater employment); energy impact (need for additional energy supply to area) . Assessment of the degree and variety of these consequences requires an actual proposal. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 9 Adopted: June 22, 1992 9. Similar impacts might exist for the use of the site or the nearby area for a commercial use in conjunction with a farm use, depending on the nature of the commercial use. Any commercial use which attracted a significant number of customers who visit the site would have traffic impact on the access roads to the site, including the access road. 10. The ESEE consequences of allowing residential uses of the site or nearby areas are less severe. If the density of residential development was not great, there would be some additional vehicular traffic generated, increased demand on water supply, need for electrical utility extensions, potential conflicts with nearby agricultural uses, need for waste disposal through septic tank systems, some increase in school capacity, and other typical consequences of residential development. If the residential development were intense (which development is not allowed under current land use designations) there would be severe conflicts with agricultural uses in the region. 11. Again, however, the key consequence of any of these conflicting uses is preventing or limiting mining use of the resource site. There is nothing about the subject site or the nearby area which makes the area attractive or better than other areas for the development of any of these conflicting uses. The normal beneficial consequences of these conflicting uses for the site or impact area are not significant enough to affect the balance between allowing the aggregate mining versus allowing the conflicting use. Nor is there a value for any of these Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 10 Adopted: June 22, 1992 conflicting uses suggested by any of the Statewide Planning Goals that makes any of these hypothetical uses uniquely valuable for this site. 12. Depending on the location of any discovered artifact or historic site, archeological resources on the site could be protected by either limiting any activities in the artifact area or at the historic site or recovery of the data by excavation. These measures would not prevent or limit mining. The consequences of protecting these resources are: the social benefits of preserving culturally significant assets and increased employment for archaeologists. 13. ESEE Consequences of Mining Use. The rule suggests that the consequences of allowing the Goal 5 use must then be contrasted with the consequences of fully allowing the conflicting uses. Again, because of the unlikely event that any of the potential conflicting uses will occur (because they are less profitable than use of the site for mining), lengthy analysis of the ESEE consequences of mining is not necessary. The evidence in the record suggests that mining will cause noise, dust, truck traffic to and from the site, consumption of water from wells on-site or off- site, employee traffic to and from the site, and other consequences that would inhibit the operation of conflicting uses within the impact area. These effects might lower the value of property in the impact area. Many of these impacts can be mitigated by imposition of appropriate terms and conditions of land use permits. The evidence also shows that the availability of this quality of rock at this location will increase competition among contractors for this site. This will lower public costs of road construction or reconstruction. Use of the site will provide some employment. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 11 Adopted: June 22, 1992 14. The balance then, is struck in favor of preserving the site for aggregate resource use by preventing the development of any non-farming uses on the site or in the impact area round the site. A ?3A? determination is made under OAR 660-16- 010(1) to preclude all of the conflicting uses except for potential archeological resources. A ?1B? determination is made for archaeological resources as potential conflicting uses. 15. The same balance would be struck for a broad range of environmental, economic, social and energy consequences of any of the potential conflicting uses or if the impact area were extended to 3000 feet around the subject site. The fact that much of the land around the resource site is owned and controlled by the resource site owner, that all of that land is subject to restricted EFU zoning, that most of the land is marginal grazing land, that more intense use of this land is highly unlikely, and that the effects of mining can be mitigated effectively compels the conclusion that potential conflicting uses should be precluded and the site preserved for aggregate extraction uses. 16. To the extent the ESEE analysis of the Planning Commission (Recommendation to County Court) is consistent with the findings and conclusions adopted herein, that ESEE analysis is adopted and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 12 Adopted: June 22, 1992 D. Statewide Planning Goal Analysis. 1. ORS 197.175(2)(a) requires that plan amendments be adopted in compliance with statewide planning goals. The Goal 5 rule alludes to consideration of planning goals as part of the analysis of the consequences of allowing conflicting uses to the Goal 5 resource use. OAR 660-15-005. See, Finding C11 above. The goals, however, may have relevance in analyzing the consequences of allowing the Goal 5 resource use and in developing a program to achieve Goal 5 within the amended plan. The goals may also be independent standards against which to assess the propriety of the plan amendment. To the extent the goal findings of the Planning Commission (Recommendation to the County Court) are consistent with the findings set out below, those findings are adopted and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. 2. Goal 1 (Citizen Involvement). Goal 1 requires the development of a citizen involvement program to insure opportunities for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The goal has no direct applicability to individual quasi-judicial plan amendments. The processing of this plan amendment has, however, allowed for a number of opportunities for citizen testimony, influence, and communication. The information on which the decision is being made has been made available to interested parties for review and challenge. There have been several public hearings and substantial public input on the decision. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 13 Adopted: June 22, 1992 3. Goal 2 (Land Use Planning). Goal 2 requires a coordinated land use planning process based upon an adequate coordinated land use planning process based upon an adequate factual base. The goal is satisfied by a process that allows for identification of issues, inventory of data, evaluation of alternatives and consequences, development of comprehensive plans and programs and implementing actions consistent with those plans. This procedure is followed in the Goal 5 process outlined in these findings. The consideration of the plan amendment in question is linked to periodic review of the County?s comprehensive plan. In this periodic review process the subject site is listed as a significant site and classified as a ?3A? Goal 5 Rule resource. Determination of the significance of this site has occurred in the context of other aggregate sites through the periodic review process. Objectors argue that the process is not ?coordinated? because DLCD prevents consideration of Goal 3 and other goals in determining whether to deny the plan amendment or mining permit. Although the position of DLCD is not always clear, the Court interprets its authority to include the discretion to deny the plan amendment because of Goal 3 or other goals. 4. Goal 3 (Agricultural Land). This goal requires plans to provide for the preservation and maintenance of agricultural lands. The site is zoned EFU-2. Although composed of Class VI soils, it has some value for grazing. These agricultural values have been preserved in the conflicting use analysis by allowing Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 14 Adopted: June 22, 1992 the continued use of the site for farming uses. Potential conflicts between use of the site for mining and agricultural uses of surrounding lands will be resolved during the mining permit process. ORS 215.296 and implementing county ordinances require consideration of the impacts on agricultural lands by the mining operation as part of allowing, denying or conditioning the mining use. The principal objections to the plan amendment from an adjacent land owner and his agent were as follows: a. Protection of Agricultural Lands. Mr. Michael Jones, a cultural and natural resource consultant, feels the pit will force a significant change in adjacent agricultural lands. It was contended that the opposition, Mr. Carey Vincent, had tried to sell his ?farm parcel? but the buyer had backed out when it was discovered there was to be an aggregate site adjacent to this parcel. It is their contention the adjoining properties will convert from farmlands to industrial and/or non-agricultural uses. It was also felt allowing the pit would violate the Comprehensive Plan designation to this property as the Plan states agricultural lands are to be preserved. b. Impact on Goal 5 Resources, Open Spaces, Scenic and Historical Areas, and Natural Resources. It is the opposition contention that great amounts of dust will be generated not only from the pit itself, but from the trucks travelling on the graveled roads. It is also a concern the pit will cause pollution in the surrounding groundwater and surface water and degrade the quality of the land on Grizzly Mountain. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 15 Adopted: June 22, 1992 There are no other Goal 5 assets on the site or in the immediate vicinity under the County?s acknowledged Goal 5 plan inventories or if the inventories adopted or proposed as part of periodic review. c. Wildlife areas and habitats. An December 10, 1991 letter from Greg Concannon, District Wildlife Biologist for the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, shows the location of deer and elk winter range within the proposed pit site. This habitat is not designated as critical habitat by ODFW and is not significant enough to warrant listing on a Goal 5 resource list. The letter suggests certain operational conditions to mitigate impacts on wildlife habitat (no blasting or crushing during December 1st through March 30th period, requirements of reclamation plan, specific location of winter stockpile site). The applicant?s agreement to appending these conditions as a part of any mining permit alleviate concerns about protection of this potential habitat area. c. Impact on Goal 6 Resources, Air, Water and Land Resource Quality. Goal 6 requires plans to maintain and improve the air, water and land resources of the state. The mining operations in the plan amendment area will be subject to waste and process discharge permits by the Department of Environmental Quality, reclamation permits by the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, and restrictions by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. These permits and regulations are sufficient to protect Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 16 Adopted: June 22, 1992 the Goal 6 values identified in the hearing. The evidence in the plan amendment record does not show that there are particular air quality, water quality, or solid waste issues in connection with mining at the site. Noise standards imposed by the DEQ are sufficient to protect against degradation of the lands in the area. d. Goal 7 (Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards). Goal 7 requires plans to protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards. The subject site is not located in an area which has been categorized as hazardous or susceptible to natural disasters (e.g., floods, earthquakes, landslides). Hazardous conditions will not be created by mining considering the benching standards imposed by the DOGAMI reclamation plan. e. Goal 8 (Recreational Needs). Goal 8 requires plans to provide for the recreational needs of the state and the siting of recreational facilities. The subject site is not a suitable area for a recreational facility, given its location, land quality, and available public services. It is not listed on any state or federal recreation plan. Mining activities which could affect the winter habitat of deer and elk have been conditioned to preclude these effects. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 17 Adopted: June 22, 1992 f. Goal 9 (Economic Development). The purposes of Goal 9 are furthered by the plan amendment. The goal requires plans to provide adequate opportunities for a variety of economic activities. An adequate supply of aggregate sites facilitates the construction of new roads and the economic opportunities created by new infrastructure. The mining operation will provide additional employment in the area and add diversity to the local economy. There was insufficient evidence to prove that mining operations will cause loss of agricultural production and income. g. Goal 10 (Housing). The plan amendment area is not suitable for housing and is not ?buildable land.? Use of the site for mining will not reduce the areas available for housing. h. Goal 11 (Public Facilities and Services). Goal 11 requires plans to provide for a sufficient arrangement of public facilities and services to further the development allowed under the plan. The record shows that sufficient water will be available to satisfy the needs of the mining use. There is not other particular demand for public facilities and services created by the proposed mining use. There may be the need for additional police services to monitor the use of the access road by the additional traffic. A graveled access road will be sufficient to handle on-site traffic. There is sufficient capacity in the public roads which would be used as principal transportation routes by the mining operation (Highway 26 and the access road through the Crooked River National Grasslands). Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 18 Adopted: June 22, 1992 i. Goal 12 (Transportation). Goal 12 requires the provision of a safe, convenient and economic transportation system in comprehensive plans. There were concerns raised about the dust generated by the truck traffic and possible collisions with animals along the access road though the National Grasslands. These concerns can be addressed at the time of issuance of a mining permit for the site by requiring the site owner to participate in the upkeep of the road and possible watering of the gravel to reduce the amounts of dust raised. Safety concerns can also be ameliorated by lowering speed limits and posting of traffic warning signs and possible placement of a reflector system. j. Goal 13 (Energy Conservation). Additional supply of aggregate sites will promote shorter hauls to construction sites and conservation of energy expended for transportation. k. Goal 14 (Urbanization). This goal is not directly applicable. The mining use will not facilitate or discourage urbanization. It may discourage housing very near the mining site. l. Goals 15-19 do not apply to the plan amendment site. m. On the basis of the above findings, the Goal 5 plan amendment is consistent with the statewide planning goals. The potential goal Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 19 Adopted: June 22, 1992 consistency issues identified above shall be addressed and remedied by clear and objective conditions appended to the land use permit for the mining activity. E. Development of Program to Achieve the Goal. 1. In order to protect the mining site from future conflicting uses, it will be necessary to adopt policies or land use designations which prevent the establishment of conflicting uses on or near the site. 2. The property owner assented to limiting allowed land uses on the site to farming and mining. 3. The County is in the process of periodic review of its land use planning program, including its Goal 5 program. The precise form for the uses restrictions for the mining site and property located within 500 feet of the site shall be determined in the periodic review process. The effect of the amendment shall be to preclude any use on or within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Taylor mining site except for the actual use of land for farming (?farm use? as defined by ORS 215.203(2)(a)) and mining bf minerals and aggregate. 4. Concerns have been expressed about the consistency with Goal 5 of the currently- adopted ordinance provisions regulating mining permits. These concerns will be addressed and resolved during the periodic review process. Ordinance No. 70 EXHIBIT A - Page 20 Adopted: June 22, 1992 5. The subject plan amendment application has been considered together with an application for a mining permit under state and local law. To the extent the considerations and findings relevant to issuance of a mining permit are also material to the legal issues pertaining to the subject plan amendment, the findings and conclusions set out in the Taylor mining permit findings, conclusions and recommendation of May, 1992 are adopted and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT A - Page 1 Adopted: April 28, 1994 EXHIBIT ?A? C-P(M)-18-94 LEGAL CRITERIA ZONING: The property is zoned Heavy Industrial H-M. Mining and quarrying are permitted outright in this zone, subject to site plan review, in accordance with Section 3.150 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Sections 5.060 (9) and Article 11 set forth requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands, or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands. it also states that the site must be on the significant inventory list of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060 (G) states that all operations are to confirm to the requirements of the Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The applicant is seeking to have the proposed quarry site included in the inventory of quarry sites contained in the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendment made pursuant to periodic review. Other relevant sections of the Comprehensive Plan are pages 25-35, 61-68, 113-119, 152-158, and 178-200. Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT B ? Page 1 Adopted: April 28, 1994 EXHIBIT ?B? C-P(M)-18-94 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: Between the City of Prineville Railroad and the madras Highway one quarter mile west of Lamonta road (T 14 S R 15 EWM Sec 23, Tl 500). PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to add an aggregate quarry site to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory in the Crook County-Prineville Area comprehensive Plan. The applicant is also seeking site plan approval to operate an aggregate quarry in a Heavy Industrial Zone H-M. ACREAGE: The property measures 42.98 acres. The proposed excavation site is to measure about 9 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: A log sorting yard is located on the property. AREA LAND USE: The property is in an industrial area. ACCESS: Access to the property is existing from Bus Evans County Road. 75-100 truck trips per day are estimated. SECURITY: The property is presently fenced, with locked gates. No security lighting is to be provided. IRRIGATION: The property has 21.2 acres of water rights from the Ochoco Irrigation District. The water rights are to be changed to industrial use. SOILS: Soils in the pit area consist primary of Metolius Sandy Loam and Powder Silt Loam, both SCS Class II. FLOOD ZONE: The property is in Flood Zone X, outside the 500 year flood zone. FIRE PROTECTION: The property is in Fire Zone II. WILDLIFE: The property is not in a critical wildlife area. VEGETATION: The site is covered by crested wheat grass and weeds. It will be seeded with crested wheat grass and/or other grasses during reclamation. WETLAND: The property is not in a designated wetland area. Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT B ? Page 2 Adopted: April 28, 1994 SURFACE WATER: A minimum setback of 1000 feet from streams and drainages is to be maintained. A 108,800 square foot settling pond is to be constructed to contain storm water runoff. It will be filled in when the site is reclaimed. GROUNDWATER: The estimated groundwater depth is 55 feet. No dewatering wells will be required. There is an existing well on the property. A well may be drilled to provide water for the operation. TOPOGRAPHY: The site is level. Topsoil depth is from 1 to 3 feet. Overburden depth is 2-4 feet. SEPTIC: Portable toilets will be provided for workers. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource material and storage of equipment are required to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The proposed use would meet these requirements, as no dust-sensitive uses, residences or public roads are located within 500 feet of the proposed quarry site. SCREENING: Screening is required to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet, under Section 11.060(F). There are no such land uses within 500 feet. RECLAMATION: Concurrent reclamation will take place during mining operations. The proposed pit will be mined in three phases, with each phase being approximately 3 acres. The first phase will be stripped and stockpiled at the pit boundaries. After mining the first phase, applicant will strip the second phase and place the strippings over the mined out first phase area. Upon completion of mining the third area applicant will reclaim this area with the strippings from the first phase, then completely finish grade the entire pit area as per our state Reclamation Plan. Topsoil will be stockpiled and returned to site, which will be seeded with crested wheat grass and/or other grasses. The settling pond will be filled in with overburden and topsoil. DISCUSSION: The applicant proposes to quarry aggregate to be used in reconstructing the Ochoco Dam. The mining method to be used is single bench. The maximum estimated depth is 18 feet. Screening and washing will be done onsite. Wash water will be contained in a closed system. Water will be obtained from the existing water right and possible from a well on the property. A containment pond will be used to contain all wastewater on the site. Mining will be done with D-8N dozer, 980-C loader, and Cat 623 paddle wheel scraper. Electricity will be provided by an onsite generator. No permanent structure will be erected. REFERENCE: The staff report of April 18, 1994 is hereby referenced Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT C ? Page 1 Adopted: April 28, 1994 EXHIBIT ?C? C-P(M)-18-94 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION (1) As indicated by the attached ESEE Analysis, the proposed gravel quarry will conflict with some permitted uses in the Heavy Industrial Zone H-M, but will not conflict with any statewide Planning Goal. It should therefore be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3C? site. It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following CONDITIONS and REQUIREMENTS: (1) The Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit residential uses (including caretaker residences), veterinary clinics and kennels, agricultural products processing and food processing on or within 500 feet of the proposed site. (2) All requirements of the state Department of Geology and Department of Environmental Quality be adhered to. Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT C ? Page 2 Adopted: April 28, 1994 ESEE ANALYSIS Of Application No. 3-C-3-GRAV-11 (Barnard Pit) Pursuant to data received from applicant concerning quantity and quality of the site material, it is a ?1C? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, but there are no conflicting Goal Issues, the site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: 1. Residences for caretakers. 2. Veterinary clinics or kennels. 3. Agricultural products processing 4. Food processing 5. Resumptions of residential uses which have been discontinued for not more than six (6) months. None of the above uses are presently existing or proposed within the impact area. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Heavy Industrial H-M. Except for the above listed incompatible uses, all allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. None of the listed conflicting uses are existing or proposed. Therefore, any economic effect on the impact area will be minimal. The economic consequences of not, allowing mining at the proposed site will be increased cost of reconstructing the Ochoco Dam due to the cost of transporting aggregate longer distances from other possible sites, and economic impacts of possible delays in dam reconstruction. SOCIAL IMPACTS No negative social impacts can be identified because there are no existing or proposed residences within the impact area, and there will be no significant scenic impacts. Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT C ? Page 3 Adopted: April 28, 1994 The social impacts of not allowing mining at the proposed site might include disruption of the lifestyles of farming families due to lack of irrigation water if dam reconstruction is delayed. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The proposed site is presently in industrial use as a log sorting yard, and has sparse vegetation. When the site is reclaimed, it will be leveled and reseeded. There are no anticipated groundwater or surface water conflicts, due to depth of groundwater and distance to the nearest surface streams and drainages. Any dust problems resulting from excavation can be controlled by watering and use of proper excavation techniques. The environmental impacts of not allowing mining at the site could include greater impacts which could result from using some alternative sites. They could also include continued degradation of fish and wildlife habitats due to lack of water in the Ochoco Reservoir if dam reconstruction is delayed. ENERGY IMPACTS There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. Energy impacts of not allowing mining at the site include greater energy costs of transporting aggregate from more distant sites. OTHER GOAL 5 RESOURCES There are no critical wildlife areas within one mile of the impact area, and no Goal 5 resources other than the aggregate which is to be extracted. Dam reconstruction is needed to maintain the fish and wildlife resources provided by the Ochoco Reservoir. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Heavy Industrial H-M, and classified as Industrial by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are permitted uses in this area. GOAL 3 The impact area does not include any agricultural lands. Reconstruction of the Ochoco Dam is necessary to maintain the agricultural operations in the County. Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT C ? Page 4 Adopted: April 28, 1994 GOAL 6 The proposed operations will not negatively impact groundwater or surface water resources. Any air quality impact will be mitigated by standard quarrying techniques which are required by the state DEQ. GOAL 7 Reconstruction of the Ochoco Dam is needed to mitigate flood hazards in the Prineville Area. GOAL 8 Dam reconstruction is necessary to maintain the Ochoco Reservoir as a recreational resource. GOAL 9 The proposal will have little if any negative economic effects as it will preclude few otherwise permitted industrial activities in the impact area. Reconstruction of the Ochoco Dam will have a positive economic impact in Crook County. GOAL 13 Use of the site as a source of aggregate for reconstruction of the Ochoco Dam will have a positive energy impact, as it will result in lower energy costs than use of a more distant site. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) The site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Conflicting uses which are permitted by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance are not presently existing and can be prohibited by the County without significant economic or social effects. There are no significant conflicts with other Goal 5 resources or other state goals. (2) The mineral and aggregate resource shall be protected by prohibiting future incompatible land uses identified as conflicting uses in this document on the Resource Site and in the Impact Area. Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT C ? Page 5 Adopted: April 28, 1994 3C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3C3-GRV-3 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-SAN-10 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3C-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-CIN-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-4-4 c. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis, and as result of that analysis has designated them as 3C Sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have actual or potential conflicting ;uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3Cl-BAS-17 Alves #1 (Northwest Basalt) 3C2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 3C3-BAS-29 Hackelman (County) 3C-BEN-3 Coats 3C-BEN-3 Alaska Pacific 3C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 3C-BEN-3 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) d. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a site-specific ESEE analysis on each resource site and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3 C sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have potential or actual conflicting uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-19- Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3C1-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 3C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 3C3-GRV-11 Bernard 3C-SAN-3 Pieratt Ordinance No. 89 EXHIBIT C ? Page 6 Adopted: April 28, 1994 Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT A ? Page 1 Adopted: September 7, 1994 EXHIBIT ?A? C-P(M)-19-94 LEGAL CRITERIA ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2. Mining is a conditional use in this zone under Section 3.020(3) of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Article II of the zoning ordinance sets requirements for mining Section 5.060(9) also sets requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surroundings lands, or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surroundings lands. It also states that the site must be on the significant inventory list of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The applicant is seeking to have the site listed in the inventory of quarry sites contained in the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendments made pursuant to periodic review. Other relevant sections of the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan are pages 25-27, 42-49, 113-119, 152-164, and 178-200, and the ESEE Analysis section of the Mineral and Aggregate Amendment. Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT B ? Page 1 Adopted: September 7, 1994 EXHIBIT ?B? C-PM)-19-94 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: 1.4 miles southeast of the existing Lane Pine Quarry about 12 miles northwest of Prineville (T 14 S 14 EWM Sec 15 TL 100, 101; Sec 22 TL 100) PROPOSAL: Recommendation to the County Court on a Comprehensive Plan amendment to add an aggregate quarry site to the inventory of mineral and aggregate sites in the Comprehensive Plan; conditional use approval for an aggregate quarrying operation on the site. ACREAGE: The excavation area is to total 120 acres. Excavation is to take place in 5 acre increments. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The property is in agricultural use. AREA LAND USE: The property is located in an agricultural area. ACCESS: The proposed site is connected by an existing haul road to the existing Lone Pine Quarry and Lone Pine Road. SECURITY: The property is fenced. The only access is through the existing Lone Pine Quarry. The access at Lone Pine Road is gated, and is adjacent to an occupied farm residence on the property. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is under farm deferral. The mining site is to be removed from farm deferral. IRRIGATION: The property has about 120 acres of irrigation water rights from the Crooked River under a state water right. The water is to be used in reclamation of the property. SOILS: Soils in the quarry area consist primarily of Prineville Sandy Loam, SCS Class II. FLOOD ZONE: The proposed quarry site is in Flood Zone X outside the 500 year flood zone. WETLAND: A 3-4 acre wetland area is adjacent to the proposed site. A minimum setback of 100 feet is to be maintained adjacent to the wetland. WILDLIFE: The property is in General Deer Winter Range. VEGETATION: The proposed site is a cultivated field. Existing vegetation within 100 feet of the mining site will be preserved. Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT B ? Page 2 Adopted: September 7, 1994 SURFACE WATER: A small irrigation pond and wetland are located on the property. Minimum setbacks of 100 feet are to be maintained from these water bodies. No surface water is to be used in the operation except for road watering and dust abatement as necessary. TOPOGRAPHY: The site is essentially level. It will be lowered less than 20 feet by the quarrying operation. SEPTIC: Portable toilets will be provided for workers. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource material and storage of equipment are required to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The proposed use would meet these requirements, as no dust-sensitive uses, residences or public roads are located within 500 feet of the proposed quarry site. SCREENING: Screening is required to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet, under Section 11.060(F). T here are no such land uses within 500 feet. RECLAMATION: Each 5 acre increment will be reclaimed when mining is completed. Overburden will be stored and used in reclamation. A live topsoil reclamation technique will be used, and reclaimed areas will be seeded and mulched. Irrigation water from the Crooked River will be used in reclamation. The property will be restored to use as irrigated agricultural land, with slopes not exceeding a three to one ratio. DISCUSSION: The site consists of a 120 acre parcel. Excavation is to occur in five acre increments with concurrent reclamation. Excavation will be to a depth of 10-20 feet. Material excavated will be hauled by an existing haul road on the property to the existing Lone Pine Quarry, where it will be processed by the existing crusher and hot plant and transported via the existing access on Lone Pine Road to where it will be used. The proposed site contains 1-2 million cubic yards of ODOT quality aggregate and cement rock. TESTIMONY: The Department of Fish and Wildlife state that they have no objection to the proposal provided their recommendations for mitigation measures in General Deer Winter Range are adhered to. An adjacent landowner submitted testimony in support of the proposal. There was no opposition testimony. REFERENCE: The staff report of July 6, 1994 is hereby referenced. Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT C ? Page 1 Adopted: September 7, 1994 EXHIBIT ?C? CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION (1) As indicated by the attached Burden of Proof Statement, the proposed quarry will conflict with some potential permitted uses in the EFU-2 Zone, but will conflict with no existing uses and with no statewide Planning Goal. It should therefore be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3C? site. It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following CONDITIONS and REQUIREMENTS: (1) The Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit land uses identified as potential conflicting uses in farm zones by Appendix 5 of the Crook County- Prineville Area. Comprehensive Plan within 500 feet of the proposed site boundaries. (2) All requirements of the state Department of Geology and the Department of Environmental Quality to be adhered to. (3) All requirements of the Department of Fish and Wildlife for mitigation measures in General Deer Winter Range to be adhered to. Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT C ? Page 2 Adopted: September 7, 1994 ESEE ANALYSIS Of Application N. 3-C-3-GRAV-12 (Bend Aggregate & Paving) Pursuant to data received from applicant concerning quantity and quality of the site material, it is a ?1C? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, but there are no conflicting Goal Issues, the site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: Farm Dwellings campgrounds Private Parks fishing & hunting preserves Non-Farm Dwellings public parks & playgrounds public or private schools home occupations churches personal use airports secondary farm dwelling boarding houses for profit commercial activities in conjunction with farm use None of the above uses are presently existing or proposed within the impact area. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use-2. Except for the above listed incompatible uses, all allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. None of the listed conflicting uses are existing or proposed. Therefore, any economic effect on the impact area will be minimal. The economic consequences of not allowing mining at the proposed site will be increased cost of reconstructing the Ochoco Dam due to the cost of transporting aggregate longer distances from other possible sites, and economic impacts of possible delays in dam reconstruction. SOCIAL IMPACTS No negative social impacts can be identified because there are no existing or proposed residences within the impact area, and there will be no significant scenic impacts. The social impacts of not allowing mining at the proposed site might include disruption of the lifestyle of farming families due to lack of irrigation water if dam reconstruction is delayed. Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT C ? Page 3 Adopted: September 7, 1994 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The proposed site is presently in farm use in hay production. The site will be concurrently reclaimed and be again used for farming. There are no anticipated groundwater or surface water conflicts. Any dust problems resulting from excavation can be controlled by watering and use of proper excavation techniques. The environmental impacts of not allowing mining at the site could include greater impacts which could result from using some alternative sites. ENERGY IMPACTS There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. Energy impacts of not allowing at the site include greater energy costs of transporting aggregate from more distant sites. OTHER GOAL 5 RESOURCES There are no critical wildlife areas within one mile of the impact area, and no Goal 5 resources other than the aggregate which is to be extracted. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use-2, and classified as Agricultural land by the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are conditional uses in this area. Goal 3 The area is currently in agricultural production. The site will be concurrently reclaimed and put back into agricultural production after the minerals re extracted. No long term impacts to agricultural production are predicted. GOAL 6 The proposed operations will not negatively impact groundwater or surface water resources. Any air quality impact will be mitigated by standard quarrying techniques which are required by the state DEQ. GOAL 8 Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT C ? Page 4 Adopted: September 7, 1994 The activity will not affect recreation in the area. GOAL 9 The proposal will have little if any negative economic effects. Use of the aggregate site will have positive economic effects providing for sale of raw materials. GOAL 13 Use of the site as source of aggregate will result in lower energy costs than use of a more distant site. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) The site should be classified as ?3C? site. Conflicting uses which are permitted by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance are not presently existing and can be prohibited by the County without significant economic or social effects. There are no significant conflicts with other Goal 5 resources or other state goals. (2) The mineral and aggregate resource shall be protected by prohibiting future incompatible land uses identified as conflicting uses in this document on the Resources Site and in the Impact Area. Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT C ? Page 5 Adopted: September 7, 1994 3C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3C3-GRV-3 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-SAN-1 O?Neil and Gravel 3C-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-CIN-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-4-4 c. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis, and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C Sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have actual or potential conflicting; uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-17 Alves # 1 (Northwest Basalt) 3C2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 3C3-BAS-29 Hackelman (County) 3C-BEN-3 Coats 3C-BEN-3 Alaska Pacific 3C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 3C-BEN-3 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) d. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a site-specific ESEE analysis on each resource site and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have potential or actual conflicting uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-19 Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3C1-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 3C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 3C3-GRV-11 Bernard 3C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate & Paving 3C-SAN-3 Pieratt NOTE: the Oregon State Highway Division uses an internal three-part number code to designate its sites; the three parts are respectively: Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT C ? Page 6 Adopted: September 7, 1994 For example Crook County?s 1C1-BAS-l site is an Oregon State Highway Division site that is identified internally by the Division as site #7-3-4. The ?7? signifies ____________, the ?3? signifies _________________ and the ?4? signifies _________________. b. IC Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME ICn-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1Cn-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1Cn-SAN-3 Pieratt 1Cn-SAN-3 Williams c. Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME IC2-GRV-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-13-4 1C1-GRV-2 Oregon State Highway Division #7-41-4 ICI-GRV-3 Oregon State Highway Division #7-38-4 IC2-GRV-4 Oregon State Highway Division #7-36-4 IC1-GRV-5 Oregon State Highway Division #7-5-4 ICI-GRV-6 Oregon State Highway Division #7-9-4 IC1-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) IC3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 1C3-GRV-11 Bernard 1C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate and Paving d. IC Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME lCn-CIN-1 Oregon State Highway lCn-CIN-2 Pieratt e. IC Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory ID . LOCATION NAME 1C-BEN-1 Coats 1C-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific 1C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 1C-BEN-4 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) Ordinance No. 93 EXHIBIT C ? Page 7 Adopted: September 7, 1994 Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT A ? Page 1 Adopted: September 14, 1994 EXHIBIT ?A? C-P-(M) ?20-94 LEGAL CRITERIA ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-3. Mining is a conditional use in this zone under Section 3.030(3) of the Crook county Zoning Ordinance. Article II of the zoning ordinance sets requirements for mining Section 5.060(9) also sets requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands, or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surroundings lands. It also states that the site must be on the significant inventory list of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The applicant is seeking to have the site listed in the inventory of quarry sites contained in the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendments made pursuant to periodic review. Other relevant sections of the Crook County-Prineville Are Comprehensive Plan are pages 25-27, 42-49, 113-119, 152-164, and 178-200, and the ESEE Analysis section of the Mineral and Aggregate Amendment. Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT B ? Page 1 Adopted: September 14, 1994 EXHIBIT ?B? C-P(m)-20-94 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: On the west side of Millican Road about 1.5 miles south of Highway 126 (T15 S R15 EWM Sec 23, TL 1208). PROPOSAL: Recommendation to the County Court on a Comprehensive Plan amendment to add an aggregate quarry site to the inventory of mineral and aggregate sites in the Comprehensive Plan; conditional use approval for an aggregate quarrying operation on the site. ACREAGE: The site consists of about 320 acres of a ranch measuring about 5000 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The proposed site is not presently used. AREA LAND USE: Properties in the area are used for grazing or are vacant. ACCESS: There are two access points. One access connects to Millican Road. The other connects to Highway 126 by way of the existing Three Springs Ranch Road. SECURITY: The proposed site is to be fenced, with locked gates at points of access to the property. Cattle guards will be placed to keep cattle out of the site. All vehicles and equipment will be stored within the fenced area. The site will be posted. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is under farm deferral. The mining site is to be removed from farm deferral. IRRIGATION: The property is not irrigated and has no water rights. SOILS: A variety of soil types are present on the site. About 70% of the site consists of SCS Class II soils (Redmond loam, Redmond sandy loam, Deschutes sandy loam, Ayres and Ochoco sandy loam). The remainder of the site consists of Class III-VII soils (Deschutes loamy sand, Bakeoven very stony loam; Ayres and Ochoco Stony Sandy Loam). FLOOD ZONE: The proposed site is in Flood Zone X outside the 500 year flood zone. WETLAND: The proposed site is not in a designated wetland area. WILDLIFE: The proposed site is in Antelope Winter Range. ODFW recommends that blasting and crushing not be permitted on the site between December 1, and April 30, and that access be blocked when the quarry is closed. Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 1 Adopted: September 14, 1994 EXHIBIT ?C? C-P(M)-20-94 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION (1) As indicated by the attached Burden of Proof Statement the proposed gravel quarry will conflict with some permitted uses in the Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-3, but will not conflict with any statewide Planning Goal. It should therefore be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3C? site. (2) As the property is located on the fringe of Antelope Winter Range, no seasonal restrictions should be imposed on operations. It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following CONDITIONS and REQUIREMENTS: (1) The Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit all uses identified as conflicting uses in Agricultural areas by the Comprehensive Plan Mineral and Aggregate Element within 500 feet of the proposed site. (2) All requirements of the state Department of Geology and Department of Environmental Quality to be adhered to. (3) No seasonal restrictions on operations to be imposed. Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 2 Adopted: September 14, 1994 VEGETATION: The proposed site is covered with juniper and sagebrush. SURFACE WATER: There is no surface water on the site. A well may be used to provide water for on-site sprinkling and processing of rock. There will be no water impoundments. TOPOGRAPHY: The site is level, with little change in topography. Excavation slopes will not exceed 3 to 1. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource material and storage of equipment are required to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The proposed use would meet these requirements, as no dust-sensitive uses, residences or public roads are located within 500 feet of the proposed quarry site. SCREENING: Screening is required to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet, under Section 11.060(F). There are no such land uses within 500 feet. RECLAMATION: The site is to be excavated in 10 acre increments with continuous reclamation as approved by DOGAMI. Dust will be controlled by seeding, mulching, and/or addition of well water. A live topsoil salvage technique will be used. ODFW recommend that overburden and topsoil from the site be utilized, and that the area be seeded to a combination of native and introduced grasses, shrubs and forbs to provide forage and cover. DISCUSSION: The site is to measure 320 acres. It will be excavated to a depth of about 25 feet. A crusher and hot plant will be operated on the site, more than 500 feet from its exterior boundaries. Aggregate produced may be used as concrete and asphalt aggregate, crushed aggregate base courses, drain rock, and structural fill. Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 3 Adopted: September 14, 1994 ESEE ANALYSIS Of Application N. 3-C-3-GRAV-13 (Raasch) Pursuant to data received from applicant concerning quantity and quality of the site material, it is a ?1C? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, but there are no conflicting Goal Issues, the site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: Farm Dwellings campgrounds Private Parks fishing & hunting preserves Non-Farm Dwellings public parks & playgrounds public or private schools home occupations churches personal use airports secondary farm dwelling boarding houses for profit commercial activities in conjunction with farm use None of the above uses are presently existing or proposed within the impact area. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use-2. Except for the above listed incompatible uses, all allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. None of the listed conflicting uses are existing or proposed. Therefore, any economic effect on the impact area will be minimal. The economic consequences of not allowing mining at the proposed site will be increased cost of reconstructing the Ochoco Dam due to the cost of transporting aggregate longer distances from other possible sites, and economic impacts of possible delays in dam reconstruction. SOCIAL IMPACTS No negative social impacts can be identified because there are no existing or proposed residences within the impact area, and there will be no significant scenic impacts. The social impacts of not allowing mining at the proposed site might include disruption of the lifestyle of farming families due to lack of irrigation water if dam reconstruction is delayed. Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 4 Adopted: September 14, 1994 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The proposed site is presently in farm use. The site will be concurrently reclaimed and be again used for farming. There are no anticipated groundwater or surface water conflicts. Any dust problems resulting from excavation can be controlled by watering and use of proper excavation techniques. The site is in the general antelope winter range and conditions of operation have been agreed upon by the applicant and ODFW to limit impacts on wildlife. Additionally, the Department of Fish and Wildlife and the applicant have agreed upon a condition of operation as shown in Exhibit ?4?. The environmental impacts of not allowing mining at the site could include greater impacts which could result from using some alternative sites. ENERGY IMPACTS There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. Energy impacts of not allowing mining at the site include greater energy costs of transporting aggregate from more distant sites. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use-3, and classified as Agricultural land by the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are conditional uses in this area. Goal 3 The area is currently in agricultural production. The site will be concurrently reclaimed and put back into agricultural production after the minerals re extracted. No long term impacts to agricultural production are predicted. GOAL 6 The proposed operations will not negatively impact groundwater or surface water resources. Any air quality impact will be mitigated by standard quarrying techniques which are required by the state DEQ. GOAL 8 The activity will not affect recreation in the area. Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 5 Adopted: September 14, 1994 GOAL 9 The proposal will have little if any negative economic effects. Use of the aggregate site will have positive economic effects providing for sale of raw materials. GOAL 13 Use of the site as source of aggregate will result in lower energy costs than use of a more distant site. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) The site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Conflicting uses which are permitted by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance are not presently existing and can be prohibited by the County without significant economic or social effects. There are no significant conflicts with other Goal 5 resources or other state goals. (2) The mineral and aggregate resource shall be protected by prohibiting future incompatible land uses identified as conflicting uses in this document on the Resources Site and in the Impact Area. Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 6 Adopted: September 14, 1994 3C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3C3-GRV-3 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-SAN-1 O?Neil and Gravel 3C-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-CIN-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-4-4 c. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis, and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C Sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have actual or potential conflicting; uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-17 Alves #1 (Northwest Basalt) 3C2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 3C3-BAS-29 Hackelman (County) 3C-BEN-3 Coats 3C-BEN-3 Alaska Pacific 3C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 3C-BEN-3 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) d. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a site-specific ESEE analysis on each resource site and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have potential or actual conflicting uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-19 Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3C1-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 3CI-GRV-10 Pieratt 3C3-GRV-11 Bernard 3C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate & Paving 3C3-GRV-13 Raasch 3C-SAN-3 Pieratt Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 7 Adopted: September 14, 1994 NOTE: the Oregon State Highway Division uses an internal three-part number code to designate its sites; the three parts are respectively: For example Crook County?s 1C1-BAS-1 site is an Oregon State Highway Division site that is identified internally by the Division as site #7-3-4. The ?7? signifies____________, the ?3? signifies ____________, and the ?4? signifies____________. b. IC Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME ICn-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel lCn-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel lCn-SAN-3 Pieratt lCn-SAN-3 Williams c. IC Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME IC2-GRV-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-13-4 1C1-GRV-2 Oregon State Highway Division #7-41-4 ICI-GRV-3 Oregon State Highway Division #7-38-4 IC2-GRV-4 Oregon State Highway Division #7-36-4 IC1-GRV-5 Oregon State Highway Division #7-25-4 ICI-GRV-6 Oregon State Highway Division #7-9-4 IC1-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) IC3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 1C3-GRV-11 Bernard 1C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate and Paving IC3-GRV-13 Raasch d. IC Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME lCn-CIN-1 Oregon State Highway lCn-CIN-2 Pieratt Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 8 Adopted: September 14, 1994 e. IC Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1C-BEN-1 Coats 1C-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific 1C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 1C-BEN-4 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) Ordinance No. 94 EXHIBIT C ? Page 9 Adopted: September 14, 1994 Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 1 ? Page 1 Adopted: December 14, 1994 EXHIBIT ?1? C-P(M)-21-94 ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use, EFU-1. Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance sets forth requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands, or significantly inventory list of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environment Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The applicant is seeking to have the proposed quarry site included in the inventory quarry site included in the inventory of quarry sites contained in the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendment to the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan made pursuant to periodic review. Other relevant sections of the Comprehensive Plan are pages 42-49, 61-68, 113-119, 152-158, and 178-200. Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 1 ? Page 2 Adopted: December 14, 1994 C-P(M)-21-94 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: About one mile south of the intersection of Millican Road and Reservoir Road (T 17 S R 15 EWM Sec 34 TL 1900; T 18 S R 15 EWM Sec 3 TL 200). PROPOSAL: Recommendation to the County Court for an amendment to the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan to add a 3C quarry site to the inventory of mineral and aggregate sites; and conditional use approval for a quarrying operation on the same site. ACREAGE: The property measures 160 acres. The mining site is to measure about 40 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: Vacant. AREA LAND USE: The property is surrounded by BLM land. ACCESS: There are easement for access to the property from the east and west. The applicant proposes to use the eastern access. SECURITY: The site is to be fenced with a locked gate. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is not under farm deferral. SOILS: The property is not covered by an SCS soil survey. FLOOD ZONE: The properties is in Flood Zone X outside the 500 year flood zone. WETLAND: The property is not in a designated wetland area. WILDLIFE: The property is in General Deer Winter Range. VEGETATION: The property is occupied by juniper. It will be reseeded with appropriate vegetation at time of reclamation. SURFACE WATER: The site is not irrigated and has no surface water. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater data is available. TOPOGRAPHY: The site is level. SEPTIC: A portable toilet will be provided for workers. Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 1 ? Page 3 Adopted: December 14, 1994 SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource material and storage of equipment are required to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The proposed use would meet these requirements, as no dust-sensitive uses, residences or public roads are located within 500 feet of the proposed quarry site. SCREENING: Screening is required to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet, under Section 11.060(F). There are no such land uses within 500 feet. RECLAMATION: Reclamation will be in accordance with a plan approved by DOGAMI and ODFW. DISCUSSION: Sand and gravel are to be quarried. About 5000-10,000 cubic yards are to be removed annually. The operation will be limited to 6-9 months of the year depending on County and DOGAMI requirements. Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 1 ? Page 4 Adopted: December 14, 1994 C-P(M)-21-94 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION (1) The proposed quarry will conflict with some permitted uses in the Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-1, but will not conflict with any statewide planning goal. It should therefore be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3-C? site. It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following CONDITIONS and REQUIREMENTS: (1) The Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit all uses identified as conflicting uses in Agricultural areas by the Comprehensive Plan Mineral and Aggregate Element within 500 feet of the proposed site. (2) All requirements of the state Department of Geology and Department of Environmental Quality to be adhered to. Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 1 Adopted: December 14, 1994 ESEE ANALYSIS Of Application N. 3-C-3-GRAV-14 (Couch) Pursuant to data received from applicant concerning quantity and quality of the site material, it is a ?1C ? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, but there are no conflicting Goal Issues, the site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: Farm Dwellings campgrounds Private Parks fishing & hunting preserves Non-Farm Dwellings public parks & playgrounds public or private schools home occupations churches personal use airports secondary farm dwelling boarding houses for profit commercial activities in conjunction with farm use None of the above uses are presently existing or proposed within the impact area. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use-1. Except for the above listed incompatible uses, all allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. None of the listed conflicting uses are existing or proposed. Therefore, any economic effect on the impact area will be minimal. The economic consequences of not allowing mining at the proposed site will be increased cost due to the cost of transporting aggregate longer distances from other possible sites. SOCIAL IMPACTS No negative social impacts can be identified because there are no existing or proposed residences within the impact area, and there will be no significant scenic impacts. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The proposed site is presently not in farm deferral. The site will be reclaimed as required under Oregon law. There are no anticipated groundwater or surface water conflicts. Any dust problems resulting from excavation can be controlled by watering and use of proper excavation techniques. The site is in the general deer winter range. Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 2 Adopted: December 14, 1994 The environmental impacts of not allowing mining at the site could include greater impacts which could result from using some alternative sites. ENERGY IMPACTS There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. Energy impacts of not allowing mining at the site include greater energy costs of transporting aggregate from more distant sites. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use-1, and classified as Agricultural land by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are conditional uses in this area. Goal 3 The area is not currently in agricultural production and is not on farm deferral. No long term impacts to agricultural production are predicted. GOAL 6 The proposed operations will not negatively impact groundwater or surface water resources. Any air quality impact will be mitigated by standard quarrying techniques which are required by the state DEQ and DOGAMI. GOAL 8 The activity will not affect recreation in the area. GOAL 9 The proposal will have little if any negative economic effects. Use of the aggregate site will have positive economic effects providing for sale of raw materials. GOAL 13 Use of the site as source of aggregate will result in lower 8 energy costs than use of a more distant site. Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 3 Adopted: December 14, 1994 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) The site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Conflicting uses which are permitted by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance are not presently existing and can be prohibited by the County without significant economic or social effects. There are no significant conflicts with other Goal 5 resources or other state goals. (2) The mineral and aggregate resource shall be protected by prohibiting future incompatible land uses identified as conflicting uses in this document on the Resources Site and in the Impact Area. Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 1 Adopted: December 14, 1994 NOTE: the Oregon State Highway Division uses an internal three-part number code to designate its sites; the three parts are respectively For example Crook County?s 1C1-BAS-1 site is an Oregon State Highway Division site that is identified internally by the Division as site #7-3-4. The ?7? signifies_______________, the ?3? signifies ___________, and the ?4? signifies ______________. b. IC Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME ICn-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel lCn-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel lCn-SAN-3 Pieratt lCn-SAN-3 Williams c. IC Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME IC2-GRV-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-13-4 1C1-GRV-2 Oregon State Highway Division #7-41-4 ICI-GRV-3 Oregon State Highway Division #7-38-4 IC2-GRV-4 Oregon State Highway Division #7-36-4 IC1-GRV-5 Oregon State Highway Division #7-25-4 ICI-GRV-6 Oregon State Highway Division #7-9-4 IC1-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) IC3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 1C3-GRV-11 Bernard 1C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate and Paving 1C3-GRV-13 Raasch 1C3-GRV-14 COUCH d. IC Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME lCn-CIN-1 Oregon State Highway ICn-CIN-2 Pieratt Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 2 Adopted: December 14, 1994 e. IC Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory ID. NO. LOCATION NAME 1C-BEN-1 Coats 1C-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific 1C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 1C-BEN-4 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) Ordinance No. 95 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 3 Adopted: December 14, 1994 3C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3C3-GRV-3 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-SAN-1 O?Neil and Gravel 3C-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-CIN-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-4-4 c. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis, and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C Sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have actual or potential conflicting; uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-17 Alves #1 ( Northwest Basalt). 3C2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 3C3-BAS-29 Hackelman (County) 3C-BEN-3 Coats 3C-BEN-3 Alaska Pacific 3C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 3C-BEN-3 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) d. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a site-specific ESEE analysis each resource site and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have potential or actual conflicting uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals : ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-19 Coats. #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3C1-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 3C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 3C3-GRV-11 Bernard 3C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate & Paving 3C3-GRV-13 Raasch 3C3-GRV-14 Couch 3C-SAN-3 Pieratt Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 1 - Page 1 Adopted: March 1, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1? C-P(M)-22-94 FINDINGS AND FACTS ZONING: The site is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-3. Section 3.030 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance contains requirements for this zone. Article II of the Zoning Ordinance sets forth requirements for mining. Section 5.060(9) also sets forth requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation might not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands, or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surroundings lands. It also states that the site must be on the significant inventory list of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The applicant is seeking a recommendation to the Crook County court on a proposal to add the proposed site to the inventory of quarry sites contained in the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate amendments to the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Other relevant sections of the Comprehensive Plan are pages 25-27, 42-49, 113-119, 152, 164 and 178-200. PROPERTY LOCATION: One mile south on the O?Neil Highway adjacent on Dry River (T 14 S R 14 EWM Sec 27 TL 100; Sec 34 TL 1801). PROPOSAL: Recommendation to the Crook County Court on a proposal to add an aggregate site to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory in the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan; and conditional use approval for quarrying, crushing, and stockpiling aggregate on the subject site. ACREAGE: The property measures 720 acres. The proposal mining site is to measure 40 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The property is used for grazing. A private park for catered barbecues is located on the property. AREA LAND USE: Properties in the area are used for grazing and hay production. The property is located a short distance to the south of the City of Prineville Railroad right-of-way. Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 1 - Page 2 Adopted: March 1, 1995 ACCESS: The applicant proposes to construct a graveled private road on the property connecting to the O?Neil Highway to provide access to the site. An existing private road on the property connects the site to the O?Neil Highway. SECURITY: The property is fenced. Locked gates will be placed at access points. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is under farm deferral. The proposed pit site is to be removed from farm deferral. SOILS: Soils on the mining site consist of Agency very stony sandy loam, SCS Class VII, Bakeoven very stony sandy loam, Class VII, and Forester loamy sand, Class III. IRRIGATION: The property has 269 acres of wastewater irrigation rights from the Dry River. There is an irrigation pond on the quarry site. The Watermaster?s Office states that a change of use must be applied for. FLOOD ZONE: The proposal quarry site is in Flood A, a 100 year flood hazard area for which no base flood elevation has been determined. FIRE PROTECTION: No public fire protection is available. The property owner has a 1000 gallon water truck. WILDLIFE: The property is not in critical winter range. ODFW indicates that there are three golden eagle nesting sites within the proposed quarry site, and an additional nest a quarter mile to the south. ODFW do not oppose the quarry, but recommend mitigation measures to help mitigate impact on the nest from noise and activities associated with the quarry. The following activities are recommended: (1) Modify the quarry operation area to exclude the rock outcrop with the eagle nests. The new boundary would be along Dry River on the Southwest edge and would be at least 500 feet from the nests (2) Avoid rock blasting or crushing between February 15 and June 30. Stockpiles will be located as far as possible from the nests, and loading of crushed rock would be allowed throughout the year. (3) ODFW personnel would be allowed access to the quarry to monitor the eagle nests to determine nesting status. ODFW agrees to monitor the site on an annual basis to determine the nesting status. If no evidence of nesting occurs by March 31, the seasonal restriction described in section 2 above will not be applied. (4) Access to the site will be closed to the general public to prevent nest disturbance. VEGETATION: Junipers are present on the site, and will be left in place within 100 feet of the site. Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 1 - Page 3 Adopted: March 1, 1995 WETLAND: The quarry site is not in a designated wetland area. SURFACE WATER: The Dry River is an intermittent stream which carries irrigation wastewater from the Powell Butte area during the irrigation season (April 15-October 15) and during stock water runs. It is usually dry at other times, and supports no fisheries. Water flow from the Dry River reaches the Crooked River to the north of the property. An irrigation pond on the site is filled by irrigation wastewater. The applicant proposes to use water from the pond for dust control as needed. The applicant does not proposed to place any rock or fill in the bottom of the drainage channel. He proposed to riprap the channel banks and exclude cattle to control erosion, and use fill or rock to create a work pad. No aggregate washing is proposed but rainstorms may cause some runoff from the work area. To prevent this, the applicant will construct a 2-3 foot berm between crushing and stockpile areas and the stream bank. The berm will be seeded with appropriate grasses. A shallow runoff retention area will be excavated north of the stockpile area. GROUNDWATER: No springs or groundwater seeps have been observed in the mining area. The regional groundwater table is below the bed of the Dry River. No mining will occur below that level. TOPOGRAPHY: The proposed mining area is in the wall of a narrow canyon, about 200 feet lower than surrounding properties. There is little or no overburden on the mining area. SEPTIC: A portable toilet will be provided for workers. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource material and storage of equipment are required to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The proposed use would meet these requirements, as no dust- sensitive uses, residences or public roads are located within 500 feet of the proposed quarry site. SCREENING: Screening is required to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet, under Section 11.060(F). There are no such land uses within 500 feet. The site location in a canyon will screen the operation from view from the O?Neil Highway and adjoining properties. BLASTING: Blasting will be performed from the top of the rock layer down. Blasting will be done no closer than 800 feet from adjoining ownerships. Blasting will be done only at times specified in the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, and will not be done during the golden eagle nesting season. Owners of nearby residences will be notified prior to blasting. The operation?s location in a canyon will help to reduce blasting noise and prevent rocks flying onto other properties, according to the applicant. Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 1 - Page 4 Adopted: March 1, 1995 RECLAMATION: The applicant will submit a reclamation plan that will meet DOGAMI requirements. Steep slopes will be left when mining is completed. If multiple benches are created, benches will be covered with a thin layer of topsoil. All buildings and equipment will be removed from the site when mining is completed. DISCUSSION: All crushing and processing equipment and trucks will meet DEQ noise standards. Water from an irrigation pond on the site will be used for dust control. Mining will be done during the hours specified in the Zoning Ordinance, unless a waiver is obtained. Blasting and crushing will not be done during the golden eagle nesting season. Mining will be done as a sidehill cut or multiple benches, with steep slopes. Tests indicates that the aggregate to be mined passes ODOT pit qualification tests for asphalt and concrete. NOISE STUDY: The applicant conducted a noise study to determine the approximate maximum noise level generated by a large front end loader at the stockpile area. The applicant states that noise from the loader appears to be less than the permissible increase specified by Oregon DEQ. TESTIMONY: The applicant and his representative spoke in favor of the application. A representative of several property owners in the area stated that they are not opposed to the application, but are concerned about possible noise impact. A representative of ODFW submitted testimony about impacts on wildlife and recommended mitigation measures. The applicant and his representative stated that noise impacts will be within allowable limits. REFERENCE: The staff report of January 17, 1995 and the ESEE Analysis for the proposal are hereby referenced. Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 1 Adopted: March 1, 1995 EXHIBIT ?2? ESEE ANALYSIS Of Application No. C-P(M)-22-94 (Keudell) Pursuant to data received from applicant concerning quantity and quality of the site material, it is a ?IC? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(%)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, but there are no conflicting Goal Issues, the site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: Farm Dwellings campgrounds Private Parks fishing & hunting preserves Non-Farm Dwellings public parks & playgrounds public or private schools home occupations churches personal use airports secondary farm dwelling boarding houses for profit commercial activities in conjunction with farm use None of the above uses are presently existing or proposed within the impact area. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use-EFU-3 and EFU-2. Except for the above listed incompatible uses, all allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. None of the listed conflicting uses are existing or proposed. Therefore, any economic effect on the impact area will be minimal. The economic consequences of not allowing mining at the proposed site will be increased cost due to the cost of transporting aggregate longer distances from other possible sites. SOCIAL IMPACTS No negative social impacts can be identified because there are no existing or proposed residences within the impact area, and there will be no significant scenic impacts. Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 2 Adopted: March 1, 1995 ENVIRONMENT IMPACTS: The proposed site is to be removed from farm deferral. The site will be reclaimed as required under Oregon Law. There are no anticipated groundwater or surface water conflicts. Any dust problems resulting from excavation can be controlled by watering and use of proper excavation techniques. The sites is not in wildlife winter range. ODFW indicates that four (4) golden eagle nests are in the vicinity of the mining site. ODFW indicates that the following mitigation measure will provide a minimum amount of protection for the nesting area: 1. Modify the quarry operation are to exclude the rock outcrop with the eagle nests. The new boundary would be along Dry River on the southwest edge and would be a least 500 feet from the nests. 2. Avoid blasting or crushing between February 15 and June 30. Stockpiles will be located as far as possible from the nests, and loading of crushed rock would be allowed throughout the year. 3. ODFW personnel would be allowed access to the quarry to monitor the eagle nests to determine nesting status. ODFW agrees to monitor the site on an annual basis to determine the nesting status, if no evidence of nesting occurs by March 31, the seasonal restriction described in section 2 above will not be applied. 4. Access to the site will be closed to the general public to prevent nest disturbance. The environmental impacts of not allowing mining at the site could include greater impacts which could result from using some alternative sites. ENERGY IMPACTS There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. Energy impacts of not allowing mining at the site include greater energy costs of transporting aggregate from more distant sites. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use-3 and EFU-2, and classified as Agricultural land by the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are conditional uses in this area. Goal 3 The area is not currently in agricultural production and is not on farm deferral. No long term impacts to agricultural production are predicted. Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 3 Adopted: March 1, 1995 Goal 6 The proposed operations will not negatively impact groundwater or surface water resources. Any air quality impact will be mitigated by standard quarrying techniques which are required by the state DEQ and DOGAMI. Goal 8 The activity will not affect recreation in the area. Goal 9 The proposal will have little if any negative economic effects. Use of the aggregate site will have positive economic effects providing for sale of raw materials. Goal 13 Use of the site as source of aggregate will result in lower energy costs than use of a more distant site. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) The site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Conflicting uses which are permitted by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance are not presently existing and can be prohibited by the County without significant economic or social effects. There are no significant conflicts with other Goal 5 resources or other state goals. (2) The mineral and aggregate resource shall be protected by prohibiting future incompatible land uses identified as conflicting uses in this document on the Resources Site and in the impact area. Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 4 Adopted: March 1, 1995 Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 1 Adopted: March 1, 1995 EXHIBIT ?3? 3C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3C3-GRV-3 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-SAN-1 O?Neil and Gravel 3C-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-CIN-l Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-4-4 c. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis, and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C Sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have actual or potential conflicting; uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-17 Alves #1 (Northwest Basalt) 3C2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 3C3-BAS-29 Hackelman (County) 3C-BEN-3 Coats 3C-BEN-3 Alaska Pacific 3C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 3C-BEN-3 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) d. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a site-specific ESEE analysis on each resource site and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have potential or actual conflicting uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3CI-BAS-19 Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3CI-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 2 Adopted: March 1, 1995 3CI-GRV-10 Pieratt 3C3-GRV-11 Bernard 3C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate & Paving 3C3-GRV-13 Raasch 3C-SAN-3 Pieratt 3C3-GRV-14 Keudell NOTE: The Oregon State Highway Division uses an internal three-part number code to designate its sites; the three parts are respectively: For example Crook County?s 1C1-BAS-1 site is an Oregon State Highway Division site that is identified internally by the Division as site #7-3-4. The ?7? signifies ___________, the ?3? signifies __________, and the ?4? signifies ______________. b. IC Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME ICn-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel lCn-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel lCn-SAN-3 Pieratt lCn-SAN-3 Williams c. IC Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME IC2-GRV-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-13-4 1C1-GRV-2 Oregon State Highway Division #7-41-4 ICI-GRV-3 Oregon State Highway Division #7-38-4 IC2-GRV-4 Oregon State Highway Division #7-36-4 IC1-GRV-5 Oregon State Highway Division #7-25-4 ICI-GRV-6 Oregon State Highway Division #7-9-4 IC1-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) IC3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 1C3-GRV-11 Bernard 1C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate and Paving IC3-GRV-13 Raasch IC3-GRV-14 Keudell Ordinance No. 97 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 3 Adopted: March 1, 1995 d. IC Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME lCn-CIN-1 Oregon State Highway lCn-CIN-2 Pieratt e. IC Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1C-BEN-1 Coats 1C-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific 1C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 1C-BEN-4 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) . Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 1 ? Page 1 Adopted: March 8, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1? C-P(M)-23-95 FINDINGS AND FACTS ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2 Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance sets forth requirements for mining. Section 5.060 (9) also sets forth requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands, or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surroundings lands. It also states that the site must be on the significant inventory list of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The applicant is seeking to have the proposed quarry site included in the inventory of quarry sites contained in the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendment to the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan made pursuant to periodic review. Other relevant sections of the Comprehensive Plan are pages 42-49, 61-68, 113-119, 152-158, and 178-200. PROPERTY LOCATION: On the north side of the Post-Paulina Highway about 2.5 mile south of the Ochoco Reservoir (T 15 S R 17 EWM Sec 17 TL 800). PROPOSAL: The applicant requests a recommendation to the Crook County Court on a proposal to amend the Crook County Comprehensive Plan to designate an aggregate quarry site as a 3C site on the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory, and conditional use approval for extraction, processing, and storage of aggregate on the subject site. ACREAGE: The property measures 3963.41 acres. The proposed quarry site is to measure 180 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The property is used for grazing. AREA LAND USE: Properties in the area are used for grazing. The nearest residence to the site is about 0.5 mile to the east of the site. ACCESS: The site is a short distance to the north of the Post-Paulina Highway. Access is existing. All access roads will be on the subject property and will be graveled. Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 1 ? Page 2 Adopted: March 8, 1995 SECURITY: The site is fenced. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is under farm deferral. WILDLIFE: The proposed site is within General Deer Winter Range and Antelope Winter Range ODFW state that blasting and crushing during winter could adversely impact wildlife. ODFW recommend restrictions on winter operations as a mitigation measure. SOILS: The property is not covered by an SCS soil survey. FLOOD ZONE: The property is in Flood Zone X outside the 500 year flood zone. WETLAND: The property is not in designated wetland area. VEGETATION: The area is occupied by juniper, native grasses, and sagebrush. It will be reseeded with appropriate vegetation during reclamation. SURFACE WATER: The quarry site has no surface water. A stock water pond is located a short distance away. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater data is available. TOPOGRAPHY: The site slopes upward from south to north. SEPTIC: Portable toilets will be provided for workers. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource material and storage of equipment are required to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. All surface mining activities will be least 500 feet from residences and public roads. Processing of materials and storage of equipment will be at least 500 feet from residences and public roads. SCREENING: Under Section 11.060(F) of the Zoning Ordinance, screening is required to obscure the site from residences, public roads etc. within 500 feet. There are no such land uses within 500 feet of the mining site. RECLAMATION: Reclamation will be done in 10 acre increments as mining progresses in accordance with DOGAMI requirements. DISCUSSION: Material from the site passes ODOT qualifications for asphalt, concrete, and base rock material. Crushing and screening will be done onsite. Final products may include concrete and asphalt aggregate, crushed aggregate ease course, drain rock, and structural fill. Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 1 ? Page 3 Adopted: March 8, 1995 TESTIMONY: The applicant and his representative spoke in favor of the proposal. ODFW submitted written and verbal testimony concerning impacts on wildlife and mitigation measures. There was no opposition testimony. The applicant stated that he believed the wildlife mitigation measures proposed by ODFW to be too restrictive. The ODFW representative met with the applicant to develop measures which are acceptable to all parties. REFERENCE: The ESEE analysis submitted by the applicant, and the staff report of January 31, 1995 are hereby referenced. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) The proposed quarry will conflict with some permitted uses in the Exclusive Farm Use Zone EFU-2, but will not conflict with any existing use within 500 feet of the proposed site. (2) The proposed quarry will potentially conflict with General Deer Winter Range and Antelope Winter Range, both Goal 5 resources, but the impact can be mitigated through appropriate measures agreed upon by the applicant and the ODFW. (3) The site is significant and should be added to the inventory as a ?1C? site. (4) After reviewing the ESEE analysis and weighing the impacts on conflicting uses, the site should be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3-C? site. It is recommended that the application be approved subject to the following CONDITIONS and REQUIREMENTS: (1) The Crook County Zoning Ordinance to be amended to prohibit all uses identified as conflicting uses in Agricultural areas by the Comprehensive Plan Mineral and Aggregate Element within 500 feet of the proposed site. (2) All requirements of DOGAMI and DEQ to be adhered to. (3) No blasting or crushing to be done on the site between December 1 thru April 30th. The applicant and the ODFW may mutually agree that the severity of the winter allows for an exception to this closure. If the parties can not agree whether the exception should be granted, the County Court shall make the final land use decision on whether the exception shall be granted. In no event shall the operation be closed for more than 90 days. Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 1 Adopted: March 8, 1995 ?EXHIBIT 2? APPLICANT?S STATEMENT Applicant: Doug and Jean Breese, 101962 Bull Blvd, Prineville, OR 97754 Property Description: The subject site consists of approximately 180 acres located in the NE Quarter of Section 17 and the north half of the SE Quarter, Township 15, Range 17, Willamette Meridian, Crook County. The site is located on the north side of the Post Paulina Hwy. Site Description: The area is currently has large amounts of surface rock with some native grasses, juniper trees, and sage brush. The ground slopes to the north away from the Hwy on a gradual slope leveling out by the north section line. Request: Applicant is proposing to designate the site as a 3C site under the Crook County Goal 5, Mineral and Aggregate Section of the Comprehensive Plan. Concurrent is a conditional use request to permit the mining, storage, and processing of material in accordance with Article 11 of Zoning Ordinance #18. Inventory: The approximate 180 acres is located approximately 6.5 miles to the southeast of Prineville on the north side of the Post-Paulina Hwy. Impact area - All of the impact areas are within the ranch operations of the applicant. The nearest residence is located about .5 mi to the east. Quality - An aggregate evaluation has been done by Century West Engineering for the rock. All three tests - Los Angeles Rattler (LAR), Sodium Sulfate, and the Oregon Air Degradation tests were performed. The material passes the ODOT qualification for asphalt, concrete and base rock material. Potential products from this source after processing through a crusher and screening operation would be concrete and asphalt aggregate, crushed aggregate base course, drain rock and structural fill from the crusher reject material. Information for an ESEE Analysis: The Crook County Comprehensive Plan has already identified some of the economic benefits from the development of the aggregate resource. The county benefits indirectly through lower priced aggregate by having sites located close enough to population areas to make it economical; the landowner and operator benefit as well as those employed. The potential negative consequences economically include the cost of rehabilitation or resurfacing of roads and the potential need for increased police regulation. The Social benefits include the employment opportunities resulting from the mining as well as an adequate supply of high quality aggregate to maintain and expand the roads of the County. Several negative potential consequences include the loss of scenic value, degradation of fish and wildlife. In this situation there will be minimal loss of scenic value as the initial site is more than .25 mile off the road and does not interrupt any scenic vistas by blocking the view. The will be negligible degradation for some wildlife, which may be displaced from the immediate area. The site is not located in any critical winter range nor in the vicinity of any nesting habitat. Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 2 Adopted: March 8, 1995 Environmental consequences has been recognized by the Comprehensive Plan. A small portion of the site has been used for limited grazing, with the majority away from the rock outcroppings on the specific site. All fugitive dust will be controlled by seeding, mulching and or the addition of water. Reclamation will occur in increments of 10 acre sites as the mining proceeds and the property will be reclaimed according to the approved DOGMI permit. The property is currently not irrigated, but just off site is a stock water pond. There are no identified negative energy consequences. The site contains high quality rock. Conditional Use Permit: There are several requirements to grant the conditional use permit. 1] Must be on the inventory list of significant sites ? The applicant has applied for the comprehensive plan amendment. 2] Use must be consistent with the Applicable ESEE Analysis ? The applicant has prepared information in addition to the County identified ESEE, which will be adopted as part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment. No conflicting uses were identified in the impact area that would require mitigation. 3] Not force a significant change in accepted farm practices ? The property is fully contained within the applicant?s ranch operation. The property has limited grazing use and has rock outcroppings, juniper trees, and sagebrush. The property is not necessary to the farm operation for grazing. The site has fencing and there are cattle guards already in place at access points. 4] No significant cost to surrounding farm practices ? as indicated the mining site is within a fenced area, is protected by cattle guards at access points, and there are no immediate farm practices in the area. 5] Site plan with suitable maps ? topographical maps in addition to aerial maps have been provided. 6] Development standards as shown on the accompanying, all operations on the site will be conducted far beyond the 100 setback requirements, with no activity of any sort within this area, vegetation will not be disturbed, the processing of material will be in excess of 500 feet from the property line and therefore will have no noise or dust sensitive uses to impact. 8] All access roads will be on the applicant?s ranch. They will be graveled from material quarried from the site. The road will access the Post Paulina Hwy at an existing gate. 9] The site is not within 100 feet of any year round stream or intermittent stream, so no riparian areas will be affected. Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 2 ? Page 3 Adopted: March 8, 1995 Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 1 Adopted: March 8, 1995 EXHIBIT ?3? 3C3-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) 3C3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 3C3-GRV-3 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-SAN-1 O?Neil and Gravel 3C-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel 3C-CIN-1 Oreg. State Hwy Div. #7-4-4 c. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a Generic ESEE analysis, and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C Sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have actual or potential conflicting; uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3C1-BAS-17 Alves #1 (Northwest Basalt) 3C2-BAS-24 Modular Crushing 3C3-BAS-29 Hackelman (County) 3C-BEN-3 Coats 3C-BEN-3 Alaska Pacific 3C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 3C-BEN-3 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) d. The following is a list of 3C sites in Crook County concerning which Crook County has completed a site-specific ESEE analysis on each resource site and as a result of that analysis has designated them as 3C sites. The Goal 5 process is completed for these sites. These 3C sites have potential or actual conflicting uses, or conflicting applicable requirements of other Statewide Planning Goals: ID NO. LOCATION NAME 3CI-BAS-19 Coats #2 (Northwest Basalt) 3CI-BAS-21 Krider #1 3C1-BAS-22 Krider #2 Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 2 Adopted: March 8, 1995 3CI-GRV-10 Pieratt 3C3-GRV-11 Bernard 3C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate & Paving 3C3-GRV-13 Raasch 3C3-GRV-14 Keudell 3C3-GRV-15 Breese 3C-SAN-3 Pieratt NOTE: The Oregon State Highway Division uses an internal three- part number code to designate its sites; the three parts are respectively: For example Crook County?s 1C1-BAS-1 site is an Oregon State Highway Division site that is identified internally by the Division as site #7-3-4. The ?7? signifies ________, the ?3? signifies __________, and the ?4? signifies_________. b. IC Sand (SAN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME ICn-SAN-1 O?Neil Sand and Gravel lCn-SAN-2 Prineville Sand and Gravel lCn-SAN-3 Pieratt lCn-SAN-3 Williams c. IC Gravel (GRV) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME IC2-GRV-1 Oregon State Highway Division #7-13-4 1C1-GRV-2 Oregon State Highway Division #7-41-4 ICI-GRV-3 Oregon State Highway Division #7-38-4 IC2-GRV-4 Oregon State Highway Division #7-36-4 IC1-GRV-5 Oregon State Highway Division #7-25-4 ICI-GRV-6 Oregon State Highway Division #7-9-4 IC1-GRV-7 Williams (Ochoco Ready Mix) IC3-GRV-8 O?Neil Sand and Gravel 1C3-GRV-9 Prineville Sand and Gravel 1C1-GRV-10 Pieratt 1C3-GRV-11 Bernard 1C3-GRV-12 Bend Aggregate and Paving IC3-GRV-13 Raasch IC3-GRV-14 Keudell 1C3-GRV-15 Breese Ordinance No. 98 EXHIBIT 3 ? Page 3 Adopted: March 8, 1995 d. IC Cinders (CIN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME lCn-CIN-1 Oregon State Highway lCn-CIN-2 Pieratt e. IC Bentonite (BEN) Resource Inventory ID NO. LOCATION NAME 1C-BEN-1 Coats 1C-BEN-2 Alaska Pacific 1C-BEN-3 Central Oregon Bentonite (Weaver) 1C-BEN-4 Oregon Sun Ranch (Evergreen Bentonite) Ordinance No. 104 EXHIBIT A - Page 1 Adopted: September 13, 1995 EXHIBIT ?A? C-P(M)-26-95 LEGAL CRITERIA ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-1. Mining is a conditional use in this zone under Section 3.010(3) of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance sets requirements for mining. Section 5.060(9) also contains requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands. It also states that a site must be on the Significant Inventory List of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Relevant sections of the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan include the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendments, and pages 25-27, 42-49, 113-119, 152-164, and 178-200. Ordinance No. 104 EXHIBIT B ? Page 1 Adopted: September 13, 1995 EXHIBIT ?B? C-P(M)-26-95 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: About six miles east and one mile south of the town of Alfalfa, and 1.5 miles southwest of Horse Butte (T 17 S R 15 EWM Sec 34 TL 1900; T 18 S R 15 EWM Sec 3 TL 200). PROPOSAL: A Comprehensive Plan amendment to add an aggregate quarry site to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan; and conditional use approval for quarrying of aggregate on the proposed site. BACKGROUND: On December 17, 1994 the Crook County Court approved County Ordinance No. 95 to add a 40 acre site on the property to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan as a 3C site (C-P(M)-21-94). The Planning Commission had recommended approval on October 12, 1994, and granted conditional use approval for a quarry operation on the site on that date. The present applicant is seeking to expand the site to cover the entire 160 acre property, and is seeking conditional use approval for a quarrying operation on the expanded site. ACREAGE: The property measures 160 acres. The proposed site is to cover the entire property. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: An existing quarrying operation is located on a 40 acre site near the center of the property. A Bonneville Power Administration power line occupies an easement on the eastern edge of the property. No excavation is proposed within the easement. BPA request that no excavation or piling of materials occur on their right-of-way; that dust be controlled on and near their transmission lines; and that BPA be notified prior to any blasting near the transmission lines. The remainder of the property is vacant. AREA LAND USE: The property is surrounded by BLM land. There are no residences within at least a three mile radius of the property. ACCESS: A haul road is to be constructed to connect to Bear Creek County road to the west of the property, on an existing easement across BLM land. Bear Creek Road connects to Alfalfa Market Road and Johnson Market Road in Deschutes County. The haul road will be graveled and watered by the applicant. SECURITY: The property will be fenced with a three-strand barbless wire fence. There will be a locked gate at each access point to the site. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is not under farm deferral. Ordinance No. 104 EXHIBIT B ? Page 2 Adopted: September 13, 1995 SOILS: The property is not covered by an SCS soil survey. IRRIGATION: The property is not irrigated and has no water rights. FLOOD ZONE: The property is in Flood Zone X, outside the 500 year flood zone. WETLAND: The property is not in a designated wetland area. WILDLIFE: The property is in General Deer Winter Range. The applicant states that there will be negligible degradation of wildlife habitat, due to wildlife being displaced from the immediate area of operations, reduction of cover and forage, and increased traffic. The applicant states that the proposed development of a water source on the property could be beneficial to wildlife. The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife state that there appears to be minimal use of the property by wintering deer. ODFW state that winter restrictions of blasting and crushing on the site to protect wildlife are not necessary in their judgement. VEGETATION: The property is presently occupied by juniper and sagebrush. The applicant proposes to reseed the area with pasture grasses at the time of reclamation. Trees along property boundaries will be preserved. SURFACE WATER: There is presently no surface water on the property and the property is not within 100 feet of any year-round stream. The applicant proposes to develop a pond for water storage on the property. Water will be used for dust control and aggregate processing. GROUNDWATER: A well will be utilized to provide water for the project. TOPOGRAPHY: The property is relatively flat with a few basalt outcrops. The general drainage appears to be in a northwesterly direction with a grade of about one percent. The property is within a wide alluvial valley with basalt rimrock bounding the western edge and the Bear Creek Buttes forming the far eastern valley margin. The property will be reclaimed with slopes not exceeding two to one. The depth of excavation will be dependent on the depth of suitable materials. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource materials and storage of equipment are to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The proposed use will meet these requirements, as there are no residences or dust-sensitive uses within 500 feet of the property, and no public roads within 100 feet of the property. SCREENING: Section 11.060(F) requires screening to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet. There are no such uses within 500 feet of the proposed mining area. RECLAMATION: Reclamation will occur as mining proceeds at 5-10 acre increments. Live topsoil salvage will be used. Areas being reclaimed will be mulched and reseeded with pasture grasses. Ordinance No. 104 EXHIBIT B ? Page 3 Adopted: September 13, 1995 SEPTIC: Portable toilets will be provided for workers. DISCUSSION: The proposed mining site consists of 160 acres, including 40 acres occupied by an existing quarry operation. Excavation will occur in 5-10 acre increments with concurrent reclamation. Depth of excavation will depend on depth of suitable materials. Crushing and processing will occur on-site. AGGREGATE RESOURCES INVESTIGATION: The applicant has submitted a report of an engineer?s investigation of the site which shows that a significant reserve of sand and gravel aggregate and basalt rock suitable for the production of ODOT specification construction materials is present on the proposed site. ESEE ANALYSIS: The ESEE Analysis for the proposed site is included in the Burden of Proof Statement submitted by the applicant. TESTIMONY: Two representatives of the applicant spoke in favor of the proposal. They stated that excavation and on-site processing will be done primarily during the winter, but that materials will be stockpiled and will be hauled out during other seasons. The applicant?s representatives stated that the applicant has experience in operating quarries near populated areas and is familiar with mitigation measures. They stated that the proposed site was chosen because the area is relatively unpopulated but is appropriately located in relation to potential markets. Two persons spoke in opposition to the proposal. They stated that their residence is located in the Juniper Acres subdivision 3-4 miles from the proposed quarry site, but that another residence is located about one mile from the site. They stated that they are concerned about the impact of truck traffic on roads in the area, about the impact on their view, and about the effects of blasting on the site on their property. They said that the existing Pieratt quarry operation near the proposed site has a negative impact on their view, and that blasting on the Pieratt site has shaken their residence and disturbed their livestock. They stated that they are concerned about the visual and other impacts of a 160 acre quarry on the site. One of the applicant?s representatives stated that the Pieratt site is on the slopes of Horse Butte where it is highly visible, but that the proposed site is on flat terrain and should be much less visible to the opponents. He stated that trucks hauling material from the site will traverse less than one mile of unpaved road before reaching paved roads, and that trucks will not go toward Prineville. He said that there will probably be about 5 round-trip truck trips to and from the site per day, with few trucks in winter. The applicant?s representatives said that the Crook County Roadmaster has indicated no opposition to the proposal, and that Millican Road may be paved as far as the site in the future. They stated that there will be a moderate amount of blasting on the site, and that a relatively small area will be quarried at any one time, which should minimize the visual impact. They said that most activities will be during normal working hours. Ordinance No. 104 EXHIBIT B ? Page 1 Adopted: September 13, 1995 EXHIBIT ?C? C-P(M)-26-95 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) On the basis of the aggregate resource investigation report submitted by the applicant, the proposed site contains significant quantities of sand and gravel aggregate and basalt rock suitable for production of ODOT specification construction materials. It is therefore recommended that the site be classified as a ?1-C? site. (2) On the basis of the ESEE analysis submitted by the applicant, the proposed quarrying operation will conflict with some permitted uses in the Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-1, but will not conflict with any statewide planning goal. Conflicting uses are not presently existing in the impact area of the proposed quarrying operation, and can be prohibited by the County without significant economic or social effects. It is therefore recommended that the site be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3-C? site. (3) It is recommended that the Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit all uses identified as conflicting uses in Agricultural areas by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan within 500 feet of the proposed site. Ordinance No. 105 EXHIBIT A ? Page 1 Adopted: September 13, 1995 EXHIBIT ?A? C-P(M)-25-95 ZONING: The property is zoned Heavy Industrial H-M. Quarrying and associated activities are permitted outright in this zone, subject to site plan review, under Section 3.150 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Article II contains requirements for quarrying Section 11.040 states that. A. The site must be designated as a mineral or aggregate resource site or an energy source site on an inventory of significant Goal 5 resources in the comprehensive plan; B. The proposed use must be consistent with the applicable ESSEE analysis and conditions contained in the comprehensive plan. In the event conditions imposed on the mining use by the comprehensive plan to mitigate mining impacts on specific conflicting uses are less restrictive than conditions necessary to address these same impacts under the standards of this section, the conditions imposed by the comprehensive plan control; C. The proposed use must be shown to not significant change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands devoted to farm or forest use; and D. The proposed use must be shown to not significantly increase the cost of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands devoted to farm or forest use; and E. There must be adequate public facilities and services (street capacity, water supply, police protection, fire protection, energy and communications services) available to meet the additional demands created by the proposed use or that can be made available through the orderly and efficient extension or expansion of these facilities and services. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The applicant is seeking to have the proposed quarry site included in the inventory of quarry sites contained in the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendment to the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan made pursuant to periodic review. Other relevant sections of the Comprehensive Plan are pages 42-49, 61-68, 113-119, 152-158, and 178-200. Ordinance No. 105 EXHIBIT A ? Page 2 Adopted: September 13, 1995 PROPERTY LOCATION: Between the City of Prineville Railroad and the Madras Highway (T 14 S R 15 EWM Sec 15 D TL 1000; Sec 22 TL 100; Sec 23 TL 300, 301, 302, 304, 400 and 401.) PROPOSAL: Recommendation to the Crook County Court on a proposal to amend the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan to add an aggregate quarry site to the inventory of Mineral and Aggregate sites in the Comprehensive Plan, and site plan approval for quarrying, stockpiling and processing aggregate on the subject site in a Heavy Industrial Zone H-M. ACREAGE: The proposed mining area is to measure about 140 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The property is vacant. Quarrying has taken place on an occasional basis on the property since 1916. AREA LAND USE: The applicant?s existing quarry operation is located to the northwest Industrial operations are located to the southeast. The property is bordered on the northwest by the City of Prineville Railroad tracks and Lamonta Road, and on the southwest by the Madras Highway. Nonfarm residences on small parcels area located to the northeast on the far side of the railroad and Lamonta Road. Grazing and crop lands are located to the southwest across the Madras Highway. A radio broadcasting station is also located to the southwest. ACCESS: Access is to be to the Madras Highway. SECURITY: The site is to be fenced with locked gates at access points. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is not under farm deferral. FLOOD ZONE: The property is in Flood Zone X outside the 500 year flood zone. WETLAND: The property is not in designated wetland area. DISCUSSION: The applicant intends to extend his existing quarry operation into an area to the southeast within the H-M zone which is not presently shown on the inventory of Mineral and Aggregate sites in the Comprehensive Plan. He states that quarrying has occurred in the proposed site area at various times in the past. When mining is completed, the site will be leveled and used for an industrial park. ESSEE: The ESSEE analysis for the site is hereby referenced. WILDLIFE: The property is not in critical wildlife habitat. VEGETATION: There is sparse vegetation on the site. SURFACE WATER: The site is not irrigated and has no surface water. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater data is available. Ordinance No. 105 EXHIBIT A ? Page 3 Adopted: September 13, 1995 TOPOGRAPHY: The site is hilly. SEPTIC: Portable toilets will be provided for workers. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinances sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource material and storage of equipment are required to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. SCREENING: Screening is required to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet, under Section 11.060(F). RECLAMATION: Reclamation will be in accordance with a plan approve by DOGAMI. TESTIMONY: One person submitted written testimony in opposition to the proposal. He proposed that the subject property be returned to agricultural use. He also proposed that operations on the site be located away from residences, that sound barriers be used, and that hours of operation be restricted. Two other persons submitted both oral and written testimony. They stated that there have been dust problems from the applicant?s present operation. They expressed concern about dust, noise, diesel fumes and reduced property values resulting from the proposed use. Another person expressed concern about an existing quarry operation to the south of the proposed site. He said he was not concerned about the present proposal. The applicant testified that he intends to implement measures for control of dust and noise on the property, possibly including obtaining water rights for dust control and planting trees for screening. He said the site should have been listed on the original inventory of Mineral and Aggregate sites. REFERENCE: The staff report of March 13, 1995 is hereby referenced. Ordinance No. 105 EXHIBIT B ? Page 1 Adopted: September 13, 1995 EXHIBITS ?B? C-P(M)-25-95 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION (1) The proposed use is permitted outright in a Heavy-Industrial Zone H-M under Section 3.150(1)(5) of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. (2) Residences and public roads are located within 500 feet of the proposed quarry site. Measures for noise and dust control will be necessary. (3) Noise and dust impacts on residences and public roads can be adequately mitigated through appropriate measures. (4) Pursuant to resource quality data received from the applicant, the site is a ?1C? significant site. (5) Conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, and are present in the impact area, but there are no conflicting state Goal issues. The site should be classified as a ?3C? site. It is recommended that the application be approved, subject to the following CONDITIONS and REQUIREMENTS: (1) Surface mining activities on the site to be a minimum of 100 feet from residences and public roads. (2) Processing of resource material and storage of equipment to be a minimum of 500 feet from residences and public roads. (3) Adequate screening to be employed to obscure the site from residences and public roads within 500 feet. (4) An adequate plan for control of noise and dust to be submitted and implemented by the applicant. This approval to be void if an adequate mitigation plan is not implemented. (5) Reclamation to be in accordance with a plan approved by DOGAMI. (6) All DOGAMI requirements to be adhered to. Ordinance No. 105 EXHIBIT B ? Page 1 Adopted: September 13, 1995 EXHIBIT ?C? ESSEE ANALYSIS APPLICATION NO. C-P(M)-25-95 Pursuant to data received from applicant concerning quantity and quality of the site material, it is a ?IC? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, and area present in the impact area, but there are no conflicting Goal Issues, the site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following conflicting uses have been identified within the impact area: Nonfarm Dwellings - 6 The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: Farm Dwellings campgrounds Private Parks fishing & hunting preserves public parks & playgrounds public or private schools home occupations churches personal use airports secondary farm dwelling boarding houses for profit commercial activities in conjunction with farm use residences for caretakers veterinary clinics or kennels agricultural products food processing resumptions or residential uses which have been discontinued for not more than six months. ECONOMIC IMPACTS: The impact area is zoned Heavy Industrial H-M and Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2. Except for the above incompatible uses, all allowed uses in these zones are compatible with mining. Possible economic impacts on non-farm residences within the impact area consist of reduced property values for the residences involved, and consequent loss of property tax revenue. Ordinance No. 105 EXHIBIT B ? Page 2 Adopted: September 13, 1995 The economic consequences of not allowing mining at the proposed site will be increased cost due to the cost of transporting aggregate longer distances from other possible sites. SOCIAL IMPACT: Possible social impacts on nonfarm residences within the impact area include impacts on liveability from noise and dust from the proposed operation, and possible loss of scenic values. The social impacts of not allowing mining on the proposed site could involve greater social impacts of mining at another location. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The proposed site is zoned for industrial use, and has little vegetation. The site will be leveled and used for an industrial park when quarrying is completed. There are no anticipated groundwater or surface water conflicts. No critical wildlife areas are nearby. The environmental impacts of not allowing mining at the site could include greater impacts which could result from using some alternative sites. ENERGY IMPACTS: There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. Energy impacts of not allowing mining at the site include greater energy costs of transporting aggregate from more distant sites. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS: GOAL 2 The site is zoned Heavy Industrial H-M. The impact area is zoned Heavy Industrial H-M and Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2, and classified as Heavy Industrial and Agricultural by the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are permitted outright in the Heavy Industrial Zone. GOAL 3 Parts of the impact area are used for crops and/or grazing. Few significant impacts on agriculture are likely. GOAL 6 The proposed operations will not negatively impact groundwater or surface water resources. Any air quality impact will be mitigated by standard quarrying techniques which are required by the state DEQ and DOGAMI. GOAL 8 The activity will not affect recreation in the area. Ordinance No. 105 EXHIBIT B ? Page 3 Adopted: September 13, 1995 GOAL 9 The proposal will have little if any negative economic effects. Use of the aggregate site will have positive economic effects providing for sale of raw materials. GOAL 13 Use of the site as source of aggregate will result in lower energy costs than use of a more distant site. Ordinance No. 108 EXHIBIT 1A ? Page 1 Adopted: October 11, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1A? C-P(M)-28-95 LEGAL CRITERIA ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2. Mining is a conditional use in this zone under Section 3.020(3) of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance sets requirements for mining. Section 5.060(9) also contains requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands. It also states that a site must be on the Significant Inventory List of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Relevant sections of the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan include the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendments, and pages 25-27, 42-49, 113-119, 152-164, and 178-200. Ordinance No. 108 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 1 Adopted: October 11, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1B? C-P(M)-28-95 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: On the north side of the Crooked River about 10 miles west of Prineville (T 14 S R 14 EWM Sec 22 TL 200). PROPOSAL: A recommendation to the Crook County Court on a proposal to add an aggregate quarry site to the Mineral and Aggregate section of the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan, and conditional use approval for a quarrying operation on the proposed site in an Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-2. BACKGROUND: The easterly 2-3 acres of the proposed site have previously been used for quarrying of gravel for use on the subject property. ACREAGE: The subject property measures 188.97 acres. The proposed quarry site is to measure 26 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The property is used for crop production. AREA LAND USE: Properties in the area are used for grazing and crop production. A quarrying operation is located immediately to the north of the proposed site, on adjacent property. ACCESS: Access to the site is to be by any existing private road connecting to the O?Neil Highway. The access road is presently graveled and is used by farm machinery. The applicant proposes to maintain the road to Crook County standards. This may include placing additional gravel and/or periodic grading. The applicant states that material from the site will probably be utilized in the Redmond area, so there will probably be little truck traffic in the direction of Prineville. ODOT indicate that a new road access permit will be needed. The approach road crosses an existing bridge over the Crooked River, which may be replaced. It crosses the City of Prineville Railroad immediately to the north of the highway. SECURITY: As the proposed mining site is located on a working ranch, the applicant states that it will not be practical to place a locked gate at the entrance to the property from the O?Neil Highway. The applicant proposes to install a gate near the southwest corner of the mining site to restrict access to the site. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is under farm deferral. SOILS: Soils in the proposed quarry area consist primarily of Prineville sandy loam, Class II, Ochoco sandy loam, Class II, and Prineville gravelly sandy loam, SCS Class IV. Ordinance No. 108 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 2 Adopted: October 11, 1995 IRRIGATION: The proposed site has groundwater irrigation rights. Irrigation water will be used as needed for watering roads and the pit area for dust control. It will not be used for aggregate processing. FLOOD ZONE: The proposed site is in Flood Zone X, outside the 500 year flood zone. WETLAND: The proposed mining site is not in a designated wetland area. WILDLIFE: The proposed mining site is on the edge of General Deer Winter Range. VEGETATION: There is little natural vegetation on the proposed quarry site. SURFACE WATER: There is no permanent or year-round surface water on the site. To reduce or eliminate runoff, the applicant proposes to grade the floor of the bench or mining area to a slope of one percent to the north. As an alternative, a low earthen berm may be constructed near the southerly edge of the mining bench to keep runoff from flowing downhill. There are no year-round streams within 100 feet of the proposed quarry site. There is an intermittent drainage near the easterly corner of the site. The applicant states that this area will not be utilized or disturbed because the site is too narrow, and most of the gravel in the easterly 2-3 acres of the site has already been removed. GROUNDWATER: Well water will be used for dust control on the site. TOPOGRAPHY: The mining area is located on a bench about 20 feet above the Crooked River. SEPTIC: Portable toilets will be provided for workers. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, roads not owned by the applicant, and property lines. Processing of resource materials and storage of equipment are to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The applicant and the owner of the property bordering the site on the north have jointly requested that a variance be granted to the required 100 foot setback adjacent to the property line between their parcels. They state that leaving a 100 foot setback would result in a ?hogback? being left between their quarries which would be unattractive and difficult to farm. The proposed site is not within 100 feet of a noise or dust sensitive use. It is to be at least 100 feet from the existing residence on the property. There will be no on-site processing of material, other than extraction. All materials will be hauled off the property for processing. Machinery on-site will consist of a front-end loader, which will be parked more than 500 feet from the residence and other noise and dust sensitive uses. Ordinance No. 108 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 3 Adopted: October 11, 1995 SCREENING: Section 11.060(F) requires screening to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet. There are no such uses within 500 feet of the proposed mining area. The applicant proposes to plant fast-growing trees to provide a visual screen on the south side of the mining site, as a berm would not be practical in that location. NOISE CONTROL: All extraction equipment will conform to DEQ noise requirements. There will be no blasting or crushing on the site. RECLAMATION: The applicant states that a reclamation plan will be submitted to both DOGAMI and Crook County. When mining is completed, the applicant will grade the site, replace topsoil, and return the site to agricultural use. All equipment and structures will be removed. TESTIMONY: The applicant?s representative testified in favor of the proposal. He said that the primary purpose of the proposal is to level the property for agricultural use. He said that the proposed use would generate traffic of about three trucks per hour. He said the proposed use will have no significant impact on the McCall House historical site. He said visibility at the highway and railroad intersections with the access road is good. He said that the existing bridge over the Crooked River will probably be replaced. He said that the applicant proposes to use appropriate dust control measures on the access road. One person submitted written testimony in opposition to the proposal. He said that he is concerned about the impact of the proposed use on his neighboring property. It was brought out in testimony that the opponent?s property is not within the impact area of the proposed use. The Oregon Department of Transportation submitted written testimony indicating that a new access permit will be necessary. REFERENCE: The staff report of August 1, 1995 is hereby referenced. ESEE ANALYSIS: The ESEE Analysis for the proposed site is attached. Ordinance No. 108 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 1 Adopted: October 11, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1C? C-P(M)-28-95 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) On the basis of the aggregate resource investigation report submitted by the applicant, the proposed site contains significant quantities of sand and gravel aggregate suitable for production of ODOT specification construction materials. It is therefore recommended that the site be classified as a ?1-C? site. (2) On the basis of the ESEE analysis, the proposed quarrying operation will conflict with some permitted uses in the Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-2, but will not conflict with any statewide planning goal. Conflicting uses are not presently existing in the impact area of the proposed quarrying operation, and can be prohibited by the County without significant economic or social effects. It is therefore recommended that the site be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3-C? site. (3) It is recommended that the Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit all uses identified as conflicting uses in Agricultural areas by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan within 500 feet of the proposed site. Ordinance No. 108 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 2 Adopted: October 11, 1995 ESEE ANALYSIS of Application No. C-P(M)-28-95 (Phillip Schlosser) Pursuant to data received from the applicant concerning the quantity and quality of the site material, the site is a ?1C? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, but there are no conflicting goal issues, the site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area, thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: farm dwellings campgrounds private parks fishing and hunting preserves nonfarm dwellings public parks and playgrounds public or private schools home occupations churches personal use airports secondary farm dwellings boarding houses for profit commercial activities in conjunction with farm use None of the above uses are presently existing or proposed within the impact area. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2. Except for the above listed incompatible uses, all allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. None of the listed conflicting uses are existing or proposed. Therefore, any economic effect on the impact area will be minimal. SOCIAL IMPACTS The proposal may have some negative scenic impact due to visibility from the O?Neil Highway to the south. This impact may be mitigated by planting a screen of fast-growing trees as proposed by the applicant. The applicant states that all extraction equipment will meet DEQ standards for noise control. Mining will be conducted only during hours specified in Crook County Ordinance No. 18. There will be no blasting or crushing on the site. Ordinance No. 108 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 3 Adopted: October 11, 1995 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The proposed site is on the edge of General Deer Winter Range. Quarrying and processing operations could cause some negative impacts on wildlife. The applicant states that there is a chance of muddy water runoff from the site onto croplands. He proposes to mitigate this by grading the floor of the bench or mining area to a slope of one percent to the north, or alternatively by constructing a low, earthen berm near the southerly edge of the mining bench. Well water will be used for dust control, but will not be used for processing. There are no apparent groundwater conflicts. ENERGY IMPACTS There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2, and classified as Agricultural lands by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are conditional uses in this area. Goal 3 The site will be reclaimed and returned to agricultural production when mining is completed. Impacts on adjacent croplands on the subject property will be mitigated by control of runoff. Goal 6 The applicant proposes mitigation measures to control runoff from the site. Dust will be controlled by watering roads and the pit area. Goal 8 The proposed operations will not apparently impact recreation in the area. Goal 9 The proposal will have few if any negative economic impacts. Goal 13 The proposal will have few if any negative energy impacts. Ordinance No. 109 EXHIBIT 1A ? Page 1 Adopted: October 11, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1A? C-P(M)-27-95 LEGAL CRITERIA ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2. Mining is a conditional use in this zone under Section 3.020(3) of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance sets requirements for mining. Section 5.060(9) also contains requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands. It also states that a site must be on the Significant Inventory List of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Relevant sections of the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan include the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendments, and pages 25-27, 42-49, 113-119, 152-164, and 178-200. Ordinance No. 109 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 1 Adopted: October 11, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1B? C-P(M)-27-95 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: On the west side of McKay, 1.25 miles northeast of Gerke Road (T 14 S R 16 EWM Sec 5 TL 100). PROPOSAL: An amendment to the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan to add an aggregate quarry site to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan, and conditional use approval for an aggregate quarrying and processing operation on the proposed site in an Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-2. BACKGROUND: A quarry was opened on the site in the 1970?s and was operated by Crook County until 1988, but the site is not listed on the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan. ACREAGE: The proposed site measures 180 acres. The present pit on the property measures 2.5 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The property is occupied by an existing quarry. AREA LAND USE: The property is located in an agricultural area. Three small nonfarm parcels are located to the east of the property adjacent to McKay Road, more than 500 feet from the proposed site. ACCESS: There is an existing access to McKay Road on the east side of the property. SECURITY: The property will be fenced with a locked gate at the access point to the site. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is under farm deferral. SOILS: Soils on the property consist of Gem-Day stony clay loam, SCS Class VI, Polly loam, Class II, Veazie gravelly loam, Class III, and Stearns-Crooked complex, Class IV. IRRIGATION: The site is not irrigated and has no water rights. A Bureau of Reclamation irrigation ditch, maintained by Ochoco Irrigation District, is located to the east of the site. The applicant has agreed not to remove or stockpile material on the ditch right-of-way, and has agreed to extend an existing culvert on the access road to the concrete area of the ditch. The applicant has also agreed that no contaminants will be introduced into the irrigation water, and that any debris which enters the canal will be removed immediately. FLOOD ZONE: The property is in Flood Zone X, outside the 500 year flood zone. Ordinance No. 109 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 2 Adopted: October 11, 1995 WETLAND: The property is not in a designated wetland area. WILDLIFE: The site is in General Deer Winter Range. VEGETATION: The property is presently occupied by juniper and sagebrush. The applicant proposes to reseed the area with pasture grasses at the time of reclamation. SURFACE WATER: There is presently no surface water on the property and the property is not within 100 feet of any year-round stream. A BOR irrigation canal traverses the property. The applicant will use a water truck for dust control. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater data is available. TOPOGRAPHY: The topography of the site is level. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, and public roads. Processing of resource materials and storage of equipment are to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The proposed use will meet these requirements, as there are no residences or dust- sensitive uses within 500 feet of the proposed site. SCREENING: Section 11.060(F) requires screening to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet. There are no such uses within 500 feet of the proposed mining area. RECLAMATION: Reclamation will be in accordance with a plan approved by DOGAMI. SEPTIC: Portable toilets will be provided for workers. TESTIMONY: The applicant?s representative spoke in favor of the proposal. He said that the site has been in existence for a number of years and should be already listed on the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory. A reclamation plan has been on file with DOGAMI since 1975. The applicant does not proposed to extend the existing stockpile area or take down the existing berm. The Department of Fish and Wildlife state that the property is not in Critical Deer Winter Range. He said that the site is projected to produce 20,000 cubic yards of material per year - about 7 to 10 truckloads per day. Material will be transported in the direction of Prineville. Visibility is good from the turnoff from the access road onto the highway. The Ochoco Irrigation District has submitted a letter stating that they have reached an understanding with the applicant concerning measures to protect the irrigation canal adjacent to the proposed site. REFERENCE: The staff report of July 17, 1995 is hereby referenced. ESEE ANALYSIS: The ESEE analysis for the proposal is attached. Ordinance No. 109 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 1 Adopted: October 11, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1C? C-P(M)-27-9 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) On the basis of the aggregate resource investigation report submitted by the applicant, the proposed site contains significant quantities of material suitable for production of ODOT specification construction materials. It is therefore recommended that the site be classified as a ?1-C? site. (2) On the basis of the ESEE analysis, the proposed quarrying operation will conflict with some permitted uses in the Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-2, but will not conflict with any statewide planning goal. Conflicting uses are not presently existing in the impact area of the proposed quarrying operation, and can be prohibited by the County without significant economic or social effects. It is therefore recommended that the site be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3-C? site. (3) It is recommended that the Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit all uses identified as conflicting uses in Agricultural areas by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan within 500 feet of the proposed site. Ordinance No. 109 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 2 Adopted: October 11, 1995 ESEE ANALYSIS of Application No. C-P(M)-27-95 (UCON Inc.) Pursuant to data received from the applicant concerning the quantity and quality of the site material, the site is a ?1C? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, but there are no conflicting goal issues, the site should be classified as a ?1C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area, thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: farm dwellings campgrounds private parks fishing and hunting preserves nonfarm dwellings public parks and playgrounds public or private schools home occupations churches personal use airports secondary farm dwellings boarding houses for profit commercial activities in conjunction with farm use None of the above uses are presently existing or proposed within the impact area. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2. Except for the above listed incompatible uses, all allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. None of the listed conflicting uses are existing or proposed. Therefore, any economic effect on the impact area will be minimal. SOCIAL IMPACTS The proposal may have some negative scenic impact if the stockpile area is located in close proximity to a public road. This may be mitigated by locating the stockpile area elsewhere. There are no residences within the impact area. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The proposed site is in General Deer Winter Range. Quarrying and processing operations could cause some negative impacts on wildlife. Ordinance No. 109 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 3 Adopted: October 11, 1995 There are no apparent groundwater or surface water conflicts. Dust problems may be controlled by watering and/or use of proper excavation techniques. ENERGY IMPACTS There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2, and classified as Agricultural lands by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are conditional uses in this area. Goal 3 The site is not currently in agricultural production. No long term impacts on agricultural production are likely. Goal 6 The proposed operations will not apparently impact groundwater or surface water resources. Any air quality impact will be mitigated by standard quarrying techniques which are required by the state DEQ and DOGAMI. Goal 8 The proposed operations will not apparently impact recreation in the area. Goal 9 The proposal will have few if any negative economic impacts. Goal 13 The proposal will have few if any negative energy impacts. Ordinance No. 111 EXHIBIT 1A ? Page 1 Adopted: November 22, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1A? C-P(M)-29-95 LEGAL CRITERIA ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2. Mining is a conditional use in this zone under Section 3.020(3) of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance sets requirements for mining. Section 5.060(9) also contains requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands. It also states that a site must be on the Significant Inventory List of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Relevant sections of the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan include the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendments, and pages 25-27, 42-49, 113-119, 152-164, and 178-200. Ordinance No. 111 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 1 Adopted: November 22, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1B? C-P(M)-29-95 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: Between Butler Road and Lone Pine Road (T 14 S R 14 EWM Sec 17 TL 100). PROPOSAL: A recommendation to the County Court on a proposal to add a quarry site to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan, and conditional use approval for a quarrying and processing operation on the subject property in an Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-2. ACREAGE: The property measures 590.31 acres. The proposed quarry site is to measure about 60 acres. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The property is used for irrigated pasture and mint cultivation. A feedlot and corral are located in the proposed quarry area. A natural gas pipeline crosses the property from north to south, between the quarry area and the processing and stockpile area. The applicants? residence and farm buildings are located to the south of the quarry area. AREA LAND USE: The property is located in an area of large parcels used for grazing and mint production. A quarrying and processing operation is located directly to the east of the property. ACCESS: The proposed quarry site is adjacent to Lone Pine Road. Entry to the site will be by an existing gated access. Graveled access roads will be constructed on the property. SECURITY: The quarry and processing site is fenced, with a gated access. Cattle guards are existing at all accesses to the property. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is under farm deferral. SOILS: Soils in the quarry, processing, and stockpile area include Ochoco sandy loam, SCS Class II, Metolius loam, Class II, and Ayres and Ochoco gravelly sandy barns, Class III. IRRIGATION: The proposed quarry and processing site has irrigation water rights. Water will be used for processing, dust control, and reclamation. FLOOD ZONE: The proposed site is in Flood Zone X, outside the 500 year flood zone. Ordinance No. 111 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 2 Adopted: November 22, 1995 WETLAND: The proposed quarrying operation may impact a designated wetland area on the property, on the northwest edge of the quarry area. WILDLIFE: The proposed site is not in a critical wildlife area. VEGETATION: There is little natural vegetation on the proposed quarry and processing site. SURFACE WATER: The applicants state that the site is not within 100 feet of any year-round stream or intermittent stream. A designated wetland is located in the vicinity of the northwest edge of the quarry area. The quarry site is within 500 feet of the east side of the Crooked River. GROUNDWATER: No groundwater data is available. TOPOGRAPHY: The proposed quarry area has irregular topography, with hill slopes on the presently irrigated area and a flat plateau by the existing feedlot area. SEPTIC: Portable toilets will be provided for workers. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, roads not owned by the applicant, and property lines. Processing of resource materials and storage of equipment are to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The applicants state that the required setbacks are to be complied with. SCREENING: Section 11.060(5) requires screening to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet, unless inconsistent with the conditions imposed to protect conflicting uses under the Comprehensive Plan, or of minimal value or effectiveness because of topography or other site features. The proposed stockpile and processing sites, as shown on the site plan submitted, are to be within 100 feet of Lone Pine Road. RECLAMATION: Reclamation is to be carried out in phases, under a plan approved by the state Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). The site will be returned to agricultural use. TESTIMONY: The applicants submitted written testimony in favor of the proposal. The applicants? representative spoke in favor of the proposal. He stated that the primary purpose of the application is to permit the applicants to level the site to increase its agricultural productivity and make it more economical to farm, with sale of aggregate removed from the site a secondary consideration. He stated that the operation will be temporary, with operations to be completed within 10 years. The applicants? representative stated that the topography of the site makes visual screening of the site from Lone Pine Road impractical. He stated that the entrance to another quarry site is located across Lone Pine Road from the property, reducing the need for visual screening. Ordinance No. 111 EXHIBIT 1B ? Page 3 Adopted: November 22, 1995 ESEE ANALYSIS: The ESEE Analysis for the proposed site is attached. REFERENCE: The staff report of September 29, 1995 is hereby referenced. Ordinance No. 111 EXHIBIT 1C ? Page 1 Adopted: November 22, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1C? ESEE ANALYSIS of Application No. C-P(M)-29-95 (TY and LINDA FEHRENBACHER) Pursuant to data received from the applicant concerning the quantity and quality of the site material, the site is a ?1C? significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). As conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance, but there are no conflicting goal issues, the site should be classified as a ?3C? site. Consequences of protecting and utilizing the mineral and aggregate resource: The following uses have been identified as potential conflicting uses, however, the County intends to prohibit them from the impact area, thereby negating any effect they may have upon the resource site, or that the resource site may have upon them: farm dwellings campgrounds private parks fishing and hunting preserves nonfarm dwellings public parks and playgrounds public or private schools home occupations churches personal use airports secondary farm dwellings boarding houses for profit commercial activities in conjunction with farm use None of the above uses are presently existing or proposed within the impact area. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2. Except for the above listed incompatible uses, all allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. None of the listed conflicting uses are existing or proposed. Therefore, any economic effect on the impact area will be minimal. SOCIAL IMPACTS The proposal may have some negative scenic impact due to visibility from the O?Neil Highway to the south. This impact may be mitigated by planting a screen of fast-growing trees as proposed by the applicant. The applicant states that all extraction equipment will meet DEQ standards for noise control. Mining will be conducted only during hours specified in Crook County Ordinance No. 18. There will be no blasting or crushing on the site. Ordinance No. 111 EXHIBIT 1C ? Page 2 Adopted: November 22, 1995 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The proposed site is on the edge of General Deer Winter Range. Quarrying and processing operations could cause some negative impacts on wildlife. The applicant states that there is a chance of muddy water runoff from the site onto croplands. He proposes to mitigate this by grading the floor of the bench or mining area to a slope of one percent to the north, or alternatively by constructing a low, earthen berm near the southerly edge of the mining bench. Well water will be used for dust control, but will not be used for processing. There are no apparent groundwater conflicts. ENERGY IMPACTS There are no existing conflicting uses within the impact area. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-2, and classified as Agricultural lands by the Crook County -Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are conditional uses in this area. Goal 3 The site will be reclaimed and returned to agricultural production when mining is completed. Impacts on adjacent croplands on the subject property will be mitigated by control of runoff. Goal 6 The applicant proposes mitigation measures to control~ runoff from the site. Dust will be controlled by watering roads and the pit area. Goal 8 The proposed operations will not apparently impact recreation in the area. Goal 9 The proposal will have few if any negative economic impacts. Goal 13 The proposal will have few if any negative energy impacts. Ordinance No. 111 EXHIBIT 1C ? Page 1 Adopted: November 22, 1995 EXHIBIT ?1D? C-P(M)-29-9 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) On the basis of the aggregate resource investigation report submitted by the applicant, the proposed site contains significant quantities of sand and gravel aggregate suitable for production of ODOT specification construction materials. It is therefore recommended that the site be classified as a ?1-C? site. (2) On the basis of the ESEE analysis, the proposed quarrying operation will conflict with some permitted uses in the Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-2, but will not conflict with any statewide planning goal. Except for the farm residence owned and occupied by the applicants, there are no incompatible uses within the impact area. Negative economic impacts of prohibiting future incompatible uses are likely to be minor. It is therefore recommended that the site be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3-C? site. (3) It is recommended that the Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit all future uses identified as conflicting uses in Agricultural areas by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan within 500 feet of the proposed site. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT A ? Page 1 Adopted: November 13, 1996 EXHIBIT ?A? C-P(M)-31-96 LEGAL CRITERIA ZONING: The property is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-3. Mining is a conditional use in this zone under Section 3.030(3) of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance sets requirements for mining. Section 5.060(9) also contains requirements for mining. Section 11.040 states that a mining operation must not force a change in accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands or significantly increase the costs of accepted farm or forest practices on surrounding lands. It also states that a site must be on the Significant Inventory List of the Comprehensive Plan. Section 11.060(G) states that all operations are to conform to the requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and the Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Relevant sections of the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan include the Goal 5 Mineral and Aggregate Amendments, and pages 25-27, 42-49, 113-119, 152-164, and 178-200. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT B ? Page 1 Adopted: November 13, 1996 EXHIBIT ?B? C-P(M)-31-96 FACTS PROPERTY LOCATION: 1.5 mile south of the O?Neil Highway, at Lot 23 of the Prineville Ranch Subdivision Phase 2 (T 14 S R 14 EWM Sec 35 TL 101). PROPOSAL: A recommendation to the Crook County Court on a proposal to add a quarry site to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan, and conditional use approval for a quarrying and processing operation on the subject property in an Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-3. ACREAGE: The subject parcel measures 159.11 acres. It is part of a 1600+ acre property owned by the applicant, but constitutes a discreet subdivision lot. The proposed quarry site is to measure 40 acres, and is to be located in the southeastern quarter of the subject parcel. CURRENT USE OF THE PROPERTY: The subject parcel is currently used for grazing. The applicant states that it is not suitable for hay production due to poor soils. AREA LAND USE: There are no residences or other conflicting uses within the 500 foot impact area of the proposed quarrying operation. A utility facility belonging to Pacific Power is located within the impact area, about 100 feet to the east of the southeastern corner of the quarry site. All other lands within the impact area are used for grazing. Lands used for grazing and hay production are located to the north of the subject parcel, outside the impact area. Two farm residences not owned by the applicant are located over 0.25 mile to the east and south of the impact area. A farm residence and two secondary farm residences owned and occupied by the applicant and his employees are located 0.75 mile to the southeast of the impact area. Two nonfarm parcels without residences, owned by the applicant, are located more than 0.25 mile to the east of the impact area. ACCESS: The subject parcel is connected by a private road to SW Cornett Loop. A consultant retained by the applicant estimates that the operation will produce about 2,467 truckloads of aggregate per year, with about 12.5 truckloads per day during the summer months of June through September, 3.21-3.34 truckloads per day during the winter months of December through February, and intermediate rates during the spring and fall. The consultant states that total loads per day and month may vary with demand. He states that as the area grows and demand increases, the quantity of aggregate produced and hauled will increase. The applicant states that he is willing to participate in a reasonable manner in providing for required road improvements and maintenance. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT B ? Page 2 Adopted: November 13, 1996 SECURITY: The applicant states that the property will be fenced. FARM DEFERRAL: The property is presently under farm deferral. SOILS: Soils on the proposed site consist of Bakeoven very stony loam, SCS Class VII; Deschutes sandy loam, Class II; Redmond sandy loam, Class II; and Redmond stony sandy loam, Class IV. IRRIGATION: The property has 74.2 acres of irrigation water rights from the Central Oregon Irrigation District (COID). The applicant indicates that irrigation water will be used in the aggregate operation. Water Rights transfer applications have been made with the Department of Water Resources to permit water use for manufacturing uses, including dust abatement. An irrigation easement traverses the western side of the property. FLOOD ZONE: The portion of the property immediately bordering the Dry River on the western part of the property is in Flood Zone A, a 100 year flood zone where base flood elevations have not been determined. The remainder of the property is in Flood Zone X and is not in a 100 or 500 year flood zone. The proposed quarry site is not in the 100 year flood zone area. WETLAND: There are no designated wetlands on the property. WILDLIFE: The property is not in deer or elk winter range. VEGETATION: There are small stands of juniper trees on rocky outcrops on the property, but little other natural vegetation. SURFACE WATER: Dry River is the only surface stream on the property and is only seasonally active with irrigation runoff. There is presently a pond on the quarry site. The applicant proposes to construct a settling pond on the property for use in the aggregate operation. GROUNDWATER: The applicant states that well logs indicate that groundwater is located more than 250 feet below the surface on the proposed site. TOPOGRAPHY: The ground surface on the site slopes gently to the northwest. There are areas of steeper slopes where rock outcrops and ledges are exposed. Elevations on the proposed quarry site range from about 2,960 feet above sea level at the northwest corner of the site to about 3,015 feet at the southeast corner. The average topsoil or overburden depth is no more than one foot. WATER: Water for the operation is to be provided by COID. Water rights transfer applications will be filed with the Department of Water Resources. An estimate has been submitted stating that 108,000 gallons of water will be used in the operation. Water will be recycled, and will be settled before being released for other uses. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT B ? Page 3 Adopted: November 13, 1996 AIR QUALITY: The applicant states that all DEQ and DOGAMI requirements will be followed. Water will be used for dust abatement as needed. SETBACKS: Section 11.060 of the Crook County Zoning Ordinance sets forth required setbacks for surface mining and processing activities. Surface mining activities are required to be 100 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses, residences, roads not owned by the applicant, and property lines. Processing of resource materials and storage of equipment are to be 500 feet from noise and dust sensitive uses and residences. The applicant states that there will be no structures within the required setbacks. SCREENING: Section 11.060(5) requires screening to obscure the site from residences, public roads, etc. within 500 feet, unless inconsistent with the conditions imposed to protect conflicting uses under the Comprehensive Plan, or of minimal value or effectiveness because of topography or other site features. The applicant states that the proposed quarry site is not highly visible from the nearest County road, Cornett Loop. He states that the site is well screened by trees in the area. After the initial phase of operation, operations will be below grade level. CULTURAL RESOURCES: The applicant states that there are no known historical or archeological sites within the impact area. RECLAMATION: The applicant states that the site will be reclaimed and returned to agricultural use when quarrying is completed, in approximately 20 years. About 50,000 cubic yards of overburden will be stockpiled for reclamation. ESEE ANALYSIS: The applicant has completed a draft ESEE Analysis for the proposal. TESTIMONY: The applicant?s representative spoke in favor of the proposal. He stated that Pacific Power and ODFW have indicated no opposition to the proposal. He said that neighboring property owners have indicated no objection to the proposal and state that the proposed quarrying operation will not disturb their livestock. He said that the access road to the property is presently 30 feet wide and lightly graveled. It will be improved as needed. It connects to Cornett Road, a paved County road. He said that the proposed Exception Area is to measure 40 acres. He said that rock in this area is on the surface and there is little overburden. Operations are anticipated to continue for about 20 years. He said that about 10.1 acres of the property outside the proposed quarry area is occupied by irrigated fields which will be kept in production. There is limited grazing on other parts of the property. The applicant?s representative said that the applicants want to adhere to the operating hours required by Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance. A consultant retained by the applicant also spoke in favor of the proposal. He said that products of the operation will be sand, fines, and oil rock. He said that four employees will be on the site at any one time. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT B ? Page 4 Adopted: November 13, 1996 Another person testified in favor of the proposal. He said quarrying is the highest and best use of the area as it is rocky. There was no opposition testimony. REFERENCE: The staff report of August 23, 1996 is hereby referenced. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT C ? Page 1 Adopted: November 13, 1996 EXHIBIT ?C? C-P(M)-31-96 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (1) On the basis of the aggregate resource investigation report submitted by the applicant, the proposed site contains significant quantities of sand and gravel aggregate suitable for production of ODOT specification construction materials. It is therefore recommended that the site be classified as a ?1-C? site. (2) On the basis of the ESEE analysis, the proposed quarrying operation will conflict with some permitted uses in the Exclusive Farm Use zone EFU-3, but will not conflict with any statewide planning goal. There are no incompatible uses within the impact area. Negative economic impacts of prohibiting future incompatible uses are likely to be minor. It is therefore recommended that the site be added to the Mineral and Aggregate Inventory of the Comprehensive Plan as a ?3-C? site. (3) It is recommended that the Crook County Zoning Ordinance be amended to prohibit all future uses identified as conflicting uses in Agricultural areas by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan within 500 feet of the proposed site. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT C ? Page 1 Adopted: November 13, 1996 EXHIBIT ?1D? ESEE ANALYSIS Applicant Draft of Application No. C-P(M) Kilpatrick Pursuant to data received from applicant concerning the quantity and quality of the site material, the site is a significant site under OAR 660-16-000(5)(C). Conflicting uses are permitted in the site impact area by the Crook County Zoning Ordinance. Applicant has identified no potentially conflicting goal issues. General: A farm dwelling and two secondary farm dwellings all owned and occupied by the applicant and applicant?s full-time ranch staff are located outside the impact area. The above mentioned dwellings are three quarters of a mile away from the impact area. The nearest farm dwellings not owned by the applicant are located over one-half mile away, one to the east and one to the south. There are two non-farm use parcels over one-quarter mile to the east that are presently owned by the applicant. The applicant states that the property will be returned to agricultural use following mining, in approximately twenty years. ECONOMIC IMPACTS The entire impact area is zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-3. All allowed uses in this zone are compatible with mining. The engineering data provided by the applicant concludes that the quality, hardness, and density of the available raw material will result in an excellent product durability. Development of the proposed site will result in a positive economic impact, including a much needed increase in area competition, and will add to the diversity of locally available rock products. SOCIAL IMPACTS The applicant is aware that there may be some concerns about increased truck traffic and is willing to participate in a reasonable manner to help with required road improvements and maintenance. Applicant has made provisions with Central Oregon Irrigation District to insure availability of water both for operations and dust abatement. The applicant is aware of no archeological and/or historically significant site within the impact area. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT C ? Page 2 Adopted: November 13, 1996 The applicant states that the site is well screened by area trees, is not highly visible from the County Road, Cornett Loop, and that operations will quickly proceed below grade making visual impacts to adjacent neighbors minimal. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Note: Applicant has contacted ODFW and was informed that survey of area could not occur until after application. Applicant is aware of no protected wildlife nesting areas within the impact area. There are no wetlands within or adjacent to the impact area. There are no surface streams or natural areas of runoff within or adjacent to the impact area. Dry River to the west is the only surface stream and it is only seasonally active with irrigation runoff. ENERGY IMPACTS Applicant will meet all State and County required noise and or dust abatement measures. OTHER STATEWIDE GOALS Goal l Full opportunities for citizen involvement in the planning process are being provided in the context of the public hearing process for the subject proposal. Goal 2 The site and impact area are zoned Exclusive Farm Use EFU-3, and classified as agricultural lands by the Crook County - Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Quarrying and mining are conditional uses in agricultural areas. Goal 3 The site is currently used for livestock grazing, most of the site has no water rights because of the poor soil conditions and is not a viable hay production area. Negative agricultural impacts are minimal due to marginal soils and the limited feed production of the site. However, the applicant will return the area to the present agricultural use following mining. The site is along the south edge of the larger cattle and hay production areas and is easily fenced so as to minimize conflicts with existing agricultural practices. Goal 4 No forest lands are located within the impact area. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT C ? Page 3 Adopted: November 13, 1996 Goal 5 The applicant has submitted information indicting the presence of Goal 5 mineral resources of commercially usable quality and quantity on the site. In addition to data submitted by registered engineer and geotechnical consultants, the applicant has included the following inventory of soil capability classifications on the proposed site as follows: BdD Bakeoven very stony loam, Oto 20 percent slopes, VIIs-2 DnA Deschutes sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent IIs-1 DnB Deschutes sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent IIe-1 RmB Redmond sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent IIe-3 RoB Redmond stony sandy loam, 0 to 6 percent slopes, IVs-2 See attached copy of SCS map. The applicant has reviewed application procedures for limited license with Central Oregon Irrigation District and Water Resources Department for water use and will apply upon approval of the requested Conditional Use Permit. Surface water is available to the site. Goal 6 There are no designated wetlands on the property. The only surface water in the area is irrigation water provided by Central Oregon Irrigation District. Area well logs indicate that groundwater is below (250+ft) of the proposed site. Most water used will be recycled and settled before other uses. Negative impacts on surface water and groundwater quality are possible, but cannot be adequately assessed on the basis of available information. No information has been submitted regarding the air quality impacts of the proposal. In the absence of such information, it is not possible to accurately assess air quality impacts. Goal 7 There are no natural hazards within the impact area. Goal 8 The applicant is not aware of any recreational facilities or uses in the impact area that will be adversely effected. Goal 9 N/a Goal 10 There are no dwellings within the impact area. The nearest dwelling is over one-half mile away and is well screened. Ordinance No. 120 EXHIBIT C ? Page 4 Adopted: November 13, 1996 Goal 11 The applicant states that there are no public facilities or services within the impact area. Goal 12 The applicant states that there are no public transportation facilities located within the impact area. Applicant has included an annual estimate of hauling use. See enclosed. Goal 13 The applicant has submitted no information on the energy impacts on the area. Goal 14 No urban development is located within the impact area. Goal 15-19 These goals are not relevant to Crook County. APPENDIX ?B? Ordinance No. 45 CROOK COUNTY EXCEPTION AREAS Table of Contents FACTOR TWO Page 1 RURAL EXCEPTION AREAS: Powell Butte #1 4 Powell Butte #2 21 Twin Lakes 35 Rockview III 40 Grimes Flat/Lamonta 45 O?Neil Highway 54 Westwood/Rimrock Area 60 McKay Acres 65 Ochoco West 70 Ochoco/Johnson Creek 75 Marks Creek 86 Lofton/Turner Creek 91 McKay Development 102 AIRPORT-INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION AREA: Prineville-Crook County Airport Development Area 107 INDUSTRIAL EXCEPTIONS AREA: Northwest Prineville Industrial Area 128 RURAL SERVICE EXCEPTION AREAS: East Powell Butte Rural Service Center 27 Post Rural Service Center 141 West Powell Butte Rural Service Center 147 Paulina Rural Service Center 153 ?RURAL? RECREATION RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION AREA: Ochoco Reservoir Recreation Residential Area 163 CROOK COUNTY GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS: Exception Area #21: RR(M-2) Zoned Land 179 Exception Area #22: Park-Reserve Zone 180 Page 1 of 1 - 1 - FACTOR TWO Goal 2 ? Amendment and Exception Rule (OAR 660 ? Division 4) Goal 3 ? Agricultural Exception Areas The purpose of the Exceptions Document is to analyze in a detailed manner those areas of the County to which certain Statewide Planning Goals were not applied under the provisions of the Goal 2 exceptions process. The majority of the land area of Crook County falls within the Statewide Planning Goal?s definitions of agricultural or forest land and most existing development is found adjacent to or interspersed with these resource lands. Three (3) types of nonresource areas are defined in the Comprehensive Plan; urban growth areas, rural service centers, and other rural lands which are presently developed or committed to nonresource use. This document contains the factual findings to document that lands herein described are either ?physically developed? to other than resource use; or are ?irrevocably committed? to other than resource use as defined in OAR 660-04-025 and OAR 660-04-028. Urban Growth Area The urban growth boundary which has been acknowledged for the City of Prineville discussed in detail within the Rural ? Urban Relationship of the Crook County-Prineville Area Comprehensive Plan. Rural Service Centers There is a discussion of the rural service centers within the Powell Butte, Post, and Paulina areas. Their primary function of service is to the surrounding agricultural areas, and are not intended to serve or anticipate urban growth of these areas. The rural service centers have at a minimum either/or school, church, post office, grocery store, and service station. The size of the rural service centers by their nature are designed to be small, compact areas. The following table describes these characteristics. RURAL SERVICE CENTER TABLE COMMUNITY POST OFFICE SCHOOL CHURCH STORE SERVICE STATION Powell Butte 1 X X X X Powell Butte 2 X X X Post X X X Paulina X X X X X - 2 - COMMUNITY COMMUNITY BUILDING NUMBER OF RESIDENCES TOTAL ACRES Powell Butte 1 Six (6) 27.06 Powell Butte 2 Two (2) 1.32 Post X One (1) 5.53 Paulina X Nine (9) 28.46 The existing development of physically developed land within the rural communities establishes that these areas are physically developed and irrevocably committed to nonresource use. There have been substantial financial investments by various special service districts and the County to provide appropriate public services to these rural communities so that residential and commercial development can be accommodated within these areas and thereby relieve development pressure from resource lands in the County. Rural Exception Areas There are other lands in Crook County which lie outside of urban growth boundaries and rural communities which cannot be used for resource purposes because of the nature of the physical development of the land or irrevocable commitment to other uses. These exception areas are described as primarily as platted subdivisions which have been developed with residential uses. Each of these areas is mapped and given a name to provide it with a unique identify for this document. Some of these areas are in contiguous relationship with each other so that the total exception area may encompass many of the individual exceptions areas. An example of a ?built upon? exception would be a developed subdivision that has all utilities and services physically provided and has had residential construction placed on each individual lot or nearly all the lots. A second reason is that the subject property is revocably committed to uses not allowed by the applicable goal because of existing adjacent uses and other relevant factors which make uses allowed by the applicable goal impractical. These factors include the degree to which public facilities and services serve a parcel, parcel size and ownership patterns of the exceptions area and adjacent lands, the extent to which natural boundaries and other buffers separate the exception area from adjacent resource land and the degree to which the property is physically developed. A parcel of land which is not heavily developed or substantially divided, but which is affected by neighboring development to the point where its resource values are substantially impaired may be designated as ?committed?. The third type of exception is based on the need for additional non-resource land, including, but not limited to residential, commercial and industrial development. A ?needs? exception is defended through demonstration of the need to accommodate such a use that can not be accommodated inside cities, urban growth boundaries or on existing developed rural land. The exceptions areas in the Plan are defended on the basis of existing physical development and irrevocable commitment to non-resource uses. Lands that are physically developed are considered to be irrevocably committed and are therefore classified as such. - 3 - Description of Process This exception document consists of the following items: (1) ?Table A? Characteristics of Exception Areas (2) Rural Exception Area Within Description (3) Assessor?s maps showing parcel locations, sizes, and ownership with exception area in bold lines (4) Aerial photographs of exception area showing the surrounding adjacent uses. Some rural exception areas include more than one subdivision in its description. Only the land shown on the aerial photograph and Assessor?s map are being proposed for exceptions, as the subdivisions are not contiguous. The Table ?A? Characteristics of Exception Areas provides information on each of the platted subdivisions proposed for the exception process. (See next page for Table ?A?) - 4 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA AREA NAME: Powell Butte #1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T 15, R 14, Section 36; T 15, R 15, Sections 29, 30A, 30D, 31. CURRENT ZONING BEFORE EXCEPTION: EFU-3 ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: R-5 APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTION: (1) Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: (1) Powell Butte #1 includes three adjacent residential subdivisions, Red Cloud Ranch, Steelhammer Ranch and Sinclair Davis tracts. (2) Total acreage: 880 acres (3) Predominate Soil Types and Class: The area has a complex mixture of over 10 soil types. The two (2) largest soil types occurring in this area are: (a) AmD Aryes Stony Sandy Loam ? SCS VIe 6 ? 20% slope (b) AmB Aryes Stony Sandy Loam ? 0 ? 6% IVs (4) Topography Lands included within the exception area are located on the north slopes of Powell Butte with small pockets of relatively flat ground. Land Use Within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: Lands included within the exception area are presently developed as rural residential parcels that range in size from approximately four (4) acres to 10 - 5 - acres. Most of the parcels are developed with dwellings and other associated structures. Approximately 40% of the parcels within the exception area are vacant buildings sites. (2) Public Facilities: This exception area is partially served by public water (Red Cloud Ranch) so that all development requires septic sewage systems and most require individual water wells or similar domestic water sources. The area is served by PP&L and U.S. West Telephone for communication service from distribution lines presently installed along the roads. The area is outside of Central Oregon Irrigation District. (3) Road or Street System: The road system within Red Cloud Ranch are paved and are approximately 50% under County maintenance. The Steelhammer and Sinclair Davis have predominately graveled public roads with some pavement. (4) Development: Approximately 60% of the parcels included in this exception area are developed with single family dwellings. Development of these parcels include septic systems, accessory building, driveways, yards, etc. associated with the dwellings; therefore most of the land area of these parcels is utilized for the residential use. Description of Adjacent Uses (1) Type of Land Use: Lands to the north and west of the exception are large parcels predominantly in agricultural use for pasture and irrigated crops such as alfalfa, potatoes, mint, oats, grass hay. These agricultural uses typically require at least 160 acres to be economically feasible, although highly productive irrigated fields of 40 acres are common, especially for crop rotation and a normal field size. Agricultural units must have a large percentage of water rights and be located in the Irrigation District to be able to farm. To the south of the area are the steep slopes of Powell Butte under BLM management. Land to the east are large cattle operations with ownerships from 160 acres to in excess of 1,000 acres of deeded land. - 6 - Exception Findings and Conclusions (1) Land Physically Developed to Other Uses. Those lots with single family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (2) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: (1) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size. (2) Lands subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over five (5) acres which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (3) The platted public road right-of-ways effectively divide the lands included within the exception area into a ?checkerboard? of small individual ownerships which precludes consolidation of private ownerships into parcels large enough to be used for agricultural use. (4) Without irrigation rights none of the parcels have the ability to grow crops or provide pasture for cattle. (5) The exception area is served by paved County-maintained road that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. (6) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSION: (1) Crook County finds that Powell Butte #1 exception area is committed to non- agricultural land use because approximately 60% of the parcels are physically developed to rural residential uses that leaves no room for agricultural uses of these lots. - 7 - (2) Crook County finds that Powell Butte #1 Exception Areas is committed to non-agricultural uses because approximately 40% of the lots are irrevocably committed to small sizes by previous subdivision activity, development of roads, utility lines, located outside of the Irrigation District, etc. which preclude the use of these lots for agricultural uses typical of the area. - 8 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #1 AREA NAME: Powell Butte #1 LOCATION: Township 15 South, Range 14 East, Section 36 Township 15 South, Range 15 East, Sections 29, 30A, 30D, 31 AREA: 880 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 218 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 8 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, public water (Red Cloud Subdivision), private water, private subsurface sewage disposal, public power, telephone EXISTING LAND USES: Approximately 60% of parcels now developed with single- family dwellings. NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 129 AVERAGE SIZE: 5.14 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 43 ANALYSIS: This exception area consists of three older subdivisions which are significantly developed and because of the zoning cannot be further divided below 5 acres. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action necessary. - 9 - Dominant Use Recreat. Cabins full time residents and Marks Creek Lodge on three sides Forest land to south USFS land Commerc Forest Adjacent Uses Lot Size 1.2 (Co. req. min of 2 lots per dwell which means max aver. den-sity of 2.4 acres Average Size (Acres) 15 1.2 6 acres 40 acres Power Available Sewer Septic Septic Septic Water Shared Comm. Well/Three-Party Spring (Small Lake Impoundment on site to provide for Fire Fighting Requir.) Private Well Private Well/ Spring Gravel Paved Gravel Dirt No. of Parcels 13 42 6 14 Total Acre. of Proposed Exception P.R.=50 M.C.=196 40 acres 400 acres Current Zone EFU-4 EFU-4 EFU-4 Location T/R/Sec. 13-19-2 13-19-2C 13-19-3D 13-17-5 13-16-7 and 8 Name Ponderosa Ranch/ Marks Creek McKay Development Lofton/ Turner Creek Goal 2 ? Exceptions ______. Characteristics of Exception Areas, P. II No 1 2 3 - 10 - Adjacent Dominant Uses Irrigated farmland N. Steelhammer Sinclair Davis Sub to east Surround Subdiv. Lots Red Cloud Ranch Subdivision/ Steelhammer Pasture, Farmland Dryland Irrigat. Farmland Dryland ran g e Irrigat. Farmland Power Avail Avail Avail Avail Avail Avail Sewer ** * * * ** ** Water Wells * * Comm. Water Syst. Wells Wells Types of Facilities Available Roads Exist Exist Exist Exist Exist Exist Median Size 4 Ac 5 Ac 8.7 Av. Median ? 7 Ac 5 Ac 5 Ac % Dev 32 58 49 32 45 100 Parcel Characteristics # Dev 41 21 27 34 25 9 Total # Parcels 127 36 55 104 55 9 Total Acreage 200 Ac *200 Ac *480 Ac 230 Ac *40 Ac Zone EFU-3 EFU-3 EFU-3 EFU-3 EFU-3 EFU-2 Location T/R/Sec. 15-14-36 15-15-30A 15-15-30D 15-15-31 15-15-29 16-14-22A 16-14-15 15-14-3 15-14-10 14-14-18CB Yr of Devel 1971 1972 1966 1971 1973 1972 Name Red Cloud Steelhammer Sinclair Davis Powell Butte View Estates Twin Lakes Rockview III Goal 2 Exceptions A. Characteristics of Exce p tion Areas, P. I No 1 2 3 4 5 6 * On individual lots ** Septic on individual lots - 11 - Adjacent Dominant Uses Westwood Subdiv. Irrigat. Farmland Quail Valley to east Irrigat. Farmland Sunrise Acres to east Irrigat. Farmland Sunset Hills/ Fairways to West Irrigat. Farmland Ochoco Valley to east, Golf Course Power Avail Avail Avail Avail Avail Avail Sewer * * ** ** ** ** Water Indiv Wells Water Wells Types of Facilities Available Roads Exist Exist Exist Exist Exist Exist Median Size Median 1 Ac. 5Ac 2 Ac 1.8 Ac .30 Ac .30 Ac % Dev 91 1.8 52 98 93 95 Parcel Characteristics # Dev 21 1 28 41 27 19 Total # Parcels 23 57 54 42 29 20 Total Acreage *24 Ac ?340 Ac ?160 Ac 80 Ac 70 Ac 45 Ac Zone EFU-2 EFU-2 EFU-2 EFU-2 EFU-2 EFU-2 Location T/R/Sec. 14-15-35BD 14-15-27C 14-15-34B 14-15-34C 14-16-27D 14-16-26C 15-16-1AA 15-16-36 Yr of Devel 1969 1971 1965 1972 1965 1964 Name Happy Hollow Westwood Sunrise Acres Quail Valley Ochoco Valley Fairways First No 7 8 9 10 11 12 * On individual lots ** Septic on individual lots - 12 - Adjacent Dominant Uses Irrigat. Farmland Juniper covered rimrock Irrigat. Farmland other subdiv. Irrigat. Farmland other Subdiv. Irrigat. Farmland Irrigat. Farms (S&W) Natural Land (N) Farmland Power Avail Avail Avail Avail Avail Avail Sewer Septic tanks ** ** ** ** * Water Wells Indiv Wells Indiv Wells Water Wells Water Wells Comm. Water Syst. Types of Facilities Available Roads Exist Exist Exist Exist Exist Exist Median Size .9 ac Median 2.5 5 Ac 5 Ac .20 1 Ac % Dev 34 95 75 90 8 100 Parcel Characteristics # Dev 8 40 12 35 44 16 Total # Parcels 23 42 16 40 563 16 Total Acreage 45 Ac *160 Ac *130 Ac ?240 Ac ?180 Ac 20 Ac Zone EFU-2 EFU-2 EFU-2 EFU-2 EFU-2 EFU-2 Location T/R/Sec. 14-16-36 14-15-11C 14-15-11D 14-15-12A 14-15-15A 14-15-15D 13-15-34 14-16-20CB Yr of Devel 1978 1973 1973 1973 1971 1970 Name Sunset Hills Puckett Vista View Estates Puddy Development Green Valley Acres Ochoco West McKay Acres No 13 14 15 16 17 18 * On individual lots ** Septic on individual lots - 13 - - 14 - - 15 - - 16 - - 17 - - 18 - - 19 - - 20 - - 21 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA AREA NAME: Powell Butte #2 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: T 16, R 14, Sec. 15 and 22A CURRENT ZONING: EFU-3 ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: R-5 APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTIONS: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: (1) Powell Butte #2 includes Powell Butte View Estates #1 and #2. (2) Total Acreage ? approximately 480 (3) Predominant Soil Types and Class: The area has a complex mixture of over 10 soil types. The two (2) largest soil types occurring in this area are: (a) AMd ? Ayres Stony Sandy Loam ? SCS VIe (b) Scd ? Searles Stony Loam ? SCS VIe (4) Topography: Lands included within the exception area are located on the southwest slopes of Powell Butte with small pockets of relatively flat ground. Land Use within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: Lands included within the exception area are presently developed as rural residential parcels that range in size from approximately four (4) acres to 10 acres. Most of the parcels are developed with dwellings and other associated structures. Approximately 40% of the parcels within the exception area are vacant building sites. - 22 - (2) Public Facilities: This exception area is partially served by public water (Powell Butte View Estates Water District) so that all development requires septic sewage systems and most require individual water wells or similar domestic water sources. The area is served by PP&L and U.S. West Telephone for communication service from distribution lines presently installed along the roads. The area is outside the boundaries of Central Oregon Irrigation District. (3) Road or Street System: The road system within Powell Butte View Estates graveled public roads with some pavement. (4) Development: Approximately 35% of the parcels included in this exception area are developed with single family dwellings. Development of these parcels include septic systems, accessory building, driveways, yards, etc. associated with the dwellings; therefore most of the land area of these parcels is utilized for the residential use. Description of Adjacent Uses (1) Type of Land Use: Lands to the north and west of the exception are large parcels predominantly in agricultural use for pasture and irrigated crops such as alfalfa, potatoes, mint, oats, grass hay. These agricultural uses typically require at least 160 acres to be economically feasible, although highly productive irrigated fields of 40 acres are common, especially for crop rotation and a normal field size. Agricultural units must have a large percentage of water rights and be located in the Irrigation District to be able to farm. To the south of the area are the steep slopes of Powell Butte under BLM management. Lands to the east are large cattle operations with ownerships from 160 acres to in excess of 1,000 acres of deeded land. Exception Findings and Conclusions (1) Land Physically Developed to Other Uses. Those lots with single family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. - 23 - (2) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size. (B) Land subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over seven (7) acres which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (C) The platted public road right-of-ways effectively divide the lands included within the exception area into a ?checkerboard? of small individual ownerships which preclude consolidation of private ownerships into parcels large enough to be used for agricultural use. (D) Without irrigation rights none of the parcels have the ability to grow crops or provide pasture for cattle. (E) The exception area is served by paved County-maintained roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. (F) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSION: (1) Crook County finds that Powell Butte #2 exception area is committed to non- agricultural land use because approximately 35% of the parcels are physically developed to rural residential uses that leaves no room for agricultural uses of these lots. (2) Crook County finds that Powell Butte #2 Exception Areas is committed to non- agricultural uses because approximately 65% of the lots are irrevocably committed to small sizes by previous subdivision activity, development of roads, utility lines, located outside of the Irrigation District, etc. which preclude the use of these lots for agricultural uses typical for the area. - 24 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #2 AREA NAME: Powell Butte #2 LOCATION: Township 16, Range 14, Sections 15 and 22A AREA: Approximately 480 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 104 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 12 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Partially served by public water, individual wells, subsurface sewage disposal, power, telephone, public roads. EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 70 AVERAGE SIZE: 7 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 70 ANALYSIS: This exception area consists of two older subdivisions which are significantly developed and because of the zoning cannot be further divided below 5 acres. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action necessary. - 25 - - 26 - - 27 - RURAL SERVICE EXCEPTION AREA AREA NAME: East Powell Butte Rural Service Center LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lots 400, 401, 402, 500, 600, 700, 800 and 900 in Section 23, T15S, R14E, and Tax Lots 300, 401 and 500 in Section 26, T15S, R14E. (See attached Assessor?s Maps 15-14-23 and 15-14-26) CURRENT ZONING: Rural Service Center, RSC-1 ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: RSC-1 APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTION: Goal 2 Exception as Committed-Developed Area OAR 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The subject Exception Area is identified as the ?East Powell Butte Area? and is designated as a Rural Service Center. The subject area encompasses a total of 27.06 acres as reported by current Crook County Assessor?s records comprising eleven (11) tax lots ranging in size from 0.18 acres to 11.70 aces. The 11 tax lots represent seven (7) individual ownerships. Included in the dominant land uses of the area are a school, a church, a grocery-deli-service station complex, and a number of individual nonfarm dwelling units. The majority of these uses have existed for more than 40 years, although the retail complex and the church have undergone redevelopment and expansions, respectively, in the past 5-10 years. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Summary: The subject Exception Area consists of a total area of 27.06 acres committed and developed for nonfarm uses consisting of commercial, public, semi-public and residential. Predominant Soil Types: As reported by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in the document entitled Soil Survey-Prineville Area dated February 1966, the dominant soil types encompassed by the subject area include the following: 1) Deschutes sandy loam, moderately deep over hardpan, Capability Class IIs-3 (approximately 65% of the total area); and 2) Deschutes loamy sand, Capability Class IIIs-1 (approximately 35% of the total area). - 28 - Topography: The entire area is level with slopes less than 0 ? 2%. LAND USE WITHIN EXCEPTION AREA: As described in the General Description set forth hereinbefore, the subject Exception Area comprises a mixture of nonfarm uses including commercial, public, semi-public and residential. Of the total acreage, 4% is committed/developed to commercial use (1.05 acres), 4% is committed/developed to residential uses (1.05 acres), 40% is committed/developed for public school use (10.62 acres), 44% is committed/developed for semi-public church use (11.7 acres), and 5% is owned by an irrigation district (1.12 acres) but undeveloped. The following is a summary of such land uses by Tax Lot as reported by the current County Assessor?s records. Land Use Summary by Tax Lot: MAP NO. TAX LOT OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES 15-14-23 400 Private Commercial 0.40 401 Private Residential 0.40 402 Private Commercial 0.35 500 Private Residential 0.19 600 Private Residential 0.46 700 Private Commercial/Parking 0.30 15-14-26 300 Public School 10.62 401 Semi-Public Church 11.70 500 Semi-Public Church 0.83 TOTAL 27.06 Public Facilities: Public facilities serving the subject area are limited to State Highway 126 which passes through the subject area in an east-west direction (a major arterial providing the primary access route from Bend-Redmond to Prineville and other major points both east and west), and a paved County (Williams) Road in a northerly direction from its intersection with said Highway 126. No other public facilities except electrical power and telephone are available with domestic water and sewage disposal for individual uses being provided by individual systems; the latter constituting the need for substantial land areas for primary and replacement systems. Development: As attested to in the foregoing ?land use? information, more than 65% of the area designated for the subject Exception Area is ?fully? committed and developed for nonresource use; the only exceptions are the 1.12 acres owned by an irrigation district that is undeveloped but unavailable for resource use due to the ownership, and location and size of tract, and the 11.7 acres (Tax Lot 401, Map 15-14-26) owned by a church which is retrained for expansion, parking and sewage disposal expansion. - 29 - ADJACENT AND AREA LAND USES: The subject Exception Area is predominately surrounded by agricultural land uses in parcels ranging in size from 39.4 acres to 139.24 acres with the average parcel size being 75.2 acres. Within a distance of 1/4 mile, the only exceptions are a 1.78 acre parcel with a small dwelling unit utilized by a local nonprofit group for meetings, and a 4.35 acre parcel occupied by a nonfarm dwelling currently owned by the State Department of Veteran Affairs. Dominate agricultural uses on the immediately adjacent lands consist of irrigated hay-pasture lands frequently occupied by livestock of which the dominant ?commercial? field sizes range from 40 to 160 acres, and which require irrigation to be productive. No apparent conflicts are evident between the uses occurring on lands within the subject Exception Area and the adjacent/surrounding agricultural lands, and, in fact, the subject Exception Area provides important, long-standing services to the agricultural operations in the immediate and general area. EXCEPTIONS FINDINGS: In accordance with the requirements set forth by OAR 660-04 regarding Exceptions in general, and more specifically as required for Exceptions for ?Land Physically Developed? and/or for ?Land Irrevocably Committed? as set forth by OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 respectively, the following Findings are set forth as a basis for the subject East Powell Butte Exception Area: Public Need: The ?Area?s? designation as a Rural Service Center is a direct reflection of the functions of the uses located therein, and such uses are considered ?publicly? important, not only to local residents, but to the traveling public as well. The school, in addition to providing a ?local? education facility for grade school children in lieu of transporting such children an additional 10 to 20 miles to the nearest grade school facilities in Prineville, also serves important ?community? functions as a ?base? for a wide variety of community activities. The church facility has also been recognized for some time as an important ?community facility? and, relative thereto, is the ?home? of the nationally know annual ?Lord Acres? auction and barbeque. The retail complex provides an important local service center, as well as similar services to the traveling public, in the provision of groceries, gasoline, deli-foods, and other retail items. The ?local? service (market) area constitutes all of that area of Crook County identified as the Powell Butte Area comprising a total population of 2,000+; said population base is comprised of both farm and rural nonfarm residents. The absence of subject Rural Service Center that has been in existence for more that 40 years, would require additional travel distances of 10 to 20 miles (one- way) for area residents to acquire the basic services provided thereby; such would be directly contrary to the objectives of Statewide Planning Goal 13 ? Energy Conservation, and with the current trends in fuel costs could also constitute an important negative factor relative to Statewide Planning Goal 9 ? Economy. The loss of the secondary benefits of the school and church in the subject area would also constitute an action contrary to the objectives of Statewide Planning Goals 8 and 11 relative to the loss of ?community? facilities for recreation, social and educational purposes. - 30 - Physical Development: The nonfarm residents located within the subject area have been in existence for more than 30 years and constitute an important rural residence setting without further and/or future conversion of primary agricultural lands in the immediate area, as well as providing an important ?indirect? security for the important public, semi-public and retail uses and investments located nearby. Each of the existing nonfarm residences is located upon parcels less than one (1) acre in size, and the limited land areas thereof (0.18 acre [7,840 sq. ft.] to 0.40 acre [17,424 sq. ft.]) are the absolute minimum considered necessary for such uses to permit both an individual domestic water source and sewage disposal system to exist on the same parcel. All of the parcels within the subject Exception area identified for residential use are currently developed for and committed to that use, precluding agricultural use. Although there is only one major commercial development within the subject Exception Area, that retail complex is fully developed and has been in existence for an extended period of time (well in advance of the adoption of any statewide planning goals or regulations), even though the present facility is a relatively recent complete replacement and expansion of a previously existing facility. Any amount of land area less than the currently developed, committed and utilized 1.05 acres would not be adequate to meet the space requirements for such a use. The 10.62 acres currently occupied and committed for school use has been in the current parcel and acreage for more than 30 years, and is the absolute minimum necessary to accommodate the existing school structures, playground areas, parking, and water/sewage disposal systems. Displacement would result in excessive public costs and would constitute violations of other planning goals. Parcel Sizes ? Ownership Patterns: The fact that the total Exception Area totals only 27.06 acres and is divided into nine (9) separate individual ownerships existing prior to the enaction of statewide planning goals, all occupied by pre-existing and long standing nonfarm uses, precludes the consideration thereof for recovery for agricultural or other resource use. Therefore, on that basis alone, the subject area is irrevocably committed to nonresource use, both physically and economically, particularly whereas the predominant ?agricultural unit? in the immediate area is in excess of 40 acres. Public Facilities and Services: Although the type of individual public facilities and services necessary to serve each of the existing uses within the subject Exception Area, particularly domestic water and sewage disposal systems, are of the same general type as those that serve resource uses, such systems are of such sizes as to be in excess of that necessary to serve area farm dwellings. Therefore, such systems must be considered more expansive than is common to resource uses. The facts that the subject Exception Area is also located at the intersection of a major transportation route (State Hwy 126) and an improved County Road, and at the location of a public school and a church, also supports the continued existence of such as a ?service center?. - 31 - Neighborhood and Regional Characteristics: From a ?neighborhood? characteristic, the subject Exception Area exists (and has for an extended period of time) as the ?community center? of an unincorporated area of the County clearly identified as the ?Powell Butte Community?. The school and the church have long existed as the educational and social centers of this identified ?community? neighborhood, and is a direct reflection of the characteristics of many rural ?regions? with limited commercial and social centers that provide minimum community services and functions without being incorporated. Such centers evolved many decades ago, and those that have continued to exist have done so because of the important and vital services and functions that each such center has always and continues to provide to the ?neighborhood? it serves, local or regional. Therefore, such areas are not only irrevocably committed to the nonresource uses to which each is devoted, but provide necessary community services and functions. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the foregoing Findings, the Conclusions that justify the subject area for an Exception pursuant to OAR?s 660-04-022, 660-04-025, and 660-04-028, are as follows: 1) Because of the long standing pre-existence of nonresource uses such as the public school, the church and the commercial retail center, there is an identified public need for such uses at this particular location. Displacement thereof would remove an important ?community center? for educational, social and commercial services to the area. 2) The subject Exceptions Area?s distinct location at the approximate ?center? of the area served clearly establishes public benefits relative to reduced travel distances for the services provided, as well as providing minimum services to the traveling public. 3) The subject Exceptions Area?s location also provides the area with a significant comparative advantage due to its location within the geographical center of the area being served. 4) Relocation of the primary uses occurring within the subject Exceptions Area would constitute an unreasonable and excessive cost, both publicly and privately. 5) As presented in the foregoing Findings, the total area encompassed by the subject Exceptions Area is the minimum necessary to accommodate the required individual use?s domestic water and sewage disposal systems, provide for the required off-street access and parking areas, and areas for associated uses such as playground areas, etc. 6) The foregoing Findings clearly establish the facts that the subject Exceptions Area is, and has been for an extended period of time, physically developed with certain uses not specifically permitted by the applicable resource goal, Goal 3, and - 32 - therefore the subject area can no longer be considered available for uses allowed by said Goal 3. 7) The Findings that the area is fully developed for the uses presently located therein also substantiates the Conclusion that the area is irrevocably committed to nonresource uses, particularly as related to those resources addressed by the applicable Goal 3. - 33 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #3 AREA NAME: East Powell Butte Rural Service Center LOCATION: Tax Lots 400, 401, 402, 500, 600, 700, 800, and 900 in Section 23, Township 15 South, Range 14 East; and Tax Lots 300, 401, and 500 in Section 26, Township 15 South, Range 14 East. AREA: 27.06 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 11 ZONING: (RSC-1) Rural Service Center PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 8 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads; private water and subsurface sewage disposal; power and telephone EXISTING LAND USES: Residential, commercial, public school, church NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 2* AVERAGE SIZE: 6.0 acres *Owned by Irrigation District and Powell Butte Christian Church. AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 1 ACRE: 2 ANALYSIS: This is an existing Rural Service Center on Highway 126. It is unlikely further development will occur. However, the RSC zone allows urban uses. RECOMMENDATION: The County should take a Goal 14 exception for this area. A Goal 3 exception has already been taken and acknowledged. - 34 - - 35 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: Twin Lakes Legal Description: T 15 S, R 14 EWM, Sec. 3 and 10 Current Zoning Before Exception: EFU-2 Zoning After Exception: R-5 Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area Physical Description: (1) This exception area consists of the Twin Lakes subdivision. (2) Total acreage: 230 acres Total parcels: 55 (3) Predominant Soil Type and Class: Predominantly Bad and BbD (SCS VIIs-2) (4) Topography: The area is predominantly flat. Land Use Within Exception Area: (1) Type of Land Use: Lands within the exception area consist of five (5) acre rural residential parcels. Approximately 45 percent are developed, and 55 percent are vacant residential sites. (2) Public Facilities: Electricity and telephone service are available to the exception area. Public water and sewers are not available. (3) Road and Street System: County roads serving the exception area are paved. Interior subdivision roads are graveled. - 36 - (4) Development: All of the parcels included in this exception area are developed with single family dwellings. Development of these parcels include septic systems, accessory buildings, driveways, yards, etc. associated with the dwellings; therefore most of the land area of these parcels is utilized for the residential use. Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is surrounded two sides by 160-500+ acre irrigated agricultural parcels which are used for pasture and for production of alfalfa, grass hay, mint, potatoes, and grain crops. To the west is BLM rangeland with private rangeland to the north. There are a few productive agricultural parcels smaller than 160 acres but larger than 40 acres. Irrigation is required for agricultural productivity in this area. Exception Findings and Conclusions: (1) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: Those lots with single family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. (2) Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (3) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extend that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: (1) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size. (2) Lands subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over five (5) acres which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (3) Platted public road right-of-ways (4) Without irrigation rights none of the parcels have the ability to grow crops or provide pasture for cattle. (5) The exception area is served by paved County maintained roads and graveled public roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. - 37 - (6) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSIONS: Crook County finds that the Twin Lakes exception area is committed to non-agricultural residential use because 45 percent of the parcels in the area are developed for non-residential use, and the remainder of the parcels are unusable for the kind of agriculture practiced in the area because of the small size and lack of irrigation water rights. - 38 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #4 AREA NAME: Twin Lakes LOCATION: Township 15 South, Range 14 East, Sections 3, 10 AREA: 230 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 55 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 8 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, power, telephone, private water and subsurface sewage disposal systems EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 30 AVERAGE SIZE: 5 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 0 ANALYSIS: This exception area is an existing rural subdivision. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 39 - - 40 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: Rockview III Legal Description: T 14 S., R 14 EWM, Sec. 18 Current Zoning Before Exception: EFU-2 Zoning After Exception: R-5 Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. Physical Description: (1) This exception area consists of the Rockview III subdivision. (2) Total acreage: 40 acres Total parcels: 9 (3) Predominant Soil Type and Class: Rx (SCS VIIs) (4) Topography: The area is characterized by rolling hills. Land Use Within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: Lands within the exception area presently developed as five (5) acres rural residential parcels. All of the parcels are developed for residential use. (2) Public Facilities: Electricity and telephone service is available to the exception area. There is no public sewer system or water system. (3) Road and Street System: County roads serving the exception area are paved. Interior subdivision roads are graveled. - 41 - (4) Development: All of the parcels included in this exception area are developed with single family dwellings. Development of these parcels include septic systems, accessory buildings, driveways, yards, etc. associated with the dwellings; therefore most of the land area of these parcels is utilized for the residential use. Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is surrounded by irrigated agricultural parcels of 160 acres and larger, which are used for grazing, and production of alfalfa and potatoes. There are a few productive agricultural parcels which are smaller than 160 acres but larger than 40 acres. Exception Findings and Conclusions: (1) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: Those lots with single-family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. (2) Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (3) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: (1) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland, which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size. (2) Lands subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over five (5) acres, which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (3) Platted public road right-of-ways. (4) Without irrigation rights none of the parcels have the ability to grow crops or provide pasture for cattle. (5) The exception area is served by paved County maintained roads and graveled public roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. - 42 - (6) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSION: Crook County finds that the Rockview III exception area is committed to non-agricultural land use because all of the parcels are developed for non-farm residential use. - 43 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #5 AREA NAME: Rock View III LOCATION: Township 14 South, Range 14 East, Section 18 AREA: 40 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 9 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 12.5 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, private water and subsurface sewage disposal systems, power, telephone EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 0 AVERAGE SIZE: N/A AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 0 ANALYSIS: This is a fully developed rural subdivision. No further development is possible. The R-5 zoning precludes any redivision of the land. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action necessary. - 44 - - 45 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: Grimes Flat/Lamonta Legal Description: T 14 S., R 15 EWM, Sects. 11c, 12 and 15 Current Zoning Before Exception: EFU-2 Zoning After Exception: R-5 Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. Physical Description: (1) Grimes Flat/Lamonta includes three near adjacent residential subdivisions: Puckett Vista View Estates, Puddy Development and Green Valley Acres. (2) Total Acreage: approximately 469 acres (3) Predominant Soil Type and Class: The area is characterized by OmA and OhA soils (SCS Class IIs-3). (4) Topography: The area is characterized by low, rolling hills. Land Use Within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: Lands within the exception area consist of parcels ranging in size from 2 acres to 23 acres, with a median size of approximately five (5) acres. Approximately 86 percent of the parcels are developed for residential use. (2) Public Facilities: Electricity is available to the entire exception area from PP&L. There are no community water or sewage systems. (3) Road and Street System: Public roads in the area are paved, but all internal subdivision lots are graveled. - 46 - (4) Development: Approximately 86 percent of the parcels in the exception area are developed for single family dwellings. Development of these parcels includes septic systems, accessory buildings, driveways, yards, etc. associated with the dwellings, therefore, most of the land area of these parcels is in residential use. Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is 2 ? 3 miles to the northwest of the Prineville urbanized area, which is characterized by a mix of residential, commercial and industrial land uses. Non-subdivision lands surrounding the exception area on all sides consist of large parcels used for pasture, and irrigated crops such as alfalfa, potatoes, mint, oats, and grass hay. These uses typically require at least 100 acres to be economically feasible, although highly productive irrigated parcels between 40 and 160 acres are present in the area. Irrigation is necessary for all agricultural uses in the area. Exception Findings and Conclusions: (1) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: Those lots with single family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. (2) Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (3) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: (1) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland, which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size. (2) Lands subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over five (5) acres, which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (3) Platted public road right-of-ways. (4) Without irrigation rights none of the parcels have the ability to grown crops or provide pasture for cattle. - 47 - (5) The exception area is served by paved County maintained roads and graveled public roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. (6) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSION: (1) Crook County finds that the Lamonta-Puckett exception area is committed to non- agricultural land use because approximately 86% of the parcels are physically developed to rural residential uses that leave no room for agricultural uses of those lots. (2) Crook County finds that Lamonta-Puckett is committed to non-agricultural uses because approximately 14% of the lots are irrevocably committed to small sizes by previous subdivision activity, development of roads, utility lines located outside of the Irrigation District, etc. which preclude the use of these lots for agricultural uses typical for the area. (3) Crook County finds that the largest parcels in the area (23 acres in Green Valley Acres and 12 acres in Puckett/Vista View) already have dwellings on them. The 23 acre parcel has two dwellings and is immediately adjacent to a H-M (Heavy Industrial) Zone and is surrounded by five (5) and ten acre parcels to the north and east. (4) Potentially only five or six more parcels could result in partitioning through the use of a R-5 Zone. - 48 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #6 AREA NAME: Grimes Flat/Lamonta LOCATION: Township 14 South, Range 15 East, Sections 11C, 12, 15 AREA: 469 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 98 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 4 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, electricity, telephone, private water systems and subsurface sewage disposal systems EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 11 AVERAGE SIZE: 2.44 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 0 ANALYSIS: This exception area contains three existing subdivisions. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 49 - - 50 - - 51 - - 52 - - 53 - - 54 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: O?Neil Highway Legal Description: T 14 S., R 15 EWM, Sec. 27, 34 and 35 Current Zoning Before Exception: EFU-2 Zoning After Exception: R-5 Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. Physical Description: (1) This area is bounded on the east and northeast by the City of Prineville Urban Growth Boundary, Crooked River to the north, the rimrocks to the south. (2) Total acreage: approximately 422 acres Total parcels: 102 (3) Predominant Soil Types and Class: The area between the rimrock and O?Neil Highway is dominated by AaE, Agency Very Stony Sandy Loam (VIIs), RX, Rockland (VII) and Ry, Rock outcrop (VIII). The predominant soil types on the north side are Crooked loamy sand and Crooked sandy loam. (Class IIw), which are generally very strongly alkaline. (4) Topography: Consists of a mix of River bottom, flat lands and steeply sloping hillsides with rimrocks and rock outcroppings. Land Use Within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: Lands included within the exception area are presently developed as rural residential parcels that range from less than one acre to one 85 acre parcel. The 85 acre parcel consists primarily of steeply sloped Class VII and VIII soils. The parcel has a dwelling on it. The predominant size of parcels are two (2) acres or less with an overall average of 4+ acres. Approximately 80% of the parcels in the area are developed for residential use with associated structures. The remaining 20% are vacant building sites. - 55 - (2) Public Facilities: Electricity is available to the exception area from PP&L. Public water and sewers are not available. Telephone service is available. (3) Road and Street System: Public roads in the area are paved. Internal subdivision roads are graveled. (4) Development: Approximately 80% of the parcels included in this exception area are developed with single family dwellings. Development of these parcels includes septic systems, yards, etc. associated with dwellings, therefore, most of the land area of developed parcels is utilized for the residential use. Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is bordered on the east side by the City of Prineville?s UGB which is zoned for light industrial uses and has the City?s sewage lagoon. The rimrocks are the natural boundary to the south. On top of the rim is County owned land with the County landfill and Westwood subdivision. Lands to the west and northwest of the exception area are used for grazing, and cultivation of mint, potatoes and grain crops. These lands are predominately irrigated. Non-irrigated parcels in the vicinity of the exception area typically range from 160 acres to more than 1,000 acres. Irrigated parcels are typically around 160-200 acres, but some productive irrigated parcels may be as small as 40 acres. Exception Findings and Conclusions: (1) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: Those lots with single family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. (2) Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (3) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: - 56 - (1) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size for irrigated lands and 160 acres or greater for non-irrigated rangeland. (2) Lands subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over five (5) acres, which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (3) Platted public road right-of-ways. (4) Without irrigation rights none of the parcels have the ability to grow crops or provide pasture for cattle. (5) The exception area is served by paved County maintained roads and graveled public roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. (6) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSION: Crook County finds that the O?Neil Highway/Rimrock exception area is committed to non-commercial agricultural land use and rural residential uses because 80% of the parcels are developed for non-agricultural residential use, and the remaining 20% are irrevocably committed because the pattern of developed sites of two (2) acres or less. Surrounding parcels of eight (8), 10, 28, etc. makes it impractical to conduct commercial agricultural enterprises. This area was in the City of Prineville Urban Growth Boundary when acknowledged by LCDC in February, 1979. The area was pulled out in 1984 to respond to a perceived development pattern in the sewage lagoon area. The initial recommendation was for Rural Residential (R-5) Zoning. The area was finally designated EFU-2. This was done in error. This exception will correct the situation. There are three (3) parcels each which have a dwelling on the land that were not included for the proposed exception area (34, 40 and 55 acres). When the City of Prineville reviews its Urban Growth Boundary, these parcels will be considered for inclusion within the Urban Growth Boundary. - 57 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #7 AREA NAME: O?Neil Highway LOCATION: Township 14 South, Range 15 East, Sections 27, 34, 35 AREA: 422 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 102 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: adjacent AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public power, public telephone, public roads, private water systems and subsurface sewage disposal systems EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 20 AVERAGE SIZE: 4 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 9 ANALYSIS: This exception area lies immediately west of the Prineville Urban Growth Boundary and contains an existing subdivision and a variety of metes and bounds tracts. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 58 - - 59 - - 60 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: Westwood/Rimrock Area Legal Description: T 14 S., R 15 EWM, Sec. SW/27, W/34 Current Zoning Before Exception: EFU-2 Zoning After Exception: R-5 Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. Physical Description: (1) The subdivision is situated on the east and northeast slopes of Myers Butte and is bounded on the north by a natural boundary of steep rimrock, and is bordered by the County Landfill is located to the south of the area. To the west is Myers Butte. (2) Total acreage: approximately 340 acres Total parcels: 57 (3) Predominant Soil Types and Class: Westwood Subdivision area is predominantly AeE Agency Very Stony Sandy Loam (VII) with some scattered DtB Deschutes Stony Loam (IVs) on the flatter ground. (4) Topography: Consists of small amounts of flat lands and steeply sloping hillsides with small amount of rock outcroppings. Land Use Within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: The area was platted as a residential in 1971. The parcels are primarily 5+/- acres in size. There is only one existing dwelling in the subdivision. (2) Public Facilities: Electricity is available to the exception area from PP&L. Public water and sewers are not available. Telephone service is available. - 61 - (3) Road and Street System: The subdivision roads are graveled. (4) Development: Westwood subdivision has only one dwelling primarily due to the cost of obtaining water. Description of Adjacent Uses: The Crook County landfill is to the south of the area. The County owns land between the landfill and subdivision as well as to the east of the subdivision. Myers Butte is to the west which has a radio transmission tower on top. The private land to the west including Myers Butte which has been used for limited rangeland grazing which is in approximately 1,000 acre parcel. The rimrock to the north provides an effective buffer to the uses in the Crooked River Valley. Exception Findings and Conclusions: (1) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses. Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (2) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: (1) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size for irrigated lands and 160 acres or greater for non-irrigated rangeland. (2) Lands subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over five (5) acres, which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (3) Without irrigation rights, none of the parcels have the ability to grow crops or provide pasture for cattle. - 62 - (4) The exception area is served by graveled public roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. (5) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSION: Crook County finds that exception area is non-agricultural land and irrevocably committed to small sizes by previous subdivision activity, development of roads, utility lines and lack of irrigation which preclude use of the land for economic agricultural purposes. Even though many of the lots in Westwood Subdivision are in common ownerships, the subdivision consists primarily of Class VII soils and is not feasible for agricultural uses. - 63 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #8 AREA NAME: Westwood Rimrock Area LOCATION: Township 14 South, Range 15 East, Southwest 1/4 of Section 27, and the West 1/2 of Section 34 AREA: 340 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 57 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 4 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public power and telephone, public roads. Public water and sewer are not available. EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 56 AVERAGE SIZE: 5 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 0 ANALYSIS: This is an existing subdivision which has experienced limited development. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 64 - - 65 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: McKay Acres Legal Description: T 14 S., R 16 EWM, Sec. 20CB Current Zoning Before Exception: EFU-2 Zoning After Exception: R-5 Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. Physical Description: (1) This exception area consists of the McKay Acres subdivision. (2) Total acreage: 40 acres Total parcels: 23 (3) Predominant Soil Types and Class: Not in the area of the SCS Soil Survey. (4) Topography: The area is predominantly flat. Land Use Within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: Lands within in the exception area are presently developed as rural residential parcels that range in size from one (1) to five (5) acres. The median size is approximately one (1) acre. All of the parcels are developed for residential use. (2) Public Facilities: Electricity and telephone service is available to the exception area. There is no community water system. There is no sewer system. (3) Road and Street System: County roads serving the exception area are paved. Interior subdivision road is a graveled, private road. - 66 - (4) Development: All of the parcels included in this exception area are developed with single family dwellings. Development of these parcels include septic systems, accessory buildings, driveways, yards, etc. associated with the dwellings; therefore most of the land area of these parcels is utilized for the residential use. (5) Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is located directly to the north of the Prineville urbanized area, which consists of a mix of residential, commercial and industrial land use. Lands to the north of the exception area consist primarily of irrigated agricultural parcels of 160 acres and larger, used for production of potatoes and mint and for pasture. There are a few productive agricultural parcels as small as 40 acres. (6) Exception Findings and Conclusions: (A) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: Those lots with single family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. (B) Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (7) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: (A) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size. (B) Lands subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over 1.7 acres, which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (C) The exception area is served by paved County maintained roads and graveled public roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. (D) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. - 67 - CONCLUSION: Crook County finds that the McKay Acres exception area is committed to non- commercial agricultural land use because all of the parcels are developed for non-farm residential use. - 68 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #9 AREA NAME: McKay Acres LOCATION: Township 14 South, Range 16 East, Section 20CB AREA: 40 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 23 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 2 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, private roads, public water system, private subsurface sewage disposal, power, and telephone service EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 0 AVERAGE SIZE: N/A AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 0 ANALYSIS: This exception area is a fully developed existing subdivision. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 69 - - 70 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: Ochoco West Legal Description: T 13 S., R 15 EWM, Sec. 34 Current Zoning Before Exception: EFU-2 Zoning After Exception: R-5 Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. Physical Description: (1) This exception area consists of the Ochoco West subdivision. (2) Total Acreage: 180 acres Total Parcels: 563 (3) Predominant Soil Types and Class: Not in the area of the SCS Soil Survey. (4) Topography: This area is hilly, with steep slopes. Land Use Within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: Lands within the exception area are presently developed as rural residential parcels, all of which are less than one (1) acre in size. The median size of .20 acre. A total of eight (8) percent of the parcels are currently developed. (2) Public Facilities: Electricity, telephone service, a public water system and a public sewer system are all available. (3) Road and Street System: County roads serving the exception area are paved. Interior subdivision roads are graveled. - 71 - (4) Development: Eight (8) percent of the parcels included in this exception area are developed with single family dwellings. Development of these parcels include septic systems, accessory buildings, driveways, yards, etc. associated with the dwellings; therefore, most of the land area of these parcels is utilized for the residential use. Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is surrounded on the south, east and west by irrigated parcels ranging from approximately 200-600 acres, which are primarily used to grown potatoes. Lands to the north are mountainous and forested. Exception Findings and Conclusions: (1) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: Those lots with single family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. (2) Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (3) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: (1) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland, which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size. (2) Lands subdivided within the exception area have an average size of just over .2 acre, which is too small to be an economic farm unit for this area. (3) Platted public road right-of-ways. (4) Without irrigation rights none of the parcels have the ability to grow crops or provide pasture for cattle. (5) The exception area is served by paved County maintained roads and graveled public roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. - 72 - (6) The exception area is served by electrical and communication utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along the public roads to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSION: Crook County finds that the Ochoco West exception area is committed to non- agricultural land use because it contains 44 parcels developed for residential use, and all of the remaining parcels are smaller than one (1) acre and have no water rights, which would preclude the kind of agriculture practiced in the area. In addition, many of the parcels are very hilly and rocky. Full utility services are in place to all of the parcels. - 73 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #10 AREA NAME: Ochoco West LOCATION: Township 13 South, Range 15 East, Section 34 AREA: 180 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 563 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 7 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, public water, public sewer, power and telephone are all available. EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 518 AVERAGE SIZE: 0.2 acre AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 0 ANALYSIS: This is an existing partially developed subdivision with its own community facilities, including water and sewer systems. The existing lots cannot be redivided. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 74 - - 75 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: Ochoco/Johnson Creek Legal Description: T 14 S., R 16 EWM, Sects. 26, 27 and 36; T 15 S., R 16 EWM, Sec. 1 Current Zoning Before Exception: EFU-2 Zoning After Exception: R-5 Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 3 for this area. Physical Description: (1) The exception area includes five (5) close, but not adjacent, residential subdivisions: Sunrise Acres, Quail Valley, Ochoco Valley, Fairways First, and Sunset Hills. (2) Total acreage: 561 acres Total parcels: 170 (3) Predominant Soil Types and Class: The predominant soil types are By and S; (SCS Class IIs) (4) Topography: This exception area consists of a mix of flat lands and steeply sloping hillsides. Land Use Within Exception Area (1) Type of Land Use: Lands within the exception area are presently developed as rural residential parcels that range in size from one-quarter (1/4) to ten (10) acres. The median size is approximately one (1) acre. Approximately 79% of the parcels are developed for residential use; approximately 21% are vacant building sites. - 76 - Within Sunrise Acres the average size is two (2) acres; Quail Valley ranges from 1/2 to 2.5; Sunset Hills are approximately one (1) acres; Ochoco Valley approximately 1/4 acre; First Fairways with lots as small as 10,000 square feet. There are several small acreage homesites on the fringe of the subdivisions which range from one (1) to ten acres with dwellings on them. The only golf course in Crook County is located to the west and south of First Fairways subdivision and to the east of a small acreage homesites along the Ochoco Highway. The course is a nine hole facility. Land immediately to the west is included for another nine holes. (2) Public Facilities: Electricity and telephone are available to the exception area. Public water and sewers are not available. Community water systems exist in Quail Valley, Sunset Hills and Ochoco Valley Homes. (3) Road and Street System: All public roads and 90 percent of internal subdivision roads in the exception area are paved. (4) Development: Approximately 73% of the parcels included in this exception area are developed with single family dwellings. Development of these parcels includes septic systems, accessory buildings, driveways, yards, etc. associated with these dwellings; therefore most of the land area of each parcel is utilized for the residential use. Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is located approximately two to three (2-3) miles to the east of the Prineville urbanized area. Lands to the north, east and south of the exception area consist of a mix of irrigated lands used for alfalfa, potatoes, mint, grass hay, and grain crops; irrigated pasture lands, and non-irrigated lands which are used for pasture or are vacant. Agricultural operations typically require at least 160 aces to be economically productive, although some productive operations or irrigated land may be as small as 40 acres. Exception Findings and Conclusions: (1) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: Those lots with single family dwellings, accessory buildings, driveways, etc. occupy and preclude any agricultural use as practiced on surrounding lands. - 77 - (2) Small parcels outside of an irrigation district cannot provide the means to provide for agricultural uses. (3) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural uses because of the following findings: (1) The typical agricultural uses in the area are cattle and irrigated cropland which is done on irrigated and non-irrigated parcels that are 40 acres or larger in size. (2) Vacant lands within the exception areas have an average size of an acre with houses in close proximity which makes it impractical to farm these scattered parcels as well as uneconomical to provide delivery of irrigation water to any degree. (3) Platted public road right-of-ways. (4) Without irrigation rights none of the parcels have the ability to grow crops or provide pasture for cattle. (5) The exception area is served by paved County maintained roads and graveled public roads that provide for the rural residential uses in the area. (6) The large parcel to be developed as the second nine hole golf course has a then layer of soil over a river gravel bed. Some gravel extraction has taken place in the middle of the property making it impractical to farm efficiently. CONCLUSION: Crook County finds that the Ochoco/Johnson Creek exception area is committed to non- agricultural land use because 79% of the parcels are developed for non-agricultural residential uses, and the remaining 21% are irrevocably committed to small sizes by previous subdivision activity, development of roads, utility lines, and lack of irrigation which precludes the use of the land for economic agricultural purposes. - 78 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #11 AREA NAME: Ochoco/Johnson Creek LOCATION: Township 14 South, Range 16 East, Sections 26, 27, 36 Township 15 South, Range 16 East, Section 1 AREA: 400 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 168 ZONING: (R-5) Rural Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 1.2 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Power and telephone, public roads, community water systems in three of the subdivisions (Quail Valley, Sunset Hills, and Ochoco Valley Homes), private subsurface sewage disposal systems EXISTING LAND USES: Single-family residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 35 AVERAGE SIZE: 1 acre AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 5 ANALYSIS: This exception area consists of five subdivisions and intervening metes and bounds parcels. The land uses allowed by the R-5 (Rural Residential) zone are rural in nature. These lands, as the R-5 zone permits, are suitable for small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 79 - - 80 - - 81 - - 82 - - 83 - - 84 - - 85 - - 86 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: Marks Creek Legal Description: T 13 S., R 19 EWM, Sec. 2, 26 and 30 Current Zoning: EFU-4 Zoning After Exception: FR-10 (Forest Recreation ? 10) Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 4 ? Forest Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 Exception is proposed for Goal 4 for this area. Physical Description: (1) Total Acreage: 246 acres Number of Parcels: 55 (2) Soil Types and Class: There are no soil surveys for this area available. (3) Forest Cover and Site Class of Land: Lands included within the exception area an unforested along the valley floor of Marks Creek. The sloped hillsides within the area are dominated by Ponderosa Pine intermingled with White Fir. Even though the area doesn?t have a soil survey or detailed cubic foot site class, the information available though the TR-1 (Timber Resource Inventory) indicated the lands is capable of growing 20 cubic feet per year. (4) Topography: Lands along the Marks Creek are generally meadowland areas with high groundwater table. The southern and western end of the area has east and north facing slopes. Marks Creek flows through the middle of the area. - 87 - Description of Land Use: (1) Type of Land Use: The lands included within the exception area are primarily recreational parcels of sizes ranging from 1.38-44 acres. At the southern end of the area is Mt. Bachelor Academy (private educational school) located on the site of the original Marks Creek Lodge and gas station. There are 11 structures on the parcel. Across the highway is Ponderosa Ranch subdivision (platted in 1971). There is one permanent resident there with 10 approved recreation dwellings. There are 42 lots however. County Health approvals require two (2) lots per dwelling unit. (2) Public Facilities: This exception area is not served by sewer service so that all development requires on site septic systems. The area is served by Central Electric Co-Op for power and Blue Mountain Phone Co. for phone service. The area is under Sate Forestry Fire Protection District. The subdivision has a lake within the plat and is a designated source for fire protection. The school also has a pond on site for fire protection. (3) Road System: This exception area is served by Highway 26, which is a state highway. All parcels except Ponderosa Ranch are served by this road. Roads within Ponderosa Ranch are public graveled roads. (4) Development: Approximately 34 parcels (including the subdivision) exist. Approximately 40% of the parcels have dwellings or associated structures; another 25% have permits to build; approximately 35% are vacant. Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is totally surrounded by U.S. Forest Service. Much of the immediate areas have had logging operations in recent years. The Forest Manages the logging practices consistent with Scenic Forest Corridor along Highway 26. - 88 - Exception Findings and Conclusions: (1) Physically Developed to Other Uses: (A) Lands with structures on them are considered to be physically developed with residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for forest uses because of the following findings: (1) 22 of these parcels are developed with single family dwellings (permanent and recreational) and school with dorm facilities which utilize septic systems, accessory buildings, yards, driveways, etc. that occupy most of the land area of the lot so there is no room for agricultural or forest uses. (2) The physically developed parcels are scattered throughout exception area and are not clustered so that development is evenly distributed within the area. (2) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural or forest uses because of the following findings: (A) The typical forest uses in the area are large tracts of commercial forest land in public ownership which are generally many thousands of acres in size. (B) Lands included within the exception area have been parcelized to an average size of less than five (5) acres which is too small to be an economic forest unit for this area. (C) Lands within the exception area are parcelized into 22 separate ownerships so that it is not practicable to consolidate management of these parcels into larger management units by purchase or leasehold for agricultural or forest use. (D) The undeveloped parcels included within this exception area are surrounded by parcels that are physically developed with residential and educational uses so that the intensity of the non-resource development on the adjacent parcels makes it impracticable to use these vacant lands for forest uses. (E) The exception area is served by Highway 26, Long Hollow Road and Hamilton Butte Drive. - 89 - (F) The exception area is served by electrical, communication and public water utilities from distribution lines that have been installed along Highway 26 and Hamilton Butte Drive to serve the rural residential uses. CONCLUSION: (1) Crook County finds that the Marks Creek exception area is committed to non- agricultural and non-forest land use because twenty-two (22) of the parcels in the exception area are physically developed with dwellings and associated structures to the extent that the land cannot be used for agricultural or forest uses typical of the surrounding area. (2) Crook County finds that the Marks Creek exception area is committed to non- agricultural and non-forest land use because ten (10) parcels included in the exception area are irrevocably committed to small parcel sizes by previous partitioning, development of roads, utility lines, etc. which precludes the use of these lots for agricultural or forest uses typical of the surrounding area. (3) These conclusions are based on the description of the exception area, the maps, and the findings presented above. - 90 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #12 AREA NAME: Marks Creek LOCATION: Township 13 South, Range 19 East, Sections 2, 26, 30 AREA: 246 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 55 ZONING: (FR-10) Forest Recreation PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Power, telephone, public roads, private water systems, private subsurface sewage disposal systems EXISTING LAND USES: Rural recreational cabins, one single-family residence, private school NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 20 AVERAGE SIZE: 4.5 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 0 ANALYSIS: This is an existing rural recreation developed in the extreme easterly portion of the County. The FR-10 zoning will preclude further redivision of this area. The FR-10 zone precludes urban uses of this land. The zone permits small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 91 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: Lofton/Turner Creek Legal Description: T 13 S., R 16 EWM, Sects. 7 and 8 Current Zoning: EFU-4 Proposed Zoning After Exemption: RW-40 (Residential/Woodlot-40) Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 4 ? Forest Land Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 4 for this area. Physical Description: (1) Total Acreage: 440 acres Total Parcels: 13 (2) Soil Types and Class: There are no soil surveys for this area available. Forest Cover and Site Class of Land: Lands included in the exception area are heavily forested with Ponderosa pine, with a small percentage of Douglas Fire and Junipers. The overall cubic foot site class for the area is moderate. There is some meadowland along creek bottoms. Topography: The exception area has generally rugged relief, with slopes ranging from 25 percent to 40 percent. Slopes generally fact east and southwest. Lofton and Turner Creeks and their tributaries flow through the area. Description of Land Use: (1) Type of Land Use: Lands included in the exception area consists of nine to 40 acre recreational parcels, one 36 acres, two 20 acres and a 3.21 acre parcel. The property was approved by the County in 1972 as part of the Oakes Livestock, Inc. subdivision. The purpose was for residential/recreational use. (2) Public Facilities: No public water, sewers, electricity, or phone service are available. - 92 - (3) Road Systems: The area is served by graveled private roads, which also serve as a logging and fire protection road. (4) Development: Of the 13 parcels in the exception area, nine (9) have been developed for residential/recreation use, of which five (5) are also being managed for timber production in accordance with State Forestry Department guidelines. (5) Description of Adjacent Uses: The exception area is bordered on part of the south by three (3) 40 acre parcels and one (1) 80 acre parcel which are vacant or developed for recreational use. The exception area is surrounded on the north, west and east and the remaining south boundary by National Forest lands, which are used for timber production. The three (3) 40 acre parcels are located in the Exclusive Farm Use, EFU-2 Zone. (6) Exception Findings and Conclusions: (A) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: (1) Lands with structures on them are considered to be physically developed with residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for forest uses because of the following findings: (a) Nine (9) of these parcels are developed with single family dwellings which utilize septic systems, accessory buildings, yards, driveways, etc. that occupy much of the land area of the lot so there is little room for agricultural or forest uses that make it impractical to manage the land as a commercial forest unit. (b) The physically developed parcels are scattered throughout the exception area and are not clustered so that development is evenly distributed within the area. (B) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (1) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural or forest uses because of the following findings: - 93 - (a) The typical forest uses in the area are large tracts of commercial forest land in public ownership which are general many thousands of acres in size. (b) The vacant parcels are bordered by parcels with dwellings on them. One of the vacant 40 acre parcels received a Conditional Use permit but has yet to build. That (c) The undeveloped parcels are two (2) 40 acres, (plus one previously approved), a 20 acre piece, and a 3.21 parcel. (d) The undeveloped parcels included within this exception area are surrounded by parcels that are physically developed with residential and educational uses so that the intensity of the non-resource development on the adjacent parcels makes it impracticable to use these vacant lands for forest uses. (e) The area is served by graveled private roads. CONCLUSION (1) Crook County finds that the Lofton/Turner Creek exception area is committed to non-agricultural and non-forest land use because 70 percent of the parcels in the exception area are physically developed with dwellings and associated structures to the extent that the land cannot be used for agricultural or forest uses typical of the surrounding area. (2) Crook County finds that the Lofton/Turner Creek exception area is committed to non-agricultural and non-forest land use because four (4) parcels included in the exception area are irrevocably committed to small parcel sizes by previous partitioning, development of roads, etc. which precludes the use of these lots for agricultural or forest uses typical of the surrounding area. (3) Crook County finds that while the land may be committed, it still has the ability to provide some resource management through small woodlot management associated with dwellings. (4) By the appropriate woodlot management zone, the County finds that only four (4) additional dwellings may be placed within the exception area. No new parcels will be allowed in the area. (5) These conclusions are based on the description of the exception area, the maps, and the findings presented above. - 94 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #13 AREA NAME: Lofton/Turner Creek LOCATION: Township 13 South, Range 16 East, Sections 7, 8 AREA: 440 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 13 ZONING: (RW-40) Residential/Woodlot 40 PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 8.5 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: No public facilities available, private road, private water, subsurface sewage disposal system EXISTING LAND USES: Residential recreational NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 5 AVERAGE SIZE: 40 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 4 ANALYSIS: This exception area consists of 13 metes and bounds tracts, 9 of which have been developed. The large lot zoning, 40 acres, precludes urban uses. The RW-40 zone precludes urban uses of this land. The zone permits small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 95 - - 96 - - 97 - - 98 - - 99 - - 100 - - 101 - - 102 - RURAL EXCEPTION AREA Area Name: McKay Development Legal Description: T 13 S., R 17 EWM, Sec. 5 Current Zoning: EFU-4 Proposed Zoning After Exception: FR-10 (Forest Recreation ? 10) Applicable Statewide Planning Goal: Goal 4 ? Forest Lands Goal Exceptions: Goal 2 exception is proposed for Goal 4 for this area. Physical Description: (1) Total Acreage: 40 acres Total Parcels: 6 (2) Soil Types and Class: There are no soil surveys for this area available. Forest Cover and Site Class of Land: Lands included in the exception area are heavily wooded with Ponderosa Pine, with a small percentage of Douglas Fir and Junipers. The overall cubic foot site class for the area is moderate. There is some meadowland in creek bed areas. Topography: The area consists of steeply sloping hillsides ranging from 20-40 percent in slope. Slopes generally face southwest and northeast. McKay Creek and its tributaries flow through the area. Descriptions of Land Uses: (1) Type of Land Use: Lands included in the exception area consist of six (6) acre recreational parcels. (2) Public Facilities: No public water, sewers, electricity, or phone services are available. - 103 - (3) Road System: The area is served by paved public roads. (4) Development: Of the six (6) parcels in the exception area, five (5) have been developed for recreational use and the larger parcel is also being managed for timber production in accordance with State Forestry Department guidelines. Description of Adjacent Land Uses: The exception area is completely surrounded by National Forest lands which are used for timber production. (1) Lands Physically Developed to Other Uses: (A) Lands with structures on them are considered to be physically developed with residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for forest uses because of the following findings: (1) Five (83 percent) of these parcels are developed with single family dwellings which utilize septic systems, accessory buildings, yards, driveways, etc. that occupy most of the land area of the lot so there is no room for agricultural or forest uses. (2) The physically developed parcels are scattered throughout the exception area so that development is evenly distributed within the area. (2) Lands Irrevocably Committed to Other Uses: (A) Lands are considered to be irrevocably committed to residential development to the extent that it is impracticable to use these lands for agricultural or forest uses because of the following findings: (1) The typical forest uses in the area are large tracts of commercial forest land in public ownership which are generally many thousands of acres in size. (2) Lands included within the exception area have been parcelized to an average size of less than five (5) acres which is too small to be an economic forest unit for this area. (3) Lands within the exception area are parcelized into six (6) separate ownerships so that it is not practicable to consolidate management - 104 - of these parcels into larger management units by purchase or leasehold for agricultural or forest use. (4) The undeveloped parcel included within this exception area are surrounded by parcels that are physically developed with residential and educational uses so that the intensity of the non- resource development on the adjacent parcels makes it impracticable to use these vacant lands for forest uses. (5) The area is served by paved Forest Service road. CONCLUSION: (1) Crook County finds that the McKay Development exception area is committed to non-agricultural and non-forest land use because five (5) of the parcels in the exception area are physically developed with dwellings and associated structures to the extent that the land cannot be used for agricultural or forest uses typical of the surrounding area. (2) Crook County finds that the McKay Development exception area is committed to non-agricultural and non-forest land use because one parcel included in the exception area are irrevocably committed to small parcel sizes by previous partitioning, development of roads, etc. which precludes the use of these lots for agricultural or forest uses typical of the surrounding area. (3) These conclusions are based on the description of the exception area, the maps, and the findings presented above. - 105 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #14 AREA NAME: McKay Development LOCATION: Township 13 South, Range 17 East, Section 5 AREA: 40 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 6 ZONING: (FR-10) Forest Recreation PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 10 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: No public services available, private water and subsurface sewage disposal EXISTING LAND USES: Forest recreational NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 1 AVERAGE SIZE: 8 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: 1 ANALYSIS: This exception area consists of 6 parcels, 5 of which are developed. This area is intended for rural recreational use. The FR-10 zone precludes urban uses of this land. The zone permits small farms and homesites with little urban facilities. These lands are not suitable, necessary, or intended for urban use. RECOMMENDATION: No further action required. - 106 - - 107 - AIRPORT-INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT EXCEPTION AREA AREA NAME: Prineville-Crook County Airport Development Area LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Those portions of Tax Lots 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 601 & 603 (As Originally located west and south of the rimrock in Section 1, Tax Lots Acknowledged) 300, 900 & 1000 in Section 2, Tax Lot 300 in Section 3, Tax Lots 300, 1000 & 1210 in Section 10, Tax Lots 300 & 303 in Section 11, Tax Lots 300, 1800, 1900, 2000, 2001 & 2001 in Section 12, and Tax Lot 300 in Section 13, all in T15S, R15E (See attached Map 15-15-Index); Those portions of Tax Lots 903, 904, 1001, 1002 & 1004 located west of the rimrock and Tax Lot 1000 in Section 7, That portion of Tax Lot 100 located southwest of the rimrock and Tax Lot 200 in NW4 of Section 6, That portion of Tax Lot 4600 located southwest of the rimrock in SW4 SW4 of Section 6, all in T15S, R16E (See attached Maps 15-16-Index, 15-16-6- Index and 15-16-6C). LEGAL DESCRIPTION (As Amended 3/5/91): That portion of Tax Lot 200 located west and north of the State Highway and above the rimrock in Section 1, those portions of Tax Lot 300 located in Sections 1, 2, 3, 10, 11 and 12, and Tax Lots 303, 400, 500, 601, 603, 900, 1000, 1800 and 1900 located in Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12, all in T15S, R15E (See Map 15-15-Index). CURRENT ZONING: Airport Approach Zone, A-A. ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: Airport Industrial Development Zone, A-D, and Airport Approach Combining Zone, (A-A). APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTION: Goal 2 Exception as Committed-Developed and Nonresource Lands GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The subject Exception Area is identified as the Prineville-Crook County Airport Development Area and is designated as such for the purpose of encouraging airport related and ?other? commercial and industrial development, while at the same time providing the maximum protection for the affected public airport. Said area originally comprised a total of 4,246.21 acres of which 3,913.05 acres (92+%) was in public ownership, and of which the Prineville-Crook County Airport is the central and primary land use. As amended, the subject area comprises a - 108 - total of only 2,849.78 acres of which 2,779.56 acres or 98% are publicly owned (Crook County ? 2,320.56 acres; City of Prineville ? 151.38 acres; and, State of Oregon ? 307.62 acres. The subject area is located approximately 2 miles southwest of the geographic center of the City of Prineville, but is adjacent to the Urban Growth Boundary of said City along the extreme north and east boundaries in Sections 1 and 2. The area is served by State Highway 126 which is the primary transportation route from Prineville to Redmond/Bend, is served by Houston Lake Road which is a major County Collector, and is totally located on a plateau above the significant rimrock formation located west and southwest of the City at an elevation approximately 350 feet higher than said City. In addition to the existing City-County Airport, two (2) other important public uses exist within the subject area; i.e. the County?s only public solid waste disposal site, and the Ochoco Wayside- Viewpoint State Park. Previously existing uses that have occurred within the area include a dirt race-track for stock cars, a trap-shooting range, a rifle range, and an existing industrial use occupied initially by a heavy equipment sales and service, then by a road construction firm, and presently vacant. In addition to the airport facilities proper, a number of private airplane hangers of major industrial firms in the area are present and occupied. All of these uses, both current and past, are nonfarm type uses. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: The development of an airport in the subject Exceptions Area was initiated in 1931 when the City of Prineville acquired title to a 160 acre tract of land just northeast of the current airport site for the purpose of construction of an airport. Two runways were soon cleared, graded and graveled through assistance from the WPA. Shortly thereafter, Crook County set aside an additional 1,240 acres of land for expansion of this original airport. Subsequent thereto, engineers for the then Civil Aeronautics Authority pronounced the field unsatisfactory for further expansion. However, following that decision, the same engineers approved the present location of the airport for development and expansion in 1942. Two years later, in 1944, the existing FBO office and two hangers were relocated to the site from Madras. Because of the joint involvement of the City and the County, an Airport Commission was established in 1946 by joint resolution of the two governing bodies. Through the administration and efforts of this Commission, the City and the County, major improvements and expansion efforts of the airport have taken place in 1946, 1964, 1967, 1972 and 1978, and at the current time the airport is the base for more than 30 aircraft and annual operations account for more than 13,000 trips. An Airport Master Plan was completed for the subject airport in 1979, and the Environmental Impact Assessment set forth therein sets forth the following: ?Continuance and expansion of the subject airport and its existing environs will not adversely impact the geology, soils, biota, prevailing land uses, and natural resources of the area; That there are no significant natural, historical, scenic or other open space resources in the area that will be adversely impacted; and, That the long-term social- economic benefits will be positive.? - 109 - PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Summary: The subject Exception Area (as amended 3/5/91) consists of a total of 2,849.78 acres (reduced from the original area of 4,246+ acres) that is committed to a variety of public and private uses including the City-County Airport, the Airport FBO facilities, a number of private airplane hangers, one commercial/industrial site, a semi-public recreation site (gun range), a public landfill site, a State Park, and a limited number (3) of rural residential or recreational tracts. Resource uses (i.e. agricultural) are basically nonexistent in the area. Predominant Soil Types: As reported by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in the report entitled ?Soil Survey ? Prineville Area, Oregon? dated 1966, there are not less than 20 different soil types comprising the subject Exceptions Area. There are, however, seven (7) soil types that are dominant in the area, and those are reported as follows with the corresponding Capability Classes of each: * Ayres and Ochoco sandy loams, 0 ? 2% slopes: Class VIe. * Bakeoven very stony loam, 0 ? 20% slopes: Class VIIs. * Bakeoven very stony sandy loam, 0 ? 20% slopes: Class VIIs. * Redmond loam, 0 ? 2% slopes: Class IIs. * Redmond sandy loam, 0 ? 2% slopes: Class IVs. * Rock land: Class VIIIs. * Swartz silt loam: Class IVw. Although the majority of the soils reported above have ?suitable? agricultural use capability classes relative to cultivation and irrigation, it is important to note that there is no water available for irrigation throughout the area, and therefore, what resource uses (agricultural) might be permitted to occur (98% of the affected lands are publicly owned) would strictly be limited to open rangeland type livestock grazing, and even then proper utilization would be restricted due to the lack of available water sources for livestock watering. Topography: As clearly indicated by the reported soil types and descriptions thereof, the area is a relatively flat plateau with slightly sloping depressions and terrain changes in elevation. LAND USE WITHIN EXCEPTION AREA: Land use within the subject Exception Area is dominated by public land uses of which the two primary uses are the existing City-County Airport and the County Solid Waste Disposal Landfill, both of which are the only such facilities within the County establishing an absolute public need therefore. The Airport itself occupies approximately 300 acres with an additional 400 acres adversely impacted by runway approach and clear zones. The County owned public solid waste disposal landfill is assigned to an additional 600+ acres, which includes the current operating area and needed area for future expansion and area disposal needs. Other uses that occur within the subject Exception Area include a State Park (30+ acres developed and approximately 110 acres held in reserve), a semi-public gun club (10 acres), a commercial/industrial area use (5 acres), and a limited number of rural residential or recreational tracts (3 totaling only - 110 - approximately 63+ acres or less than 3% of the total area). From a land ownership standpoint, public ownership clearly dominates and comprises nearly 98%+ of the total area. Following hereinafter is a summary of land uses in the subject area as originally set forth for the subject Exception area by ownership and primary uses reported by County Assessor?s tax lot number(s) as classified by said Assessor?s records: MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES % TOTAL Map 15-15-Index 100 Private Vacant 17.48 0.4% 200 State Vacant 132.62 3.1% 300 County 350.00+ 8.2% 300.00+ 7.1% Airport Landfill Vacant 2,119.25- 49.9% 303 Private Comm/Ind 5.05 0.1% 400 St. OSHD Comm.Strge. 2.07 0.05% 500 Private Rural Tract 36.86 0.9% 601 Private Rec. Tract 13.59 0.3% 603 Private Rec. Tract 13.58 0.3% 900 Private Rec. Tract 1.00 0.03% 1000 State Vacant 158.48 3.7% 1100 State Vacant 318.48 7.5% 1700 State Vacant 20.00 0.5% 1800 City Vacant 151.38 3.6% 1900 State Vacant 3.06 0.1% 2000 Private Rural Resid. 80.00 1.9% 2001 Private Rural Resid. 40.00 1.0% 2002 Private Rec. Tract 40.00 1.0% Map 15-16-Index 903 (part) Private Rec. Tract 2.00 0.05% 904 (part) Private Rec. Tract 5.00 0.1% 1000 County Vacant/Rec. 326.47 7.7% 1001 (part) Private Rec. Tract 5.00 0.1% 1002 (part) Private Rec. Tract 15.00 0.4% 1004 (part) Private Rec. Tract 30.00 0.7% Map 15-16-6 100 (part) Private Rec. Tract 5.00 0.1% 200 State Park 30.93 0.7% Map 15-16-6C 4600 (part) Private Residential 8.60 0.2% TOTALS 4,246.21 100.0% Summary Totals: Public 3,913.05 92.2% Private 333.05 7.8% - 111 - As amended, the total area has been reduced by approximately 1,400 acre of which a large number (i.e. by tax lots) are comprised on individual private ownerships ranging in size from 5 to 80 acres. Therefore, as amended, the following constitutes a summary of lands proposed for retention within the subject Exceptions Area: MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES % TOTAL Map 15-15-Index 200 State State Park 144.01 5% 300 County Airport 300.00 11& 300 County Landfill 600.00+ 21% 300 County Vacant 1,420.56 50% 400 State Storage 2.07 -- 500 Private Tract 36.00 2% 601 Private Tract 13.59 1% 603 Private Tract 13.58 1% 900 Private Tract 1.00 -- 1000 State Vacant 158.48 6% 1800 City Vacant 151.38 6% 1900 State Vacant 3.06 -- Summary Totals: Public 2,779.56 ac. 97.5% of Total Private 70.22 ac. 2.5% of Total Public Facilities: Public facilities serving the subject area are predominately limited to transportation facilities which are represented by two (2) major routes consisting of State Highway 126 and Huston Lake Road (a paved major collector County Road). The City-County Airport, of course, represents another very important transportation facility which is one of the dominant public use facilities in the area. Also existing within the subject area is the County?s only publicly approved solid waste disposal site. There are no other existing public facilities within or serving the subject area; i.e. with the exception of electrical and telephone service. The County has, however, constructed and provided a limited water system for the airport facilities and the immediately adjoining industrially developed property. More recently, the State Highway and County have cooperatively constructed a left-turn refuge lane area on the serving State Highway in conjunction with a new major access road constructed by the County into the subject facilities built to heavy use standards. Development: As attested to in the foregoing land use information, actual development in the area is predominately limited to the existing airport which comprises an actual developed area of 300+ acres, and the 600+ acres that are assigned to the County?s landfill. Other developments within the area are limited to the 30 acres developed for a State Park and 100+ acres held in reserve for that purpose, 10 acres occupied by a gun club, and 5 acres developed for commercial/industrial use. In addition thereto, a total of approximately 70 acres is committed to rural residential or recreational uses. Therefore, only about 1,130 acres or 39.7% of the area is considered developed and committed to non-resource uses, however, the additional 1,719 acres of the area are either identified as unavailable for resource use because of the public ownership - 112 - status thereof, or are considered nonresource lands because of the lack of agricultural support resources. In addition, approximately 400 acres or 23.3% of this 1,719 acres of undeveloped area is adversely impacted by approach and clear zones related to the two (2) main runways of the Airport. ADJACENT AND AREA LAND USES: The northern and northeastern boundaries of the subject area (even though separated somewhat by the dominant rimrock forming such area boundaries) are adjacent to predominately urban and suburban use type developed areas, all of which are located within the currently acknowledged UGB area of the City of Prineville (i.e. those areas located in the extreme northeast corner of Section 2, and those areas along the north and east boundaries of Section 1). The area to the immediate northwest of the subject Exception Area is fully committed to an existing platted and partially developed rural residential development. Areas to the west, the south and the southeast are dominated by resource type uses consisting primarily of open rangeland type livestock operations, although a limited number of rural residential parcels do exist to the southerly eastern boundary and in the extreme southeast boundary area of the subject Exception Area. As attested to in the afore referenced Environmental Impact Assessment set forth in the Airport Master Plan, there are no apparent existing or potential land use of resource conflicts with the dominant airport use of the area. Neither have there been any apparent conflicts between said airport use and adjoining/area land uses and the other dominant uses in the subject Exception Area including the public solid waste disposal site, the previously existing industrial uses, and the previously existing public recreation type uses. EXCEPTIONS FINDINGS: In accordance with the requirements of OAR 660-04 regarding Exceptions, the following Findings are set forth as a basis for the subject Airport Development Exception Area: Public Need: The public need attributed to the subject Exceptions Area is established by four (4) very important factors: 1) The existing City-County Airport constitutes a vital public transportation facility necessary for service to the area and the region, and constitutes a vital component of the County?s overall compliance with the Statewide Planning Transportation Goal regarding alternate modes of transportation; 2) Relative to the subject Airport, a substantial portion (23+%) of the vacant (i.e. undeveloped/uncommitted area of the overall subject Exceptions Area is considered necessary to provide for maximum protection and support measure for said Airport; 3) A major portion (21%) of the total subject Exceptions Area is devoted to and necessary to provide for the solid waste disposal needs of the area, present and future; and - 113 - 4) The subject area provides the necessary base for the vitally important expansion of commercial and industrial development necessary for the diversification and maintenance of a resource dependent economy (Note: Additional findings relative to this factor are set forth hereinafter as a basis for a ?Reasonings Exceptions? for the subject area in addition to the basis as a committed/developed and nonresource lands area). Physical Development: Although only 645 aces (22.6%) of the total area is classified as ?physically? developed and/or committed, major portions (814 acres or 36.9%) of the remaining area are necessary for airport protection areas and measures, solid waste disposal site expansion, and in park reserve lands. In addition, substantial area is identified as needed for the development of commercial/industrial uses to support and diversify the local economy. Parcel Sizes ? Ownership Patterns: The parcel sizes and ownership patterns of the area are dominated by public lands ownerships in relatively large acreages. Although there are a limited number of private land ownerships within the subject Exceptions Area, those ownerships are predominately represented by isolated (both physically and by ownership patterns) parcels of limited acreages; i.e. only four (4) parcels totaling only 64.17 acres for an average parcel size of only 16 acres. Of even more significance, is the fact that three (3) of these parcels comprising all but one (1) acre of land are located immediately adjacent to the UGB of the City of Prineville and are totally segregated from any other resource lands by said UGB and by the adjoining large public ownerships on the west and the south. The small parcel size/ownership pattern of the limited number of privately owned parcels within the Exceptions Area is also significant as related to the dominant bordering patterns of large single ownerships (i.e. to the subject Exceptions Area but noted private parcels) of 160 acres and larger (parcel sizes ranging from 160 to 4,476 acres). Public Facilities and Services: Although public facilities and services to and within the subject area are predominately limited to and represented primarily by two (2) major transportation facilities (a State Highway and a County collector road), the area itself is dominated by three other major public facilities; i.e. the Airport, the County Solid Waste Disposal site, and a State Park. In addition to the afore-referenced major transportation facilities, the Sate Highway Division has recently installed a left-turn refuge area at the main entrance to the subject Airport and current industrial area, and County has complemented that facility by constructing a heavy-load capacity main access road into the subject area. Other public facilities include electrical power (onsite) to accommodate large capacity uses, and a limited water supply system, to serve existing potential users. Neighborhood and Regional Characteristics: The characteristics of the area are representative of a relatively undeveloped, publicly owned open space area, which presents an unusual and advantageous setting for a public airport and a public solid waste disposal site. Such a site also provides a comparative advantage for the location of commercial and industrial uses which might present incompatibilities with more ?urbanized? developed areas as found within the current City urban area. - 114 - This dominate characteristic of the subject Exceptions Area provides the basis for the comparative advantage that such an Airport and solid waste disposal facility area has over the locations of many other alternative locations. The dominance of public lands within the subject area is also a major characteristic of the area not common to many other areas of similar uses or use designations. Such public ownership can be utilized to competitively attract new and additional commercial and industrial uses to the area as is the case with similar ?industrial- commercial? development areas in the immediate vicinities of the Redmond and Madras Airports. These same characteristics are not common to the immediate areas in that area, and are not (with the exception of the City of Prineville Industrial Park which is nearly capacity) common to the overall general area of the City of Prineville and the urban area thereof. Lands outside the designated Exception Area are dominated by large single ownerships that are currently devoted to extensive open-range land livestock grazing uses, and other public ownerships in the general area are either vacant or devoted to aggregate resource uses with which the existing and proposed uses within the subject Exceptions Area are found to be compatible. In the case of those uses within the City of Prineville?s UGB to the northeast with which proposed uses might conflict, such potential conflicts are minimized by the significant geological features and elevation differences evident in those locations. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the foregoing Findings and resource information, the Conclusions that justify and support the subject area for Exception pursuant to OAR 660-04 are as follows: 1) The subject area is dominated by and committed to two (2) major public facilities, the Airport and the Solid Waste Disposal Site, and the areas necessary to provide the needed buffers, protection measures and support facilities constitute a public need for such nonresource designation. 2) The fact that 97.5% of the subject area is in public ownership precludes the consideration of such lands for resource use. 3) In addition to the paramount public ownership factor, nearly 40% of the area is already developed and/or committed to four (4) dominate uses consisting of the Airport, a developed industrial site, a public solid waste disposal site, and a State Park. 4) Combined with the developed/committed area, an additional 400+ acres (23% of the remaining undeveloped lands) are identified as ?necessary? protection areas for the approach and clear zones of the affected Airport. It is an unusual and extremely beneficial condition to have such undeveloped lands with such protection areas publicly owned and controlled. - 115 - 5) Although the basic capability classifications of the primary soils comprising the subject area technically supports a resource use designation, the dominate ownership and lack of supporting agricultural use resources precludes any viable resource use thereof. 6) Although a number of private ownerships exist within the subject Exceptions Area, such parcels are not of sufficient size to be considered viable resource units and are precluded from combination with other resource lands by a significant geological feature (i.e. the rimrock), and by adjoining urban and suburban developed lands within the existing UGB of the City of Prineville. 7) In addition to the physical separation of the existing private lands from other private resource lands by a significant geological feature, such private lands are effectively separated by surrounding public lands not available for resource use in combination therewith. 8) Even though actual physical development is not a dominate and compelling factor for an Exception for the area, those areas necessary for the protection of the existing development that does occur mandates the total area so designated in the public interest. 9) From an economic and related Statewide Planning Goal standpoint, the subject Exception Area constitutes an overall factor for compliance with Statewide Planning Goals through the provision of limited amounts of publicly owned lands for commercial and industrial development relative to the area?s needs for economy diversification and survival. Relative thereto, such possession of publicly owned lands for such development provides a measure of comparative advantage vitally necessary in any economic development endeavors. In addition to the foregoing Findings and Conclusions justifying an Exception for the area as a committed/developed area, this factor also provides the basis for a ?Reasons? exception as set forth hereinafter. REASONS EXCEPTION: In addition to an Exception which can be taken for ?committed and developed? lands, Goal 2 and ORS 197.732(1)(c) provides that a local government may adopt an exception to a particular goal or goals for lands not ?built upon? or ?irrevocably committed? to uses not allowed by an applicable goal (in this case Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands), where the following standards are met: a) Reasons justify why the state policy embodied in the applicable goal(s) should not apply; b) Areas which do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use(s); - 116 - c) The long term environmental, economic, social and energy consequences resulting from the proposed use(s) at the proposed site with measures designed to reduce adverse impacts are not significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located in areas requiring a goal exception other than the proposed site; and d) The proposed uses are compatible with other adjacent uses or will be so rendered through measures designed to reduce adverse impacts. The requirements of ORS 197.732(1)(c) and Goal 2 (Exceptions) have been interpreted in administrative rules adopted by LCDC, OAR 660-04-018 (Planning and Zoning for Exception Areas), OAR 660-04-020 (Goal 2, Part II(c) Exception Requirements), and OAR 660-04-022 (Reasons Necessary to Justify an Exception under Goal 2, Part II(c). Reasons Justifying why the state policy embodied in the applicable Agricultural Lands Goal No. 2 should not apply: The applicable ?policy? in this case is summarized to the intent of preserving ?agricultural lands? in large blocks for the necessary maintenance of the agricultural economy of the ?area?, for the means of conserving natural resources, and to minimize the costs and conflicts associated with expanding ?urban? development into rural areas. Relative thereto, the following findings justify the conclusions that such a policy is not applicable to the subject Exceptions Area: 1) Because of the extreme dominance of public ownerships, the absence of agricultural support resources, and the isolated and small tract areas of private lands within the subject area, the identification of the affected lands therein as ?Agricultural Lands? is not reasonable. 2) The area is already committed and developed to certain nonresource (nonfarm) uses with which many agricultural uses are in conflict. 3) The uses that do occur within the subject area are clearly identified as uses which meet critical public needs, and with which reclamation for resource uses would be publicly detrimental and economically unfeasible. 4) Portions of the subject area are immediately adjacent to an existing and acknowledged urban area with which many agricultural uses would be incompatible or would at a minimum create certain conflicts. 5) Although the area may visually be classified as ?rural? open space, the nonresource uses that occur within are more urban related than rural; particularly the Airport, the solid waste disposal site, and the existing industrial development. 6) Those nonfarm uses that do occur within the subject area clearly constitute uses to which an urban area is dependent. - 117 - Reasons Justifying an Airport and Industrial Designation and Zoning for the subject Exception Area: OAR 660-04-018(3) provides that, when a local government takes a ?reasons? exception, plan and zone designations must limit the uses and activities ?to only those uses and activities which are justified in the exception?. Relative thereto, the uses authorized by this exception are airport, airport related, industrial, and public uses. It must also be noted that all uses permitted within the subject area are subject to approval in accordance with Airport Approach and Clear Zone overlay (combining) zone requirements pursuant to guidelines set forth by the Sate Aeronautics Division and the Federal Aviation Administration. It is the intend of the County that this area be utilized as a continuance of those vitally important public uses that occur therein at the current time and that such uses be protected to the maximum extent possible, and further, that such area be the basis of needed commercial and industrial development so absolutely necessary for the continued economic and social viability of the County as a whole. The reasons justifying the proposed Plan and Zoning designations are therefore set forth as follows: 1) The continuance and mandatory future expansion of the existing public solid waste disposal site requires an industrial designation to insure such continuance and expansion with a minimum level of incompatible uses such as presented by more residentially and resource related uses. 2) The combination of a zone providing for airport and industrial uses insures a maximum level of uses compatibilities, while the overlay of ?approved? approach and clear zone areas maximizes the protection of the primary airport use in the affected areas. 3) A review of comparable designated and zoned lands within the adjoining urban area and throughout the County clearly reveals that existing lands so designated and zoned are at near capacity. Developments occurring in the past 7?10 years have resulted in the City?s 54+ acre industrial park being near capacity, while forthcoming wetland regulations are expected to adversely impact additional development on remaining lands predominately along Ochoco Creek. In addition, the largest private block of industrially designated and zoned lands in the general vicinity of the City?s Industrial Park have just recently been developed with three major industrial/commercial users. 4) Although ?limited? areas remain for such development within existing areas so designated and zoned, the marketability thereof is limited as is exhibited by the failure to identify a readily usable site for an potential industrial user requiring a considerable land area (i.e. 10 acres or more). 5) The resulting economically beneficial developments that have occurred at similar sites at the Redmond and the Madras Airport Industrial Areas in recent years versus what has occurred in the general Prineville/Crook County area is clearly indicative of the need of such an area; particularly - 118 - when a number of those firms ultimately locating at one of the afore- referenced industrial areas in the Central Oregon Area did consider Prineville as a potential location but were unable to find sufficient available land areas. 6) The need for the capacity for such industrial development alternatives in the Prineville Area of Crook County (said urban area being the only urban area in the County) is compounded by the facts that the dominate industries of forest products and agriculture are resource dependent with the former industrial sector expected to decline in future years due to a number of external factors including environmental limitations. Relative to these two dominate industry sectors, Crook County is rated as one of the highest ?single industry dependent areas? in the State. 7) Even though the area is currently identified as a ?resource? and ?single industry? dependent area, the exceptional growth of the Bend Area and the resulting higher investment costs required in that area is resulting in an identified growth pattern and a number of employment producing development opportunities, including industrial, in the Prineville/Crook County area. The continuing lack of ?adequate? lands for such opportunities could effectively produce long-term tremendously adverse economic impacts to the area. 8) The failure of the County to be able to provide the basis for such economic development opportunities (i.e. the rejection of this proposed Exception Area) would be in direct conflict with the State economic goal of encouraging industrial and other economic growth in ?rural? and economically-lagging areas. 9) Although such a use would not, of course, be permitted within those areas to be encompassed by the combining approach and clear zone areas, there have been preliminary plans discussed with a State agency that would provide funding for the development of a ?commercial? ?ORV Park? facility in the subject area. Such a facility is not compatible within an clearly established and ?developed? urban area, but would be compatible in the subject Exception Area (i.e. outside the afore-referenced approach/clear zone areas). The need for such an area of facility is also directed at a public need as well as an economic benefit, particularly with increasing environmental and other limitations on such areas and/or facilities on ?other? public lands (primarily federal lands) throughout the State. Such a facility would not only be an economic benefit locally and be in direct compliance with the Region?s Regional Economic Development Strategy Plan, but would also meet a statewide recreation need and therefore be in direct compliance with the Statewide Recreation Planning Goal. - 119 - 10) As established hereinabove, the designation and zoning of the subject area for the uses proposed would effectively be in compliance with the County?s (and Statewide) Planning Goals relative to Transportation, Public Facilities and Services, Economic Development, and Recreation. 11) In contrast thereto, there would not be any adverse impacts on compliance requirements with Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands due to the facts that the affected lands are not clearly identifiable as ?agricultural lands?, there are not any large blocks of resource lands to preserve, the area does not, has not and cannot potentially be identified as contributing to the agricultural economy of the area or the state, with the exception of the open space aspect of existing ?vacant? lands there are not any significant natural resources to be preserved within the area, nor are there any identified costs or conflicts with rural areas associated with the proposed nonresource development of the area. Justification for ?Rural? Airport and Industrial Development: Although the subject Exception Area may justifiably be included as an expansion of the UGB area of the City of Prineville, OAR 660-04-022 does set forth specific criteria for taking a ?reasons? exception for such an area in a ?rural? area; i.e. an area outside an established UGB. OAR 660-04-022(1)(a) requires the County to demonstrate need for the proposed use(s), based on one or more of the requirements of Statewide Planning Goals 3 to 19. OAR 660-04-022(1)(b) requires the County to demonstrate either that the resource upon which the proposed site is dependent can be reasonably obtained only at the proposed exception site, and the use(s) or activity(s) require a location near the resource, or that the proposed use(s) has special features or qualities that necessitates its location on or near the proposed exception site. OAR 660-04-022(1)(a) and (b) provide the general framework for an exception to a goal or goals. For ?rural? industrial development, i.e. industrial development located outside of a UGB, ?appropriate reasons and facts? include, but are not limited to, criteria set forth in OAR 660-04-022(3). Those criteria are: ?(a) The use is significantly dependent upon a unique resource located on agricultural or forest land?; or ?(b) The use cannot be located inside a UGB due to impacts that are hazardous or incompatible in densely populated areas; or ?(c) The use would have a significant comparative advantage due to its location which would benefit the county economy and cause only minimal loss of productive resource lands. Reasons for such a decision should include a discussion of the lost resource productivity and values in relation to the county?s gain from the industrial (or other nonresource) use(s), and the specific transportation and resource advantages which support the decision.? 1) The County notes that ?most? industrial uses, by their nature and intensity, have distinctly ?urban? qualities; however, with the exception of those ?additional? uses that may develop within the subject area as a result of - 120 - the proposed designation, two (2) of the existing uses may have ?urban? qualities but are clearly not compatible with densely populated urban areas; i.e. the Airport and the solid waste disposal site. 2) The County views OAR 660-04-022(3) as allowing uses such as those proposed within the subject area outside a UGB area, notwithstanding their urban qualities, upon a demonstration of compliance with OAR 660- 04-022(3) and the other exception standards in OAR 660-04-020. Therefore, to the extent that uses which may already exist and which may occur in the future on the proposed site may be deemed ?urban? in nature or by major characteristics, an exception is hereby taken to Goal 14 (Urbanization), which otherwise prohibits urban uses on rural lands. In lieu hereof, however, the subject area may well be justified for inclusion within the adjacent UGB area in which case this exception would not therefore be applicable. 3) An exception is also take to Goal 11 (Public Facilities and Services), which otherwise prohibits the extension of urban services onto rural lands. Such an exception is hereby taken even though two (2) of the existing public uses existing within the subject area may well be classified as ?urban? public facilities. With respect to Goal 11 however, the County recognizes that the existing and proposed uses within the subject area may require services that may be deemed ?urban? in nature, including water and electrical services, but that sewage disposal services would continue to be by individual user systems common to rural areas. Because the proposed uses for the subject area are justified within this document, this exception to Goal 11 is taken to allow the proper servicing of potential developments, even though such services would not likely be an extension of those ?urban? services provided by the City, but will likely be system and individual services provided onsite. In the event that required services and facilities are extended to the site, such additional services would be limited to those appropriate to the needs of the use or uses developed within the subject area. 4) Additional justification for the proposed designation of the subject area is set forth hereinbefore on pages 13 through 15. Need for Airport and Industrial Uses in the Exception Area: OAR 660-04-022(1)(a) requires a demonstration of need for the proposed use(s) or activity(s), based on one or more statewide goals. Because proposed uses are industrial which constitutes economically beneficial uses, the goal at issue is Goal 9, Economy of the State. Said Goal provides: ?To diversify and improve the economy of the state (and the impacted jurisdiction[s]). The goal mandates that state and federal economic plans be coordinated; that plans and policies ?contribute to a stable and healthy economy in all regions of the state?, that plans be based on inventories of areas suitable for increased economic growth and activity, considering a variety of factors; and that economic growth be encouraged in areas that want increased growth and activity. - 121 - 1) The County has fully established its desire for economic growth and diversification, both in Plan Economic Policies and as a partner in the Central Oregon Regional Development Strategy process. 2) The need and desires for economic growth and stability is also reflected through the recent actions of a community business awareness program as ?Vision 2000.? 3) Economic development actions are also indicated positive through the City-County cooperative development of the City?s Industrial Park and nearby private industrial lands which are presently developed to near capacity. 4) In a recent inventory of available sites for needed additional industrial development, such inventory revealed that such lands are in limited supply and that the availability of additional lands without conversion of ?prime? agricultural lands was not possible; i.e. with the exception of the proposed Exception Area. 5) The suitability of the subject area for such development is established by the facts that a number of ?industrial type? uses are already in existence in that location. 6) The subject area also possesses a number of those attributes deemed necessary for such development and includes the existing airport, major highway access with an already existing developed safety access point (i.e. the left-turn refuge lane area), electrical power, water service, close proximity to an urban area, the absence of conflicting densely populated areas, good air quality and circulation with prevailing wind patterns away from populated areas, and expansive vacant lands. 7) Economic based development on the subject area would also be in compliance with the State goal of rural and economic lagging area development versus such development in the more urbanized areas of the State. 8) The need for additional industrial development in the area is also established in recent projections by the State Employment Division and the State Department of Economic Development that the current dominate industry in the area, i.e. the wood products industry, is likely to face ongoing reductions and industry slowdowns. 9) The potential for increased economic activity and development in the subject area is also documented by the fact that there have been recent applications for establishment of industrial type uses in the area, but which have not been possible due to the current restrictive zoning. - 122 - Special Site Features Justifying the Exception: OAR 660-04-022(3) sets forth several criteria that may justify the location of industrial lands outside a UGB. Two of those three criteria (subsections 3(b) and 3(c)) would apply to the subject area, and the third criterion (subsection 3(a)) might apply to any one specific project. 1) OAR 660-04-022(3)(a) allows justification of a rural industrial designation where the use is ?significantly dependent upon a unique resource located on agricultural or forest land.? In the case of the subject area, any specific use that was ?significantly dependent? upon the existing airport would meet this criteria. Such a factor is significant that said airport is the only such facility in the County. 2) OAR 660-04-022(3)(b) allows justification of a rural industrial use where the use would have significant comparative advantage due to its location which would benefit the local economy and cause only minimal loss to productive resource lands. a) The comparative advantage of the subject area is derived from the expansive public ownerships and from the specific location relative to major transportation facilities, access facilities and proximity to the urban areas of Prineville, Redmond and Bend, the lower property values and tax rates in the Crook County area relative to alternate sites in the neighboring Deschutes County, significantly more clear air patterns at the subject airport versus those at the Redmond Airport, and the physical buffers between the subject area and densely populated urban areas. b) Industrial use development of the subject area would clearly cause an absolute minimal loss of productive resource lands primarily based on the fact that all of the affected lands are in reality unproductive from a resource standpoint. 3) OAR 660-04-022(3)(c) also requires consideration of the impact of the use on resource productivity and values. In the case of the subject area, such an impact is totally negative in that none of the lands encompassed within the proposed area are known to have ever had any measurable resource productivity or value. 4) OAR 660-04-022(3)(b) allows rural industrial development where a use is too hazardous to, or incompatible with, dense population areas to warrant inclusion within a UGB. Relative thereto, two of the existing uses, i.e. the airport and the solid waste disposal site, constitute uses which are more compatible in the area located than within more densely populated areas providing ?protections? for all affected use types. Recent uses proposed - 123 - within the subject area have also desired the subject area location because of existing conflicts with densely populated areas at present locations which would be minimized with relocation to the subject area. Similar conditions could be evident for any number of uses that may desire to locate within the subject area, and there are no other identifiable areas within the planning area which would provide for such conflict minimization. Areas Not Requiring a New Exception Cannot Reasonably Accommodate the Uses Proposed within the Subject Exception Area: OAR 660-04-020(2)(b) requires an applicant for a reasons exception to show that areas which do not require a new exception cannot reasonably accommodate the use(s) proposed within the subject exception area. Under this rule, the applicant must explain why the proposed use(s) cannot be reasonably accommodated: (1) on nonresource land that would not require an exception; (2) on resource land that is already irrevocably committed to nonresource uses; and (3) inside an urban growth boundary. Relative thereto, the following findings are set forth: 1) An inventory of available industrial lands within the existing UGB area of the City of Prineville clearly reveals that there is a general lack of available lands already designated for industrial development. 2) There are no other ?nonresource? land adjacent to the City?s UGB boundaries or within the subject UGB area that can accommodate those uses existing and proposed within the subject exception area. In fact, the majority of lands adjacent to the subject UGB (with the exception of the subject area and other areas irrevocably committed to already existing nonresource uses of which residential is the primary use) are considered ?prime? agricultural lands currently under cultivation, irrigation and devoted to intensive farming activities. 3) In direct contrast to the foregoing findings, those lands encompassed by the subject exception area are considered ?nonresource? lands, even though an exception to Goal 3 is established herein. The Uses Existing and Proposed within the subject Exception Area Cannot Reasonably be Located on Nonresource Lands Not Requiring an Exception or on Lands Irrevocably Committed to Nonresource Use: As previously set forth herein, there are not any identifiable alternate sites for the uses existing and proposed within the subject exception area, either within the existing UGB area or in areas adjacent to or in the close proximity of said UGB area. There certainly are no other areas that could accommodate the uses proposed herein without an exception, and, in fact, the subject area may be the only ?nonresource? lands area within a reasonable distance of the subject UGB area that can reasonably be expected to accommodate the existing and proposed uses. - 124 - There are, of course, alternate sites of very similar characteristics and locations at the Redmond and Madras Airport development areas. Such areas do not, however, meet the economic needs of the Crook County-Prineville Area, and are, in fact, in direct competition for available developments. The Proposed and Existing Uses of the Subject Exception Area Cannot Reasonably be Located Inside the UGB Area of the City of Prineville as it presently exists: As previously documented, there are not sufficient industrially designated lands within the subject UGB area to accommodate desired and need growth, nor are there any alternate sites identifiable which could be added to the subject UGB for that purpose without sacrificing productive resource lands. Further, at least two of the existing uses within the subject exception area are not compatible with densely populated areas such as found within the subject UGB area at the present time, and certainly it is not reasonable to require the relocation of such uses to locations within said UGB area. In addition, the subject Prineville UGB area is the only UGB area within the County. The Long-Term Environmental, Economic, Social and Energy Consequences Resulting from the Use(s) at the Proposed Site With Measures Designed to Reduce Adverse Impacts are not Significantly More Adverse than would Typically Result from the Same Proposal being located in other Areas Requiring a Goal Exception: This criterion requires a demonstration that the ESEE consequences resulting from the proposed use(s) at the proposed site will not be significantly more adverse than would typically result from the same proposal being located at other areas ?requiring a goal exception.? This criterion does not apply to other areas for which a goal exception is not required. Hammack & Assoc., Inc. v. Washington County, Or LUBA (87-037)(1987). Relative hereto the following findings are set forth: 1) There are not any alternate sites identifiable for the existing and proposed uses within the subject exception area. Therefore, there cannot be a comparative analysis of the resulting impacts from alternate site locations. 2) Further, there are not any identifiable ?negative? consequences resulting from the existing and proposed uses within the subject exception area. In fact, the negative consequences are evident in the case of such uses not being permitted at the proposed location. 3) The fact that the location of existing and proposed uses in other areas requiring a goal exception would require the displacement of productive resource lands versus the loss of nonproductive resource lands at the subject site also attests to the fact that the ESEE consequences would therefore be substantially less than for alternate sites. 4) Environmental Consequences: The only apparent environmental impact of utilizing this area for the continuance of the existing uses and for the development of proposed uses would be the loss of approximately 1,700 acres of vacant public lands which may have some ?open space? value but are not currently enjoyed by the public for that primary purpose nor are - 125 - such lands identified or designated for such value. Further, because of necessary buffers and protection measures for the existing airport approach and clear zones, and for the public solid waste disposal facility, much of the area will continue to possess the vacant, open space characteristics presently evident. 5) Social Consequences: The continuance of the existing uses and the development of proposed uses would have positive social impacts in that two very important public facilities would be retained, additional job opportunities would be provided, and industrial-residential use conflicts would be minimized. The expansion of job opportunities locally would of course help offset the expected downturns in the current dominate industrial sectors. Because of the site?s location and natural geographical buffers and the location relative to prevailing wind patterns in the area, development in that area would not create negative social impacts caused by noise, dust particulates, odors, or other by-products of industrial activity on the site. In fact, the negative social impacts referenced herein would be more significant at alternate locations in more populated areas than at the proposed location. 6) Economic Consequences: Further development of the subject areas can only benefit the area economically. Such positive consequences would be the result of increased job opportunities, increased investment levels and values, and economic diversity, thereby helping to achieve the goal of economic stabilization of the area. 7) Energy Consequences: Additional development at the proposed location would be energy efficient due to the immediate proximity of an urban area providing housing for employees, and the existing availability of utilities and transportation facilities. The expanded job opportunities that may be afforded by the development of the area would also decrease energy requirements now required by commuters to other areas of such employment. 8) In Summary, the proposed site is ideally suited for continued development, and such development would not have significant environmental, social, economic or energy consequences, except positively. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION: In conclusion, the subject proposed exception area is especially well suited to the existing and proposed uses without displacing any significant resource lands. The site possesses a number of comparative advantages due to the predominance of public ownership and the availability of sufficient land areas and necessary public services and facilities. In addition there are not - 126 - identified negative ESEE consequences from expanded development in the area, and there is an identified need for an area for the intended uses. The subject area and its proposed designation is also important relative to the protection and future expansion of vital public facilities. Implementation of the proposed Plan designation as an Airport and Industrial Development Area will be accomplished by the enactment of zoning similar to the County?s existing General Industrial Zone but with specific measures to protect the existing two major public facilities consisting of the airport and the county landfill. Such measures as specifically related to the subject airport will be an Approach-Clear Zone combining zone pursuant to guidelines and requirements set forth by the State Aeronautics Division and the Federal Aviation Administration. - 127 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #15 AREA NAME: Airport Development Zone LOCATION: That portion of Tax Lot 200 located west and north of the State Highway and above the rimrock in Section 1, those portions of Tax Lot 300 located in Sections 1, 2, 3, 10, 11 and 12, and Tax Lots 303, 400, 500, 601, 603, 900, 1000, 1800, and 1900 located in Sections 1, 2, 11 and 12, all in Township 15 South, Range 15 East. AREA: 2,849.78 acres PARCELS/LOTS: N/A ZONING: (A-A) Airport Approach zone PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: Currently in process of being added to UGB. AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: N/A EXISTING LAND USES: N/A NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: N/A AVERAGE SIZE: AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: N/A ANALYSIS: The County has adopted an ordinance to include this area in Prineville UGB. RECOMMENDATION: No further action. - 128 - INDUSTRIAL EXCEPTIONS AREA AREA NAME: Northwest Prineville Industrial Area LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That part of Tax Lot 701 being the S2S2SW4 of Section 14, T14S, R15E (See attached Map 14-15-14); Tax Lots 1000 & 1001 in the SE4 of Section 15, T14S, R15E (See Map 14-15-15D); Tax Lots 100, 101 & 102 of Section 22, T14S, R15E (See Map 14-15-22); Tax Lots 200 thru 304, that part of Tax Lot 400 located east of Highway 26, and Tax Lots 401 thru 800 of Section 23, T14S, R15E (See Map 14-15-23); Tax Lots 601 and 900 thru 2100 of in the SW4 of Section 24, T14S, R15E (See Map 14-15-24C); and Tax Lots 2101 thru 2105 and Tax Lot 2108 in the NW4 of Section 25, T14S, R15E (See Map 14-15-25B). CURRENT ZONING: Heavy Industrial Zone, H-M. ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: Heavy Industrial Zone, H-M. APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTION: Goal 2 Exception as Committed-Developed Area OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The subject Exception Area is identified as the Northwest Prineville Industrial Area and is so designated. The subject area encompasses a total area of 526.14 acres located approximately 1/2 mile northwest of the City of Prineville between State Highway 26 and a major collector County Road (Lamonta Road). The area is dominated by heavy industrial uses including four (4) wood products manufacturing firms, a cogeneration plant, and two (2) commercial rock quarry operations. In addition to the two (2) major highways serving the area, the area is served in its entirety by the City of Prineville Railroad. The majority of the nonresource uses occurring within the area have existed for periods preceeding the enaction of Statewide Planning Goals. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Summary: The subject Exceptions Area comprises a total area of 526.14 acres committed and developed to nonfarm (nonresource) uses consisting of heavy industrial, commercial and rural residential uses, the vast majority of which have pre-existed for an extended period of time. The area constitutes a vitally important sector of the County?s total economy and employment base. - 129 - Predominant Soil Types: As reported by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in the document entitled ?Soil Survey ? Prineville Area, Oregon? dated 1966, the dominant soil types encompassed by the subject area includes 18 Soils Mapping Units representing seven (7) Soil Series. The following is a summary listing of the dominant soil series found in the subject area in nearly equal areas with the assigned agricultural use capability class of each: * Ayres/Ochoco stony sandy loams: Class II ? IV. * Crooked sandy loam: Class III. * Metolius sandy loam: Class II ? IV. * Ochoco loam & gravelly loam: Class II ? III. * Prineville sandy loam: Class II ? III. * Powder loam: Class II. * Riverwash: Class VIII. Although the foregoing reported Soil Series and the assigned Capability Classes thereof would substantiate a resource designation of the subject area, such is precluded by the actual development of nonresource uses on more than 80% of the total area, many of which represent extremely large investments for which conversion of for resource use would be economically prohibitive. Topography: The area?s topography varies from nearly level areas to areas with gently sloping terrain created by small hills and draws. Native vegetation is a mixture of grasses, sagebrush, rabbit brush and junipers. LAND USE WITHIN EXCEPTION AREA: As described in the General Description set forth hereinbefore, the area is dominated by nonresource uses consisting of heavy industrial (the most dominant), commercial and rural residential. Of the total area of 526.14 acres, 417 acres or 79.3% is committed to or developed for industrial use, 2.36 acres of 0.4% is committed to commercial use, and 19.87 acres or 3.8% is committed/developed for rural residential uses; i.e. a total of 439.23 acres or 83.5% of the area is committed to and/or developed for nonresource uses. Dominating the industrial uses in the area are four (4) wood products manufacturing firms, a cogeneration plant, and two (2) commercial rock quarry operations. The total area of 19.87 acres committed to rural residential uses represents 14 individual dwelling units for an average lot size of 1.4 acres. The two (2) commercial uses existing in the area include a small grocery store and a heavy equipment repair shop. Land Use Summary by Tax Lot: The following is a summary of land uses in the subject area as reported by Assessor?s records: MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES % TOTAL Map 14-15-14 701 (part) Private Wood Prds. Mfg. 36.00 6.8% Map 14-15-15D 1000 Private Quarry Site 7.92 1.5% 1001 Private Vacant 3.08 0.6% - 130 - MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES % TOTAL Map 14-15-22 100 Private Quarry Site 37.11 7.0% 101 Private Hvy. Equip.Rpr. 2.00 0.4% 102 (part) Private Farm/Dwelling 21.00 4.0% Map 14-15-23 200 Private Wood Prds.Mfg. 22.07 4.2% 300 Private Quarry Site 59.11 11.2% 301 Private Quarry Site 8.00 1.5% 302 Private Quarry Site 24.62 4.7% 303 Private Rock Proc. 16.73 3.2% 304 Private Vacant 15.67 3.0% 400 (part) Private Vacant 21.00 4.0% 401 Private Quarry Site 7.32 1.4% 402 Private Rock Prd.Disp. 14.92 2.9% 403 Private Rock Prd.Proc. 0.27 0.1% 500 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 42.96 8.2% 600 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 57.49 10.9% 601 Private Cogeneration 6.10 1.1% 700 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 0.95 0.2% 800 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 21.80 4.2% Map 14-15-24C 601 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 19.12 3.6% 900 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 3.98 0.8% 1000 Private Rural Resid. 0.30 0.06% 1100 Private Rural Resid. 0.24 0.05% 1101 Private Rural Resid. 0.78 0.15% 1102 Private Rural Resid. 0.58 0.08% 1200 Private Rural Resid. 0.16 0.03% 1300 Private Commercial 0.36 0.07% 1400 Private Rural Resid. 0.25 0.05% 1500 Private Rural Resid. 0.23 0.04% 1600 Private Rural Resid. 0.16 0.03% 1700 Private Rural Resid. 0.22 0.04% 1800 Private Rural Resid. 0.50 0.07% 1900 Private Rural Resid. 0.40 0.06% 2000 Private Rural Resid. 0.48 0.07% 2100 Private Rural Resid. 1.00 0.19% Map 14-15-25B 2101 Private Rural Resid. 14.57 2.8% 2102 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 1.35 0.3% 2103 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 5.45 1.0% 2104 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 9.39 1.8% 2105 Private Office/Mfg. 2.49 0.5% 2108 Private Wood Prd.Mfg. 3.50 0.7% TOTALS 526.14 100.0% - 131 - Summary Totals: Industrial 408.65 77.7% Commercial 2.36 0.4% Rural Resid. 19.87 3.8% Farm 21.00 4.0% Vacant 74.26 14.1% Public Facilities: Public facilities serving the subject area include State Highway 26 (Prineville-Madras-Portland Highway), Lamonta Road (a County Paved major collector and major truck route), Elliott and Gumpert Roads (County paved roads), and the City of Prineville Railroad. There are no other public facilities such as public or community water or sewage disposal systems, but public utility services including electrical power, natural gas, telephone and cable TV are available. Development: As attested to in the foregoing information on land use in the area, more than 80% of the area is fully committed and developed for nonresource/nonfarm uses of which the dominate uses are wood products manufacturing. The rural residential uses that exist in the area emerged more than 30 years ago in response to the needs and desires of workers to reside as close as possible to their points of employment; i.e. the major wood products firms located in the immediate vicinity within the subject Exceptions Area. The fact that the area is dominated by heavy industrial uses and is located outside the City but within a relatively close distance of not more than one mile attests to the need recognized many years ago for such uses to be somewhat buffered (separated) from more urban type use concentrations but still be within a reasonable distance thereof. Such location was also influenced by the immediate availability of rail service, and the close proximity of major highway transportation routes, both of which were already existing within the immediately adjacent Exceptions Area. ADJACENT AND AREA LAND USES: The subject Exceptions Area is surrounded by two major classes of land uses, agriculture and rural residential, although the latter occupies less adjoining lands from an acreage standpoint than does agriculture. The adjoining lands on the extreme northwest boundary of the subject Exceptions Area are committed/developed in rural residential uses occurring within a single development consisting of lots averaging approximately 10 acres each. Land uses adjoining the area along the extreme northeast boundary are predominately agricultural uses on parcels ranging in size from 40+ acres to 150 acres. Land uses in the general area adjacent to the more easterly northeast boundary of the subject area are a mixture of farm uses on parcels of 15 to 80 acres and rural residential uses on parcels averaging approximately 2 to 3 acres each. In that area lying easterly of the central portion of the subject Exceptions Area, dominate land uses are also a mixture of farm and rural residential uses on parcels of 20 to 60 acres and 1 to 5 acres respectively. Rural residential uses are by far the dominate use occurring in that area along the southeast boundary of the subject Exceptions Area, with parcel sizes ranging from 0.2 to 5.6 acres. - 132 - In direct contrast to the mixture of farm and nonfarm uses that occur in the general and adjoining areas described above, those uses bordering the subject Exceptions Area along the southern and westerly borders are predominately agricultural resource uses; i.e. with the exception of two bordering major transportation routes. EXCEPTIONS FINDINGS: In accordance with the requirements set forth by OAR 660-04 regarding Exceptions, the following Findings are set forth as the basis for the subject Northwest Industrial Exception Area. Public Need: The subject area encompasses major wood products manufacturing plants that provide important and significant employment and constitute an important and vital economic sector of the County?s overall economy. In addition, those resources provided by the existing rock quarry operations in the area constitute a vital resource to the continued development of the area. The loss of such employment opportunities would constitute a direct and absolute negative public impact, and the displacement of such extensive capital investments necessary for resource use recovery would be an unreasonable consideration. Physical Development: As attested to in the foregoing resource data, the subject area is more than 80% fully developed and committed to nonresource/nonagricultural uses. Even more significant is the fact that more than 70% of the area is developed and committed to economically benefiting industrial uses that provide publicly benefiting employment to the area. Parcel Sizes ? Ownership Patterns: The parcel size and ownership patterns that exist within the subject Exceptions Area are quite similar to those dominating both the resource and nonresource uses within the general area. Such size and ownership pattern similarities however, do not provide the basis for potential conversion to resource uses because of the high level of commitment and investment for nonresource uses. Public Facilities and Services: Although public and/or community water and sewage disposal systems are not present within the subject Exceptions Area, those public facilities and services that do exist within the subject area are considered beyond that necessary or economy adaptable to resource uses, and are more representative of facilities and services commonly limited to more nonresource developed areas. Neighborhood and Regional Characteristics: The dominate land use characteristics of the subject Exceptions Area are more reflective of an incorporated or more urban developed area than for a rural, resource dominate area. Therefore, even though the subject area is bordered on two sides by dominate resource uses, its characteristics are in direct conflict therewith. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the foregoing Findings and resource data, the Conclusions that justify and support the subject area for an Exception pursuant to the requirements set forth by OAR 660-04 are as follows: - 133 - 1) Actual land use inventory data clearly establishes the facts that the area is more than 80% fully developed and committed to nonresource uses. 2) That of the nonresource uses existing within the subject area, major industrial developments are the dominate uses and account for 77% of the total area. 3) Those industrial uses existing within the area provide important and vital economic benefits and employment opportunities, and because of those reasons alone such uses constitute an important public need. 4) The combination of the extensive development levels in the area and the public needs related thereto, preclude the consideration of the area for resource uses; physically, economically, socially, and in the public interest. 5) Even though the dominate soil types in the area are Capability Classes II, III, and IV, such lands are precluded from resource use because of existing developments and investments therefore. 6) The subject area constitutes an important element in the County?s overall goal compliance requirements, particularly as related to the requirements of the Economic Goal. - 134 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #16 AREA NAME: Northwest Prineville Industrial Area LOCATION: That part of Tax Lot 701 being the South 1/2, South 1/2, Southwest 1/4 of Section 14, Township 14 South, Range 15 East; Tax Lots 1000 and 1001 in the Southeast 1/4 of Section 15, Township 14 South, Range 15 East; Tax Lots 100, 101, and 102 of Section 22, Township 14 South, Range 15 East; Tax Lots 200 through 304, that part of Tax Lot 400 located east of Highway 26; and Tax Lots 401 through 800 of Section 23, Township 14 South, Range 15 East; Tax Lots 601 and 900 through 2100 in the Southwest 1/4 of Section 24, Township 14 South, Range 15 East; and Tax Lots 2101 through 2105 and Tax Lot 2108 in the Northwest 1/4 of Section 25, Township 14 South, Range 15 East. AREA: 526 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 42 ZONING: (H-M) Heavy Industrial PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 1/2 mile AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, private water and subsurface disposal systems, power, telephone and TV cable EXISTING LAND USES: Heavy industrial, commercial, rural residential NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: AVERAGE SIZE: N/A County records show over 100 acres of vacant land are interspersed within the existing land uses of this exception area. AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 1 ACRE: Not available ANALYSIS: This exception area is the major industrial site of Crook County. The H-M zone is considered an urban land use. The state has requested detailed mapping of the existing land uses, including an aerial photo of this area. This level of detail is beyond the scope of this project. RECOMMENDATION: The County should seek an amended Work Program to allow further analysis in accord with state directives of this area. - 135 - - 136 - - 137 - - 138 - - 139 - - 140 - - 141 - RURAL SERVICE EXCEPTION AREA AREA NAME: Post Rural Service Center LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lots 100 and 200 in Section 30, T16S, R19E. (See attached Assessor?s Map 16-19-30AD) CURRENT ZONING: Rural Service Center, RSC-1 ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: RSC-1 APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTION: Goal 2 Exception as Committed-Developed pursuant to OAR 660- 04-025 and 660-04-028. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The subject Exceptions Area is identified as the ?Post Area? and is designated as a Rural Service Center. The subject area encompasses a total of 5.53 acres as reported by current Crook County Assessor?s records comprising two (2) tax lots of 1.9 and 3.63 acres respectively, each tax lot being in a separate single ownership. Said Tax Lot 100 comprising 1.9 acres is occupied by grocery store, tavern, gas station and residence complex. Tax Lot 200 is occupied by a ?Community Hall? and associated off-street parking areas. Both uses have pre-existed for more than 50 years and service an area of 20+ miles in all directions. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Summary: The subject Exceptions Area consists of a total area of 5.53 acres committed and developed for nonresource (nonfarm) uses consisting of a commercial use and a semi-public community service use. Predominant Soil Types: As reported by the OSU Soils Department and the USDA Soil Conservation Service in a report entitled ?General Soil Map Report with Irrigable Areas ? Deschutes Drainage Basin? dated 1969 as published by the State Water Resources Board, the dominant soil type comprising the subject Exceptions Area is described as follows: ?Day-Ridgeway Soil Series; mapping unit Dr 96-98; agricultural use limitations due to high shrink-swell potential, poor workability, high clay and rock content, and strong temperature limitations; Capability Class VII.? - 142 - Topography: The topography of the subject Exceptions Area varies from nearly level terrain in the immediate locations of the existing use structures to steeply sloping areas southward towards the Crooked River and northward across the State Highway with surface outcroppings of rock and clay. LAND USE WITHIN THE EXCEPTION AREA: As described in the General Description set forth hereinbefore, the subject Exceptions Area comprises two (2) nonresource/nonfarm uses consisting of a commercial complex involving a grocery store, tavern, gas pumps and a residence, and a ?community hall? owned by a private party but available for community type uses and activities. Of the total area of 5.53 acres designated for the subject Exceptions Area, all of Tax Lot 100 (1.9 acres devoted to the commercial complex) and the major portion of Tax Lot 200 (i.e. the 2.6 acres located south of the serving Paulina-Suplee Highway) upon which the community hall is located are developed for and committed to nonresource uses; i.e. 4.5 acres or 82% of the total area is physically developed and committed to the current established nonresource uses. The approximately 1.03 acres of Tax Lot 200 located on the north side of said Highway consists of an exposed clay surface with slopes in excess of 20% which is undeveloped, and in actuality probably has little value for either nonresource or resource use and/or development. Public Facilities and Services: There are no ?public? facilities or services within the subject Exceptions Area with the exception of the serving State Highway and public utilities of telephone and electrical power. Each of the existing nonresource uses are served by individual domestic water supply and sewage disposal systems, and because of the soil limitations applicable thereto the latter requires extensive areas. Development: As attested to in the foregoing ?land use? information, more than 80% of the area designated for the subject Exception Area is developed and committed for the pre-existing nonresource uses occurring thereon. The only exception is the approximate 1.03 acres of Tax Lot 200 located on the north side of the State Highway that is basically undeveloped for nonresource use, but is physically nonadapted to resource use due to the limited area, the location, the configuration and severe soil limitations. ADJACENT AND AREA LAND USES: The subject Exceptions Area is predominately surrounded by large scale agricultural uses consisting of range-livestock operations. Although there are some more intensive type of agricultural uses in the general area in the form of irrigated cropland to the northwest and to the south across the Crooked River, the dominant resource use in the area are open-rangelands. To the immediate easterly area is a block of land owned by the State Highway Division which has previously been utilized as a maintenance and storage area. The subject Exceptions Area is buffered from resource uses in the area on the north by the State Highway and excessive terrain (steeply sloping areas), and on the southeast by the Crooked River and substantial changes in ground elevations. Resource (farm) uses in the area generally occur on land areas in excess of 160 acres. - 143 - LAND USE CONFLICTS: There are no apparent conflicts between the existing uses within the subject Exceptions Area and the area resource uses, and, in fact, the subject Exceptions Area has for more than 50 years provided a minimum of necessary and publicly beneficial services to the area. Being the only such service area within a distance of 20+ miles, the subject Exceptions Area has for some time served as a center of community activities and service for both local residents and travelers through the area. EXCEPTIONS FINDINGS: In accordance with the requirements set forth by OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 in the matter of Exceptions for ?Lands Physically Developed? and/or for ?Land Irrevocably Committed? respectively, the following Findings are set forth as applicable to the subject ?Post Area? Exceptions to Goal 3 as a Rural Service Center: Public Need: Although not a specific requirement set forth by the related Exceptions provisions, the subject Exceptions Area does specifically comply with public need factors and does contribute to compliance with other applicable Statewide Planning Goals. In this matter, the existing commercial services provided by the subject Exceptions Area do provide limited retail services unavailable without traveling a distance of 20+ miles one-way, many times during inclement weather conditions; thereby, the subject Exceptions Area does meet a public need of residents in the general area (most of which are farm [resource] operators) and to the travelers to the area. For local residents, such services assist in energy conservation furthering the Counties compliance with the applicable planning goal, and also provides services furthering the compliance with the Public Facilities/Services Goal. The existing Community Hall, even though in private ownership, also meets a public need by providing the facilities for ?community? events and activities. Physical Development: The two (2) existing nonresource/nonfarm uses located within and comprising the entire Exceptions Area, constitute uses that have been ?physically? developed for more than 50 years, and the land areas assigned thereto are considered the minimum necessary to accommodate said uses considering needs for domestic water and sewage disposal system needs, off-street parking and access, and setback areas related to the traversing State Highway. There is no question that the lands assigned to these nonresource uses are developed for and committed to such uses. Parcel Sizes ? Ownership Patterns: The fact that the entire Exception Area involves only 5.53 acres devoted to two (2) nonresource uses of separate ownerships, both of which have existed for an extended period of time, documents the fact that the land within said ?area? is no longer available for resource use. It is also clear that, with resource uses in the area being represented predominantly by parcel sizes of 160 acres or more, that the subject 5.53 acres is substantially less than would be acceptable as a ?reasonable? farm unit. In fact, area resource ownership patterns are of such scale that an area of only 5+ acres has no beneficial resource value, even if undeveloped for nonresource uses. - 144 - Neighborhood and Regional Characteristics: From a ?neighborhood? characteristic, the subject Exceptions Area has for more than 50+ years existed as the ?community-center? of the general (neighborhood) area, and is the only such facility within a distance of 20 miles. As with most rural areas of the state, such ?centers? originally evolved as the central emphasis center of the area providing minimum services, a community focal point, and other amenities during times when large travel distances posed social and economical hardships. Although large travel distances are easily negotiable today, such ?centers? have (and will) continue to provide the basis for many of these ?neighborhood? characteristics. On a regional basis, many similar ?centers? exist, and provide minimal but important goods and services, both to local residents and to travelers to the area. Although the ?area? is characterized predominately as a large-scale range livestock producing area, the needs for and importance of the type of services and focus that such a ?center? provides cannot be discounted. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the foregoing Findings, the following Conclusions justify the designation of the subject area as a ?Rural Service Center Exceptions Area? pursuant to the requirements set forth by OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 as a ?Developed and/or Committed? Exceptions Area: 1) The area encompassed by the subject Exceptions Area is, and has been for an extended period of time, fully developed and committed to the nonresource uses that exist therein. 2) The limited land area assigned and committed to the subject uses occurring within said Exception Area are the considered the minimum necessary to accommodate said uses and the related accessory, secondary and support uses thereof. 3) Displacement of the existing uses would constitute an excessive and unreasonable private expense that would not be beneficial to resource uses in the area, but would be in fact detrimental to the farm (resource) residents of the area and to the public in general. 4) Even without the commitment to nonresource uses, the predominant soils comprising the Exceptions Area site are of Capability Class VII+ and of little resource value. 5) In addition to the physical soil limitations for resource use, the subject area is precluded from resource use due to the limited area involved, the geographical and manmade separations and barriers between other resource uses, and the excessive costs of reclamation for resource use. 6) All evidence establishes the facts that the subject Exceptions Area is, and has been for more than 50+ years, physically developed and committed to uses not specifically permitted by the applicable Statewide Planning Goal 3, and therefore, the subject area can no longer be considered available for uses allowed by said Goal 3. - 145 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #17 AREA NAME: Post Rural Service Center LOCATION: Township 16 South, Range 19 East, Section 30, Tax Lots 100, 200, and 299 AREA: 6.84 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 3 ZONING: (RSC-1) Rural Service Center PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 20 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, power, and telephone. Private water and subsurface sewage disposal. EXISTING LAND USES: Residential, commercial, community hall NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 1 AVERAGE SIZE: 1.00 acre Tax Lot 299 AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 1 ACRE: 1 ANALYSIS: This is an existing Rural Service Center on the Paulina-Suplee Highway. The likelihood of urban development is remote. However, the RSC zone does allow urban uses. RECOMMENDATION: The County should take a Goal 14 exception for this area. A Goal 3 exception has already been taken and acknowledged. - 146 - - 147 - RURAL SERVICE EXCEPTION AREA AREA NAME: West Powell Butte Rural Service Center LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lots 1300, 1301, 1302 and 1303 in Section 22, T15S, R14E (See attached Assessor?s Map 15-14-22) CURRENT ZONING: Rural Service Center, RSC-1. ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: RSC-1 APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTION: Goal 2 Exception as Committed-Developed Area OAR 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The subject Exception Area is identified as the ?West Powell Butte Area? and is designated as a Rural Service Center. The subject area encompasses a total of only 1.37 acres as reported by current Crook County Assessor?s records comprising four (4) tax lots ranging in size from 0.19 acres to 0.53 acres. The four (4) tax lots represent only two (2) individual ownerships, but are occupied by a commercial retail mini-market and gas station, a U.S. Post Office and three (3) dwelling units. All of these uses have existed for more than 40 years, although the Post Office is a recent replacement for a previously existing facility. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Summary: The subject Exception Area consists of a total area of 1.37 acres committed and developed for nonfarm uses as clearly evidenced by current and past County Assessor?s records. Said uses are commercial, semi-public and nonfarm residential. Predominant Soil Types: As reported by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in the document entitled the Soil Survey-Prineville Area dated February 1966, the dominant soil types comprising the subject area includes the following: 1) The approximate west 1/2 of the subject area is comprised of a soil type identified as Deschutes sandy loam and described as moderately deep sandy loam soil over hardpan with slopes of 0-2 percent; the reported agricultural use Capability Class is IIIe-1. - 148 - 2) The approximate east 1/2 of the subject area is comprised of a soil type identified as Bakeoven very stony sandy loam soil, with slopes of 0-2 percent in that particular location; the reported agricultural use Capability Class is VIIs-2 with extreme agricultural use limitations due to soil depth (8-12 inches over bedrock), an irrigation suitability rating of very difficult, and cultivation impractical. LAND USE WITHIN EXCEPTION AREA: As described in the General Description set forth hereinbefore, the subject Exception Area comprises a mixture of nonfarm uses including commercial, semi-public and residential. Of the total acreage of 1.37 acres, 24% (0.32 acres) is committed/developed to an existing commercial mini-market/gas station use, 14% (0.19 acres) is committed/developed for a residence and U.S. Post Office, and the remaining 60% (0.81 acres ? 2 tax lots) is committed/developed for a single- family nonfarm residence. The following is a summary of such land uses by Tax Lot as reported by the current Crook County Assessor?s records: LAND USE SUMMARY BY TAX LOT (All on Assessor?s Map 15-14-22) TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES 1300 Private Commercial 0.32 1301 Private Resid/Comm 0.19 1302 Private Residential 0.28 1303 Private Combined w/ 1302 0.53 TOTAL: 1.37 Public Facilities ? Services: Public facilities serving the subject area are limited to State Highway 126 which passes by the subject area on the northern boundary in an east-west direction (an arterial providing the primary access route from Redmond to Prineville and other major points both east and west), and two (2) paved County Roads intersecting with said State Highway at the northwest corner of the subject Exception Area (Bozarth Road providing access to the north, and the Powell Butte ?Highway? providing access to the south and being a major route to the Bend area of Deschutes County. No other public facilities except electrical and telephone are available, with domestic water and sewage disposal being provided to each of the existing uses by private individual systems. Development: As attested to in the foregoing ?land use? information, all of the area (1.37 acres) designated for the subject Exception Area is ?fully? committed and developed for nonresource use. Even though Tax Lot 1303 is combined with Tax Lot 1302 as a single ownership residential use, the total area of 0.81 acres assigned thereto is the absolute minimum necessary to accommodate the affected dwelling unit and its associated individual domestic water and sewage disposal systems. Both of the other uses are established on extremely limited land areas (0.32 acres and 0.19 acres), and considered the ?absolute? minimum necessary to accommodate such and the required supporting domestic water, sewage disposal and off-street parking facilities. - 149 - ADJACENT AND AREA LAND USES: The subject Exception Area is predominantly surrounded by agricultural land uses in parcels ranging in size from 36.7 acres to 114.89 acres with the average parcel size being 60.74 acres. Dominate uses on the immediately adjacent lands (with the exception of the right-of-ways of the adjoining State Highway and County Powell Butte Highway) are agricultural consisting primarily of irrigated hay-pasture lands. The dominant agricultural uses occurring in the area are comprised of field sizes of 30 acres and more, and require irrigation to be productive. No apparent conflicts are evident between the existing uses located within the subject Exceptions Area and those agricultural uses occurring on the adjacent/surrounding agricultural (resource) lands in the area. In fact, the subject Exceptions Area provides important, long-standing services to the area agricultural operations in the immediate and general area. EXCEPTIONS FINDINGS: In accordance with the requirements set forth by OAR 660-04 regarding Exceptions in general, and more specifically as required by Exceptions for ?Land Physically Developed? and/or for ?Land Irrevocably Committed? as set forth by OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 respectively, the following Findings are set forth as a basis for the subject West Powell Butte Exception Area. Public Need: The subject Exceptions Area?s designation as a Rural Service Center is directly related to the services and functions that the area provides for the general Powell Butte community area and to the traveling public. Particularly, the U.S. Post Office facility located within the subject Exceptions Area provides a needed public service that is only available at alternate locations in the cities of Prineville and Redmond (13 and 11 miles one-way respectively), and without such a service in this location, local and area residents would have to travel substantial distances to receive this needed public service. Because the closure of such a public service use would insure increased energy costs to receive such service, and because the loss of such service on a community basis further isolates rural farm and nonfarm residents (which has already occurred in many rural locations of the state), the maintenance of this service as an integral part of this overall Exceptions Area is concluded to constitute a public need factor. In addition to the provision of this identified public service need, the uses occurring within the subject Exceptions Area also provide limited retail goods and gasoline services. Physical Development: The nonfarm/nonresource uses occurring within the subject Exceptions Area have existed for an extended period of time (40+ years), even though one (1) use (i.e. the U.S. Post Office facility) has recently been established as a replacement use. All of the existing uses are developed upon limited land areas (8,276 sq. ft. to 35,284 sq. ft.), all of which are considered the absolute minimums necessary to accommodate the uses occurring thereon; particularly since each of the existing uses must rely on individual systems for domestic water and sewage disposal, and must therefore have at least enough land area to accommodate such systems and necessary replacement systems. In conclusion, the limited land areas ?committed? to the existing nonresource uses are fully developed for those purposes. - 150 - Parcel Sizes ? Ownership Patterns: The dominant factor relating to parcel sizes and ownership patterns within the subject Exceptions Area is that the entire area totals only 1.37 acres, and that limited area represents three (3) distinct nonresource uses for an overall density of only 0.46 acres per use. Relative thereto, the average farm (resource) parcel size in the immediate and general area is 60.47 acres, with the minimum being 36.7 acres. Therefore, even with the total removal of all nonresource uses and the total consolidation of the subject properties into a single land unit, such would not be evenly remotely large enough to accommodate an effective resource use. Even though Tax Lot 1303 is technically classified as a ?vacant? parcel by the County Assessor?s records, that parcel is in a combined ownership with Tax Lot 1302, and does contain the sewage disposal system serving the nonfarm residence located on said Tax Lot 1302; further, said Tax Lot 1303 (containing only 0.53 acres) is of such configuration that resource use thereof would be prohibitive (an elongated triangle with the widest dimension being approximately 114 feet). Public Facilities and Services: Although the type of individual public facilities and services necessary to serve each of the existing uses located within the subject Exceptions Area, particularly domestic water and sewage disposal systems, are of the same general type as those that serve resource uses, such systems are installed on such limited land areas as to preclude the use of such areas for resource uses. The fact that the subject Exceptions Area is also located at a major intersection of a State Highway and two County Roads, supports the continuance of the services provided to the traveling public and local residents, and constitutes a level of transportation services not necessary for normal resource uses in the area and a situation which would be hazardous to resource uses and associated farm equipment traffic. Neighborhood and Regional Characteristics: From a ?neighborhood? characteristic, the subject Exceptions Area exists (and has for an extended period of time ? 40+ years) as one of the two primary rural service centers providing minimum retail, fuel and postal services to that area of Crook County identified as the Powell Butte Community. The location at an intersection to two major transportation routes also provides important services to the travelers through that area. The subject Exceptions Area represents a type of rural service center located at a major highway intersection that is not only common throughout rural areas of the state, but one that provides important and minimum services to local residents and travelers alike. Such centers are on the decline in the state resulting in increases in energy services provided thereby. Therefore, the subject rural center not only represents a distinct type of rural service center within the ?neighborhood? in which it is located, but represents a type of service center which is common (but becoming less so) and important to both nonresource and resource operators/residents within the area served. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the foregoing Findings, the Conclusions that justify the continuance and designation of the subject area as a ?Developed and Committed? Exceptions Area pursuant to OAR?s 660-04- 025 and 660-04-028 are as follows: 1) Each and every parcel located within the subject area is, and has been for an extended period to time, ?fully? developed and committed to the nonresource uses to which each parcel is currently devoted. - 151 - 2) Even though approximately 50% of the designated area is of a soil type conducive to resource (agricultural) use, the pre-existence of the commercial and semi- public uses located thereon preclude such resource use. 3) In addition to the low capability class of the eastern 50% of the area included within the designated Exceptions Area, that area is committed to nonresource use by the pre-existence of a nonresource residential use, the configuration of the only vacant part of that ownership, and the existence of the required sewage disposal system for the subject use. 4) Whereas the average resource parcel size in the area is 30+ acres, even the complete displacement of all of the existing nonresource uses within the subject Exceptions Area and the consolidation of all of the parcels located therein into a single ownership (resulting in a total ownership of 1.37 acres) would not constitute a parcel of any reasonable size for resource use. 5) Relocation of the primary uses occurring within the subject Exceptions Area would constitute an unreasonable and excessive cost, both publicly and privately, and be of no benefit to the resource use of the area. 6) The foregoing Findings clearly establish the facts that the area is, and has been for an extended period of time, physically developed and committed with certain uses not specifically permitted by the applicable Goal 3 resource goal, and therefore the subject area cannot be considered available for resource uses permitted by said Goal 3. - 152 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #18 AREA NAME: West Powell Butte Rural Service Center LOCATION: Tax Lots 1300, 1301, 1302, and 1303 in Section 22, Township 15 South, Range 14 East AREA: 1.37 acre PARCELS/LOTS: 4 ZONING: (RSC) Rural Service Center PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 9 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads; private water and subsurface sewage disposal; telephone and power EXISTING LAND USES: Residential, commercial and governmental (Post Office) NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 0 AVERAGE SIZE: N/A AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 1 ACRE: 0 ANALYSIS: This is an existing Rural Service Center on Highway 126. There is no likelihood of further development. However, the RSC zone allows urban uses. RECOMMENDATION: The County should take a Goal 14 exception for this area. A Goal 3 exception has already been taken and acknowledged. - 153 - RURAL SERVICE EXCEPTION AREA AREA NAME: Paulina Rural Service Center LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lots 100 thru 2800 in the NE 1/4 NE 1/4 of Section 4, and Tax Lots 101, 200 (part of), 300, 400, 401 and 500 in the NW 1/4 NE 1/4 of Section 4, all in T17S, R23E. (See attached Assessor?s Maps 17-23-4-Detail and 17-23-4AA) CURRENT ZONING: Tax Lots 100 ? 2800 (Map 17-23-4AA): RSC-1 Tax Lots 101 ? 500 (Map 17-23-4-Detail): EFU-1 ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: Rural Service Center, RSC-1 (all Tax Lots) APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTION: Goal 2 Exception as Committed-Developed Area OAR 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The subject Exception Area is identified as the Paulina Area and is designated as a Rural Service Center. Said area exists as the unincorporated platted townsite and other adjoining nonresource uses constituting the ?rural? community of Paulina in the extreme easterly part of Crook County. With the exception of the State Highway and County Road rights-of-ways, the entire area encompasses a total land area of 18.59 acres representing 40 individual Tax Lots for an average overall density of 0.47 acres per taxing unit. In general, the area is represented by a wide range of nonresource uses including a grade school, a community hall, a grocery store-gas station- tavern-post office complex, a county road department shop complex, public utilities installations, not less than 17 residences, and four (4) commercial-home occupation type uses such as repair shops and services. The vast majority of these uses, or at least the structures in which they occur, have existed for extended periods of time (30 to 50+ years). PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Summary: The subject Exception Area consists of a total area of 18.59 acres developed and committed to nonresource uses, plus 10.78 acres of public highway, road and street rights-of- way, for a total nonresource committed-developed area of 29.37 acres. Developed nonresource uses include commercial, public, semi-public and nonfarm residential. - 154 - Predominant Soil Types: As reported by the OSU Soils Department and USDA Soil Conservation Service in a report entitled ?General Soil Map Report with Irrigable Areas ? Deschutes Drainage Basin? dated 1969 as published by the State Water Resources Board, the dominant soil types comprising the subject Exceptions Area are described as follows: 1) More than 90% of the area is mapped as Soil Classification Unit 83 consisting of very shallow, rocky, very stony, well drained soils over basalt, rhyolite or welded tuff. Their agricultural use is limited by stones, depth and temperature extremes, and are unsuited for irrigation or cultivation in their natural state. No capability class is reported, but has been interpreted from soils properties, qualities and interpretations charts to be a Class V to VI. 2) Less than 10% of the area along the easterly and southerly boundaries is mapped as Soil Classification Unit 1 consisting of deep, well drained, medium-textured soils derived from recent alluviums on nearly level fans and bottomlands. Such soils are well suited to irrigation, but the temperature limitations are severe. No capability class is reported, but has been interpreted from soils properties, qualities and interpretations charts to be a Class III to IV. Topography: The topography of the subject Exception Area varies from nearly level to gently sloping areas with slopes of 3 to 7 percent. The more steeply sloping areas are located along the north right-of-way line of the traversing State Highway in the northern portion of the subject Exceptions Area, and do not impact any of the existing developments. LAND USE WITHIN EXCEPTION AREA: Summary: As described briefly in the General Description set forth hereinbefore, the subject Exceptions Area comprises a various number of nonresource/nonfarm uses, including commercial, public, semi-public, and residential. Of the total area of 29.37 acres, 37% or 10.78 acres is devoted to highway and street right-of-ways, 22% or 6.28 acres is committed to the existing school and county road shop complex (equally divided), 2% or 0.45 acres is committed to semi-public uses including a community hall, a church and telephone and electrical utility?s installations, 4% or 0.95 acres is developed for and committed to commercial uses, and the remaining 38% or 10.91 acres is committed to nonfarm residents. Original Townsite: The original platted ?townsite? comprised a total area of approximately 10.74 acres consisting of 46 lots measuring 40? x 114? of 4,560 square feet each totaling 4.82 acres, 7 lots of various sizes averaging 0.14 acres or 6,100 square feet each totaling 0.96 acres, and highway and street right-of-ways totaling 4.96 acres. The size of these originally platted lots of course proved to be ?too? small to accommodate individual domestic wells and sewage disposal systems, and therefore, in nearly all cases 2 to 4 lots have been combined to satisfactorily accommodate a single family dwelling unit. Therefore, in spite of the originally planned 53 lot townsite, said area in reality accommodates only approximately 20 individual dwellings, commercial and semi-public uses. - 155 - Additional Areas: In addition to the committed-developed area encompassed by the original townsite, immediately adjoining areas totaling 18.63 aces have been developed and committed to nonfarm/nonresource uses. These uses are dominated by the existing public school (3.25 acres), the county road shop complex (3.03 acres), and state and county road right-of-ways (5.82 acres), for a total of 12.10 acres or 65% of the total area of the subject Exception Area not a part of the original townsite. The remaining 35% or 6.53 acres of the subject Exception Area that are not a part of the original townsite are predominately developed for and committed to nonfarm/nonresource residential uses on lots ranging in size from 0.3 acres to 1.61 acres. The only exceptions thereto are that portion of Tax Lot 200 (map 17-23-4-Detail) lying between the Paulina-Suplee Highway and County Road No. 131 that is undeveloped, and those portions of Tax Lot 800 (map 17-23-4AA) lying northwest of said Paulina-Suplee Highway and between said Highway and County Road No. 131; these three (3) undeveloped areas total approximately 4.33 acres, or only 1.5% of the total area of the subject Exceptions Area. The major portions of these three (3) areas, at least those two areas located between the state and county road right-of- ways are considered unavailable for development or use for either resource or nonresource use because of their locations and configurations relative to right-of-way setback requirements. Land Use Summary By Tax Lot: MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES Map 17-23-4AA 100 Private Farm/Resid 0.10 190 Private Comb. w/TL100 0.15 200 Private Comb. w/TL100 0.09 290 Private Comb. w/TL100 0.08 300 Private Commercial 0.16 400 Private Comb. w/TL300 0.14 500 Semi-Public Community Hall 0.12 600 Private Comm/Resid 0.25 601 Private Comm/Resid 0.10 700 Private Commercial 0.13 800 Private Res/Vacant 1.70 801 Public School 0.05 900 Semi-Public Church 0.23 1000 Private Residential 0.16 1001 Semi-Public Pub. Utility 0.04 1002 Private Residential 0.23 1100 Private Residential 0.41 1200 Private Commercial 0.31 1300 Private Residential 0.31 1400 Private Residential 0.10 1500 Private Comb. w/TL1400 0.10 1600 Private Comb. w/TL1400 0.10 1700 Private Residential 0.31 1800 Private Resid/Vacant 0.21 1900 Private Residential 0.42 - 156 - MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES Map 17-23-4AA Cont. 2000 Private Residential 0.21 2100 Private Residential 0.10 2200 Private Comb. w/TL2100 0.10 2300 Private Comb. w/TL2100 0.21 2400 Private Residential 0.10 2500 Private Residential 0.40 2600 Public School 0.05 2700 Public School 3.15 2800 Private Residential 0.31 Map 17-23-4-Detail 101 Private Residential 0.30 200 (part of) Private Farm/Vacant 2.30 300 Public Co. Road Dept. 3.03 400 Private Residential 1.61 401 Private Residential 0.66 500 Semi-Public Pub. Utility 0.06 TOTAL 18.59 Land Use Summary By Major Use Class: NO. OF TAX LOTS USE CLASS TOTAL ACRES % OF TOTAL 4 Farm/Resid 0.42 3.0% 4 Commercial 0.74 4.0% 2 Comm/Resid 0.35 2.0% 5 Semi-Public 0.45 3.0% 4 Public 6.28 34.0% 19 Residential 6.14 32.0% 2 Resid/Vacant 1.91 10.0% 1 Farm/Vacant 2.30 12.0% 45 TOTALS 18.59 100.0% Public Facilities and Services: Even though the subject Exceptions Area more closely represents a small-rural city vs. a rural commercial service center, none of those public facilities and services common to most small cities are evident. There is not any municipal or community type services such as water or sewer systems, and each existing individual use relies on individual domestic water and sewage disposal systems. Even though the area is not served by community water or sewerage systems, the main street is an improved paved street, and other streets are improved with gravel surfaces. Other public or semi-public facilities and services provided include a community hall, a church, a grade school, a post office, and public utilities including telephone and electrical power. ADJACENT AND AREA LAND USES: The subject Exceptions Area is predominately surrounded by large scale agricultural uses consisting of range-livestock operations. Although there is some more intensive type of - 157 - agricultural uses occurring on the immediately adjoining lands to the south in the form of cropland, the dominant resource uses in the area are open-rangelands. There has, however, been some more intensive cropland development in the general area as a result of some deep well developments for irrigation, such developments are primarily located some three (3)+ miles to the east of the subject Exceptions Area. More intensive agriculture in the area is predominately limited by the area?s high elevation of approximately 4,000 feet and the resulting extreme temperature limitations and short growing season; in fact, frost in July is not an uncommon occurrence. Because of the nature of the agriculture in the area, base properties for such uses are commonly of 160 acres and larger, with the immediately adjoining agricultural properties averaging 265 acres in size. LAND USE CONFLICTS: There are not now, nor have there ever been, any apparent conflicts between the uses occurring within the subject Exceptions Area and the adjoining and area resource uses. In fact, the subject Exceptions Area is considered a vital and integral part of the overall ?community? structure. Said Exceptions Area provides a minimum level of services to a ?community area? that is isolated from other service centers by distances of 50+ miles, with hazardous travel common in the winter time. The recognition of this general area of the County as the ?Paulina Area? is a direct reflection of the importance of the subject Exceptions Area to that region, and is even the basis for a number of annual events and activities, one of which (the Paulina Rodeo) is well-known on a state and regional basis. DEVELOPMENT: As attested to the foregoing information and statistical data, nearly 80% of the total area designated for the subject Exceptions Area is fully developed and committed to nonresource/nonfarm uses. The only exceptions are two (2) residentially classified lots totaling 1.91 acres (Tax Lots 800 and 1800 of Map 17-23-4AA of 1.7 and 0.21 acres respectively), and a part of Tax Lot 200 of Map 17-23-4-Detail comprising 2.3 acres classified as vacant/?farm?. Said Tax Lot 800 is divided by the right-of-way of the Paulina-Suplee State Highway in such a manner that only approximately 1.7 acres is considered usable for any purpose, nonresource or otherwise, said Tax Lot 1800 contains only 0.21 acres and is located within the interior of the fully developed original townsite, and that portion of said Tax Lot 200 is so located between the right-of-ways of the Paulina-Suplee State Highway and County Road No. 131 and is of such configuration that no reasonable use of said property for any private purpose is considered feasible. Although the subject Exceptions Area is not served by public facilities such as a water or sewer system, it is served by improved streets and concentrations of telephone and electrical services. - 158 - EXCEPTIONS FINDINGS: In accordance with the requirements set forth by OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 regarding Exceptions for ?Land Physically Developed? and for ?Land Irrevocably Committed? respectively, the following Findings are set forth as the basis for the subject Paulina Exception Area. There is also evidence of ?Public Needs? relative to the designation of the subject area as an Exceptions Area. Public Need: The area?s designation as a Rural Service Center is a direct reflection of the functions and services that the area provides to ?in-area? and general area residents, both farm and nonfarm. Such ?public needs? are clearly identifiable, and include the grade school, the county road maintenance shop complex, the grocery/gas station complex, the community hall, the church, certain repair and service commercial uses, and the post office. Without these services being available within the subject Exceptions Area, residents would be required to travel additional distances as much as 100+ miles roundtrip; a particularly significant concern relative to such services is the fact that grade school children in the general area would have to travel great distances during inclement weather conditions to obtain public educational services if the subject Exceptions Area was not so located. The displacement of the subject Exceptions Area would also be detrimental to the agricultural (resource) operations in the area due to the loss of available housing for many residents that are employed by said operations. The loss of semi-public services such as the community hall and the church would also constitute a social adversity to the area. Physical Development: As clearly established by the foregoing information and statistical data, the subject Exceptions Area constitutes an area that is ?fully? developed and committed to nonresource uses. Even though a number of ?duly? platted lots and parcels have been combined to effectively accommodate single nonresource uses, the resulting areas remain substantially small for any effective resource use. It is also important to recognize that the vast majority of existing nonresource uses within the subject Exceptions Area have pre-existed for an extended period of time (i.e. 40 to 50+ years). It is also important to recognize that total displacement of the subject Exceptions Area would only result in the production of the subject availability of 18.59 acres, certainly not considered of any resource use benefit relative to the predominate agricultural unit sizes in the immediate and general area. Parcel Sizes ? Ownership Patterns: The fact that the total Exception area totals only 29.37 acres (including right-of-ways for a State Highway and a County Road), and that the actual nonresource developed/committed area totals only 18.59 acres that is developed and committed to not less than 30 individual nonresource uses precludes the recovery for any effective resource use. Even though the overall density of the area is only 0.62 acres per nonresource use, many of the individual parcels for such uses are less than 0.25 acres. This pattern of ownership/parcel sizes within the subject Exceptions Area is significantly less than the average farm (resource) use size of 260+ acres in the immediate area. - 159 - Public Facilities and Services: Public facilities and services within the subject Exceptions Area are limited, but do include such ?community? nonresource related types of uses such as the community hall, post office, church, school and public (county) road maintenance shop complex. Domestic water and sewer disposal are limited to individual systems for each existing individual use within the subject area, however the main access routes to and through the subject area are paved and publicly maintained. Neighborhood and Regional Characteristics: From a ?neighborhood? characteristic, the subject Exception Area exists (and has for an extended period of time) as the ?community focal point? and ?center? of that area of the County identified as the ?Paulina Country?. The ?community? of Paulina, originating as a platted townsite, represents a type of rural center common throughout the rural areas of the State, some of which are incorporated cities, and some (like Paulina) of which remain unincorporated. In both cases, these existing rural centers exist because of the important roles, public needs and services provided thereby to the neighborhoods, community areas and regions within which they are located. These ?centers?, like the Paulina Exception Area, are not only fully developed for the nonresource uses to which they are committed, but provide direct and beneficial support services to the resource uses which occur within the same general area. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the foregoing Findings, information and statistical data, the Conclusions that follow justify the subject area for an Exception pursuant to the requirements of OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028: 1) Because of the long standing pre-existence of the nonresource uses within the subject Exception Area, particularly such uses as the mercantile store, community hall, school, post office, church, county road maintenance shop, and public utility installations, there is an identified public need and benefit for the subject rural center at its particular location. 2) Displacement or other unreasonable restrictions on the continuance of the subject Exception Area as a rural service center would remove an important ?community center, focus and service? to the surrounding area, and constitute an adverse impact on social, educational and economic aspects of the ?area? served, including adverse impacts on primary resource uses in the area. 3) Displacement, relocation and excessive restrictions of the dominate nonresource uses located within the subject Exceptions Area would constitute unreasonable and excessive costs and hardships, both publicly and privately, and equally applicable to resource and nonresource uses in the area. 4) As presented in the foregoing Findings and supportive information, nearly 80% of the total area assigned to the subject Exceptions Area?s ?Rural Service Guide? designation is fully developed and irrevocably committed to the nonresource uses that exist at the present time. Because many of the existing nonresource uses to which the area is developed and committed are not uses specifically permitted by - 160 - the applicable Goal 3 resource goal, therefore the subject area cannot be considered available for uses specifically permitted by said Goal. 5) The foregoing Findings and supportive information clearly establish the facts that the subject Exceptions Area, in its entirety, is, and has been for an extended period of time, physically developed and committed to nonresource uses. This conclusion fully supports the following conclusion that the area is irrevocably committed to nonresource uses. 6) The subject area is not only physically developed and irrevocably committed to nonresource uses, but there is an established public need for the uses existing therein, and such uses do (in fact) directly benefit and support the continuance of major resource uses in the area. - 161 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #19 AREA NAME: Paulina Rural Service Center LOCATION: Tax Lots 100 through 2800 in the Northeast 1/4, Northeast 1/4 of Section 4, and Tax Lots 101, 200 (part of), 300, 400, 401, and 500 in the Northwest 1/4, Northeast 1/4 of Section 4, all in Township 17 South, Range 23 East. AREA: 29.37 acres including roads PARCELS/LOTS: 45 ZONING: (RSC-1) Rural Service Center PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 47 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads; private water and subsurface sewage disposal; power and telephone EXISTING LAND USES: Residential, commercial, governmental NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 10 AVERAGE SIZE: 0.28 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 1 ACRE: 1 ANALYSIS: This is a rural unincorporated community. There are 17 residences, commercial services, an elementary school, and other governmental service. Paulina serves as the Rural Service Center of this portion of Crook County. There is little likelihood of major development occurring there. However, the RSC zone allows urban uses. RECOMMENDATION: The County should take an exception to Goal 14 for this area. A Goal 3 exception has already been taken and acknowledged. - 162 - - 163 - ?RURAL? RECREATION RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION AREA AREA NAME: Ochoco Reservoir Recreation Residential Area LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Tax Lots 302, 303 and 600 thru 706 in Section 27, T14S, R17E (See attached Map 14-17-27); Those portions of Tax Lot 100 located in the NE4SW4, S2SW4NE4 & SE4NE4, and Tax Lots 101 thru 900 in Section 33, T14S, R17E (See attached Map 14-17- 33); All Tax Lots in Section 33, T14S, R17E, included in the attached Map 14-17-33DA; Tax Lots 100 thru 2200 in Section 33, T14S, R17E, included in the attached Map 14-17-33CD; Tax Lots 100, 101, and 300 thru 1004 in Section 34 of T14S, R17E (See attached Map 14-17-34); and, That portion of Tax Lot 200 located in NW4NW4 and the W2NE4NW4, Tax Lot 103, and Tax Lots 105 thru 300 in Section 35 of T14S, R17E (See attached Map 14- 17-35). CURRENT ZONING: Rural Residential ZONING AFTER EXCEPTION: Rural Residential APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL: Goal 3 ? Agricultural Lands GOAL EXCEPTION: Goal 2 Exception as Committed-Developed Area pursuant to OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 and as ?nonresource? lands. GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The subject Exception Area is identified as the Ochoco Reservoir ?Rural? Recreation Residential Area, and is so designated. The subject area encompasses a total of 584.61 acres as reported by current Crook County Assessor?s records, including 56.03 acres (i.e. 10%) that is included within the right-of-ways of State Highway 26 (an Access Oregon Highway), a County Road (Mill Creek Road), and a number of privately developed subdivision roads. The general area has developed over the past 30+ years primarily as a combination of rural and recreational residences, and recreationally oriented commercial uses, including a primary and heavily used State Park. The only exceptions to these primary uses in the area are a resource related commercial use and a specialized ?hobby-type? ostrich farm. The attracting, base resource and primary demand for the area?s development is the Ochoco Reservoir, one of the few major water resources in the entire area that was developed with the total shoreline retained in private lake-front properties (i.e. with the exception of the noted State Park). Such an amenity, in combination with the facts that the area is only six (6) miles from the City of Prineville, is served by a major State Highway, is a dominate recreation resource area, and has little (if any) alternate resource values due to soil and - 164 - topographical limitations, are paramount reasons of the area?s existing and continued demand for nonresource use and development. PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION: Summary: The subject Exceptions Area consists of a total area of 584.61 acres, all located along the north shore area of the Ochoco Reservoir six miles east of the City of Prineville. The area is predominately committed and developed for nonresource recreationally oriented residential and commercial uses, and those lands presently undeveloped are clearly identified as nonresource lands due to soil and topographical limitations. Predominant Soil Types: Dominate soil types comprising the subject area are reported by the USDA Soil Conservation Service in two separate documents: 1) A document entitled the ?General Soil Map Report with Irrigable Areas ? Deschutes Drainage Basin? dated 1969; and 2) A document entitled the ?Soil Survey ? Prineville Area, Oregon? dated 1966. As reported in these two documents, the following soil types are dominant in the subject Exceptions Area: 1) The vast majority of the area, comprising all of the area except the extreme east portion and totaling approximately 511 acres or 88% of the total area, is dominated by a soils mapping unit classified as Unit 96-76/5-6 and described as follows: ?Unit 96: A land unit consisting of rock outcrops and rough steeply sloping, shallow, very stony soils. Such lands occur as canyons and escarpments along margins and dissected portions of lava plateaus or as buttes and volcanic cones. Soils of this unit are unsuited for agricultural use? and have a Capability Rating of VIII. The sub-unit of soils mapping unit 96-76 is Unit 76, which occurs as the ?secondary? soils unit of the subject mapping unit, is described as follows: ?Unit 76 consists of shallow clayey, very stony, well drained soils over basalt, rhyolite or welded tuff. They occur on gently undulating to rolling lava plateaus and some very steep faulted, and dissected terrain. They have little potential for agricultural use? and have a Capability Rating of VII and VIII. Also occurring in small pockets or depressions located within the foregoing Soils Unit 96-76 in this area of the subject Exceptions Area, are minor occurrences of a soils unit identified as the Gem Soil Series that ?consists of moderately deep, well drained, very stony soils derived from basalt. These soils have limited potential for open range use, but are unsuited for cultivation or irrigation;? Class VI-VII. 2) The extreme east portion of the subject Exception Area comprising approximately 74 acres (12% of the total area) is an area that is comprised of a large number of soil types occurring in small areas of one to ten acres in size. Soils reported in this area included the following: Ontko clay loam with a Capability Class of IVw; Polly loam with a Capability Class of II-III; Polly sandy loam with a Capability Class of III-IV; Powder loam with a Capability Class of II; Veazie loam with a Capability Class of III; Veazie-Riverwash complex with a Capability Class of VIII; Riverwash with a Capability Class of VIII; and Rock land with a - 165 - Capability Class of VII-VIII. Even though much of this area is dominated by soils with agricultural capability ratings of II to IV, considerable acreages are already committed and developed for nonresource uses (approximately 40 acres or 54%) and of the remaining 34 acres (46%) of the area, approximately 75% or 25 acres is subject to surface water overflow and high water table during periods that the reservoir is at capacity, precluding both resource and nonresource uses. Topography: As can be determined from the foregoing soils information for the subject area, the area is dominated by steeply sloping terrain with frequent rock outcroppings. Native vegetation is characterized as a mixture of juniper, sagebrush and minor occurrences of native grasses and shrubs. Such severe terrain features are less in the eastern portion of the subject area in which the dominant topographic features are gently sloping lowlands along the reservoir and stream channel areas. LAND USE WITHIN EXCEPTION AREA: As described in the General Description set forth hereinbefore, the subject Exception Area is dominated by a mixture of rural and recreationally oriented residential and commercial uses. Other dominant uses in the area include the existing State Park and the major State Highway. Of the total area of 584.61 acres, 394.38 acres or 68% is considered developed and/or committed to nonresource uses, and the remaining 190.23 acres or 32% is almost totally dominated by ?nonresource? classified lands as established by the Class VII and VIII Capability Ratings thereof. The following is a summary of the land use classifications of the lands within the subject Exceptions Area by major land uses as reported by current County Assessor?s records: - 166 - LAND USE CLASS NO. TAX LOTS TOTAL ACRES % OF TOTAL Rec. Residential* 49 103.85 17.8% Rec/Res. Tracts** 32 169.52 29.0% Public (St. Park) 1 11.50 2.0% Mobile Hm. Park 1 2.75 0.5% Highways/Roads 6 56.03 9.6% Vacant/Undeveloped**** 5 190.23 32.5% TOTALS 108 584.61 100.0% * Those lots classified as Rec. Residential Lots are those lots upon which a residential dwelling is currently located. ** Those lots classified as Rec/Res. Tracts include tracts of land which are less than 5-acres in size or lots located within a duly platted/approved subdivision to which services and improvements such as roads, water, electrical, telephone, etc. have been installed. Such includes the following subdivisions: North Shore Estates: 7 lots/14.14 acres. Ochoco Lake Lots: 6 lots/2.87 acres. Mill Crk. Ranches: 6 lots/141.74 acres. *** Those lots classified as Rec. Commercial are all developed and include such uses as RV Parks, Restaurants, Grocery Stores, a Marina, and Boat Supply Services. **** Those lands classified as Vacant/Undeveloped lands are all lands that are dominated by soils with SCS Agricultural Capability Classes of VI, VII and VIII, with the latter being the dominate capability class. In summary, the total Exception Area of 584.61 acres is dominated by ?committed/developed? nonresource uses totaling 394.38 acres or 67.5% of the total area. The remaining 190.23 acres is dominated by lands classified as ?nonresource? lands because of the SCS Capability Classifications thereof. The entire area is almost totally separated and buffered from resource land uses by severe topographical features and manmade structures such as the Ochoco Reservoir itself. The overall density of the entire Exception Area is only 1:5.41 with the vast majority of ?individual-separate? ownerships being less than 5 acres. In relation thereto, resource uses that occur in the general area involve ownerships in excess of 40 acres. In addition, the vast majority of vacant lands within the subject area are served by improvements not necessary for or conducive to resource use thereof, or are of such proximity to nonresource uses that utilization thereof for resource uses (in addition to the nonresource classifications thereof due to the SCS Capability Classifications) would require access directly through developed/committed nonresource uses greatly increasing the potential for trespass and other liabilities. In addition, the severe topographical features separating such vacant lands from other resource lands and uses effectively precludes any effective and reasonable resource use. The following constitutes a detailed inventory of all of the lots and parcels located within the subject Exceptions Area as reported by current County Assessor?s records: - 167 - MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES Map 14-17-27 (All-platted subdivision-Mill Creek Ranches) 302 Private Roadway 2.23 303 Private Rec. Tract 49.14 600 Private Rec. Tract 19.67 701 Private Rec. Tract 18.40 702 Private Rec. Tract 17.56 703 Private Rec. Resid. 17.76 704 Private Rec. Tract 17.12 705 Private Rec. Tract 19.25 706 Private Roadway 5.38 Map 14-17-33 100 (part of) Private Vacant 88.00 101 Private Rec. Tract 0.40 102 Private Rec. Tract 0.40 103 Private Rec. Resid. 0.40 104 Private Rec. Tract 0.40 105 Private Rec. Resid. 0.40 200 Private Rec. Comm. 3.19 201 Private Rec. Comm. 3.70 202 Private Rec. Resid. 2.35 300 Private Rec. Resid. 4.70 500 Private Rec. Resid. 1.70 600 Private Commercial 1.05 601 Private Commercial 0.70 602 Private Commercial 0.25 701 Private Rec. Tract 2.10 709 Private Rec. Resid. 2.00 711 Private Rec. Tract 0.31 713 Private Rec. Resid. 2.14 714 Private Rec. Resid. 1.00 715 Private Rec. Tract 1.96 716 Private Rec. Resid. 2.40 717 Private Rec. Resid. 2.10 718 Private Rec. Resid. 2.00 719 Private Rec. Resid. 1.00 720 Private Rec. Resid. 2.29 721 Private Rec. Tract 2.10 722 Private Rec. Resid. 1.20 900 Public State Park 11.50 Map 14-17-33DA (All North Shore Estates Subdivision) 100 Private Rec. Tract 1.17 200 Private Rec. Tract 0.81 300 Private Rec. Tract 1.03 400 Private Rec. Tract 1.12 500 Private Rec. Tract 1.05 600 Private Rec. Tract 0.85 - 168 - MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES Map 14-17-33DA (All North Shore Estates Subdivision) ? Continued 700 Private Rec. Tract 1.06 800 Private Common Area 3.97 900 Private Rec. Resid. 3.08 Map 14-17-33CD 100 Private Rec. Tract 0.51 300 Private Rec. Tract 0.28 400 Private Rec. Resid. 0.31 500 Private Rec. Tract 0.36 600 Private Rec. Resid. 0.37 700 Private Rec. Resid. 0.36 800 Private Rec. Resid. 0.35 900 Private Rec. Tract 0.34 1000 Private Rec. Tract 0.35 1100 Private Rec. Resid. 0.38 1200 Private Rec. Tract 1.03 1300 Private Rec. Comm. 0.99 1400 Private Rec. Comm. 1.09 1500 Private Rec. Comm. 0.50 1600 Private Rec. Comm. 0.14 1700 Private Rec. Resid. 0.99 1800 Private Rec. Resid. 0.95 1900 Private Commercial 2.48 2000 Private Rec. Resid. 0.95 2100 Private Rec. Resid. 2.34 2101 Private Rec. Resid. 0.79 2200 Private Rec. Resid. 2.38 Map 14-17-34 100 Private Vacant 123.09 101 Private Commercial 0.24 300 Private Commercial 5.29 400 Private Commercial 1.11 500 Private Rec. Tract 1.00 600 Private Rural Resid. 5.99 601 Private Rural Resid. 4.45 602 Private Rec. Resid. 2.00 603 Private Rural Resid. 2.51 604 Private Rural Tract 2.57 605 Private Rec. Resid. 2.00 700 Private Rec. Resid. 0.75 900 Private Rec. Resid. 1.00 1000 Private Rec. Tract 0.40 1001 Private Rec. Resid. 0.60 1002 Private Rec. Resid. 0.22 1003 Private Rec. Resid. 0.63 1004 Private Rec. Resid. 0.55 - 169 - MAP/TAX LOT NO. OWNERSHIP USE CLASS ACRES Map 14-17-35 103 Private Rec. Tract 4.73 105 Private Rec. Resid. 4.73 106 Private Rec. Resid. 9.97 200 (part of) Private Rural Res/Comm. 28.00 201 Private Rec. Resid. 1.00 202 Private Rec. Resid. 0.77 203 Private Rec. Resid. 1.45 204 Private Rec. Resid. 0.53 205 Private Rec. Resid. 0.96 206 Private Rec. Resid. 1.03 207 Private Rec. Resid. 1.18 208 Private Rec. Resid. 1.07 209 Private Rec. Resid. 0.53 210 Private Vacant/Wetlands 3.47 300 Private MH Park 2.75 N.R. Public State Highway 48.42 TOTAL 584.61 Public Facilities: Public facilities (including privately owned facilities) include the existing State Highway 26 (an Access Oregon Highway), a number of improved private roadways, community water systems, community sewage disposal systems, installed electrical and telephone systems, and cable TV services. Development: As attested to in the foregoing land use information, more than 67% of the area designated for the subject ?Exception Area? is fully committed and/or developed for nonresource uses. The remaining 33% is predominately classified as ?nonresource? lands by the SCS Capability Classification thereof. ADJACENT AND AREA LAND USES: The subject Exception Area is surrounded by a mixture of ?resource? and nonresource uses. The entire south boundary area is comprised of the Ochoco Reservoir itself that is recognized statewide as a primary recreation facility as a fishery/water recreation resource, even though said reservoir?s primary purpose is to supply water to the Ochoco Irrigation District for agricultural lands in the Prineville Valley area. The western boundary area is dominated by rural residential areas comprising two major rural subdivisions. The north boundary area is classified as resource lands, but is dominated by lands of public ownership under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The eastern boundary area of the subject Exceptions Area is dominated by private lands devoted to resource uses in the form of pasture/hay/range lands, but which are somewhat buffered from the subject Exceptions Area by State Highway 26 and by the Mill Creek stream channel. Resource uses in the general area are dominated by ownerships in excess of 40 acres. - 170 - No apparent conflicts are evident between the uses within the subject Exceptions area and the adjacent/surrounding resource uses. With the exception of the easterly most area, the nonresource uses of the subject Exceptions Area are effectively buffered from resource uses by extreme topographical and manmade features. EXCEPTIONS FINDINGS: In accordance with the requirements set forth by OAR 660-04 regarding Exceptions in general, and more specifically as required for Exceptions for ?Land Physically Developed? and/or for ?Land Irrevocably Committed? as set forth by OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 respectively, the following Findings are set forth as the basis for the subject Ochoco Reservoir Exceptions Area: Public Need: The area?s designation as a Rural-Recreation Residential Area is a direct reflection of the primary uses that have existed in that area over an extended period of time, and are therefore considered ?publicly? important, not only to those that reside in the area, but to those that ?recreate? in the area and to the traveling public. The existence of the Ochoco Reservoir as a primary recreation resource, both locally, regionally and statewide, mandates a certain level of recreationally oriented commercial uses to accommodate the recreationists with a minimum of adverse impacts on said resource; such includes the existing State Park, two RV Parks, two restaurants, a marina and other related commercial uses. The fact that the Ochoco Reservoir also exists as one of the ?few? major water surfaces with substantial privately owned shorelines also satisfies a public need (desire) for recreational homesites, thereby reducing the pressures for such uses on other similar resources in the area, the region and the state. The fact that the area is served by an Access Oregon Highway (State Highway 26), also meets a public need by the existence of those uses that directly provide services to the traveling public; such includes the two restaurants, grocery businesses and limited gasoline services. The state significance of Access Oregon Highway Routes, the existence of and planned improvements to the existing State Park in the area, and the fact that the County?s selected Regional Economic Development Strategy is Recreation/Tourism, further establishes the ?public need? significance of the subject Exceptions Area, not only on a ?local-county? level, but on a regional and statewide basis as well. Physical Development: The majority (50% or more) of the nonresource uses that occur within the subject area have been in existence for more than 20 years and constitute an important recreational/residential setting without further and/or future conversion of primary resource lands in the area. More than 67% of the total area is fully developed and/or committed by the existence of nonresource developments consisting of actual structural improvements and improvements including roads, water systems, sewage disposal systems, and electrical- telephone-cable TV systems. The existence of such developments and improvements precludes the use of lands within the subject area for resource uses. Displacement would result in excessive public and private costs, and would not serve any beneficial resource use. - 171 - Parcel Sizes ? Ownership Patterns: Although the subject Exception Area encompasses a total area of 584.61 acres, that area represents a total of 108 individual-separate tax lot units for an overall density of only 1:5.41 or an average lot/parcel size of only 5.41 acres. Of the 108 total tax lot units, 43 or 40% are one (1) acre or less in size, and 40 or 37% are more than one (1) acre but less than five (5) acres in size, resulting in 77% of the total lots in the area being less than five (5) acres. The total number of 108 tax lot units further represent a total of 83 individual- separate-noncontiguous ownerships; the combining of a tax lot units has been necessary to satisfy space area requirements for onsite sewage disposal systems and to accommodate for onsite sewage disposal systems and to accommodate dwelling units on individual lots with extreme topographical limitations. Public Facilities and Services: Although ?public? facilities and services to the area are limited to the serving State Highway 26, to fire protection services provided by a Rural Fire District, to vector control services provided by a Vector Control District, and to mail service provided by the U.S. Postal Service, the semi-public and private ?community? services are extensive. The latter includes private subdivision roads, community water and sewage disposal systems, and telephone-electrical-cable TV systems installed on a subdivision and individual lot service basis. Even though such services may be considered ?limited?, such is still considered more extensive than is even remotely necessary and reasonable for resource uses. Neighborhood and Regional Characteristics: The subject Exceptions Area is characterized by a mixture of rural and recreational residential, commercial recreation, and public recreation uses and resources. Although the area?s rural population is represented by a year-round resident population of approximately 100, seasonal recreation residency of 300+ is common with recreation vehicle owners occupying the two RV parks and individual lots/parcels for periods of one (1) month and more during a single visit to the area; RV visitor stays at the State Park are normally of shorter duration. The general area or region in which the subject Exceptions Area is located is characterized by these foregoing described uses, together with more permanent type rural residents to the west and a mixture of small and large scale agricultural uses to the east. Lands to the north and south of the subject Exceptions Area are dominated by open-range lands occupied by livestock and wildlife. The reservoir itself is, of course, the dominant feature characterization of the entire area. Nonresource Lands: As attested to hereinbefore, the vast majority of the area (even though dominated by committed/developed lands) is comprised of lands with ?nonresource? capability classifications of SCS Capability Classes VII and VIII. In addition to the physical limitations presented by the reported soil limitations, resource use is further limited by extreme topographical features the lack of water for irrigation purposes, extremely limited natural vegetation for any measurable resource production, and the natural separation by major terrain features from major resource user areas in the County. The potential of resource use of such areas is further reduced to the lack of adequate access thereto without passing directly through nonresource developed areas and uses. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the foregoing Findings, the Conclusions that justify the subject area for an Exception pursuant to OAR?s 660-04-025 and 660-04-028 are as follows: - 172 - 1) Because of the long standing pre-existence of the majority of nonresource uses the dominate the area, and because of the public need factors thereof relative to the serving Access Oregon Highway 26, the County?s Regional Economic Development Strategy emphasis, and the existing State Park, displacement or unreasonable restriction of continued maintenance and development of the area would constitute a negative private and public impact, would be contrary to other planning goals (both economic and recreation), and such displacement or restriction would not serve any beneficial public purpose. 2) The location of the subject Exception Area in direct relation to the primary recreation resource of the Ochoco Reservoir effectively precludes consideration of an alternate site location for the dominant uses comprised therein. 3) The specific location and configuration of the subject area constitutes an area of comparative advantage for those types of uses designated to be permitted therein because of the dominate Ochoco Reservoir base resource. 4) Findings clearly establish that the area in general (and specifically 67+%), is fully committed and/or developed for nonresource uses, and for those reasons cannot any longer by considered available for uses allowed by the applicable Goal 3. 5) The findings further establish that (even though nearly 50% of the area identified as committed/developed is represented by ?vacant? lots or parcels) the area is irrevocably committed to nonresource use due to the existence of structures and facility improvements not conducive or reasonably adaptable to resource use, particularly those resource uses provided for by the applicable Goal 3. 6) The findings, based on independent technical resource data, also establish the facts that even though 32% of the total area is not in reality developed or committed to nonresource uses, such lands have little if any resource value and must therefore be classified as nonresource lands. - 173 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #20 AREA NAME: Ochoco Reservoir Recreation Residential Area LOCATION: Tax Lots 302, 303 and 600 through 706 in Section 27, Township 14 South, Range 17 East. Those portions of Tax Lot 100 located in the Northeast 1/4, Southwest 1/4; South 1/2, Southwest 1/4, Northeast 1/4; Southeast 1/4, Northeast 1/4; and Tax Lots 101 through 900 in Section 33, Township 14 South, Range 17 East. All Tax Lots in Section 33, Township 14 South, Range 17 East; Tax Lots 100 through 2200 in Section 33, Township 14 South, Range 17 East; Tax Lots 100, 101, and 300 through 1004 in Section 34 of Township 14 South, Range 17 East; and that portion of Tax Lot 200 located in the Northwest 1/4, Northwest 1/4 and the West 1/2, Northeast 1/4, Northwest 1/4; Tax Lot 103 and Tax Lots 105 through 300 in Section 35, Township 14 South, Range 17 East AREA: 584 acres PARCELS/LOTS: 108 ZONING: (RR-1) Recreation Residential PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 6 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, community water and sewer systems, private water and sewer systems, power, telephone, and cable TV service EXISTING LAND USES: Residential, recreational, State Park, commercial, recreational commercial, mobile home park NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: 5 TOTAL AREA: 190 acres AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 1 ACRE: 0 ANALYSIS: This exception area serves as the major recreational area of Crook County. Extensive development has occurred. Urban services are available to many sub-areas of this area. RECOMMENDATION: The County should take a Goal 14 exception for this area. A Goal 3 exception has already been taken and acknowledged. - 174 - - 175 - - 176 - - 177 - - 178 - - 179 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #21 AREA NAME: RR(M)-2 zoned land LOCATION: South of Prineville AREA: Approximately 36+ square miles PARCELS/LOTS: Not available ZONING: RR(M)-2 PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: Adjacent AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: Public roads, community water and sewer systems, private water and subsurface disposal systems, power and telephone EXISTING LAND USES: Mobile homes, residential, farm. Three are fifteen platted subdivisions in this area as well as hundreds of metes and bounds tracts. NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: N/A AVERAGE SIZE: N/A AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: N/A ANALYSIS: This area contains approximately 36 square miles, with 15 active subdivisions, hundreds of metes and bounds tracts, and large undeveloped acreages. The RR(M)-2 zone allows a two acre minimum lot size and several urban land uses. The amount of vacant land available would not allow a committed or irrevocably committed Exception to be taken. RECOMMENDATION: Down-zone this area to the R-5 zone. - 180 - Crook County GOAL 14/CURRY COUNTY ANALYSIS EXCEPTION AREA: #22 AREA NAME: Park-Reserve Zone LOCATION: South of Prineville AREA: 40 square miles PARCELS/LOTS: N/A ZONING: (PR) Park Reserve PROXIMITY TO PRINEVILLE UGB: 9 miles AVAILABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FACILITIES: N/A EXISTING LAND USES: Residential-Agriculture NUMBER AND SIZE OF VACANT PARCELS: N/A AVERAGE SIZE: N/A AMOUNT OF BUILDABLE LAND OR PARCELS OR LOTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES: N/A ANALYSIS: A large area south of Prineville in which there are three platted subdivisions. These subdivisions, Jasper Knolls, Bottero Park, and a portion of Juniper Hills, are specifically excluded from the minimum lot size requirement of the PR zone. All new development outside these three subdivisions requires a 20 acre minimum. RECOMMENDATION: Include this area with the Exceptions Ordinance/Document. *The Lakeview Cove Subdivision has been located and determined to be, indeed, in the County?s RR(M-2) zone. City Boundary UGB Roads Parcels HEAVY INDUSTRIAL CORE COMMERCIAL OUTLYING COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL DISCLAIMER: CROOK COUNTY MAKES NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR ANY OTHER MATTER. THE COUNTY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR POSSIBLE ERRORS, OMISSIONS, MISUSE, OR MISSINTERPRETATION. THE INFORMATION ON THIS MAP IS PREPARED FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED, AND IS NOT INTENDED, FOR SURVEY OR ENGINEERING PURPOSES. NO REPRESENTATION IS MADE CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF ANY APPARENT ROUTE OF ACCESS IDENTIFIED IN DIGITAL OR HARDCOPY MAPPING OF GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION OR DATA.PLEASE NOTIFY CROOK COUNTY GIS OF ANY ERRORS 541-416-3930. P r i n e v i l l e - P h y s i c a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n ( A d o p t e d 0 4 / 0 5 / 1 9 8 4 )P r i n e v i l l e - P h y s i c a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n ( A d o p t e d 0 4 / 0 5 / 1 9 8 4 ) Map Document: (V:\Departments\A_CC_GIS\Projects\PR_Planning\Development Plan\DP.mxd) 8/10/2006 -- 9:08:20 AM City Boundary UGB Roads Parcels HEAVY INDUSTRIAL CORE COMMERCIAL OUTLYING COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL DISCLAIMER: CROOK COUNTY MAKES NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR ANY OTHER MATTER. THE COUNTY IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR POSSIBLE ERRORS, OMISSIONS, MISUSE, OR MISSINTERPRETATION. THE INFORMATION ON THIS MAP IS PREPARED FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY AND SHOULD NOT BE USED, AND IS NOT INTENDED, FOR SURVEY OR ENGINEERING PURPOSES. NO REPRESENTATION IS MADE CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF ANY APPARENT ROUTE OF ACCESS IDENTIFIED IN DIGITAL OR HARDCOPY MAPPING OF GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION OR DATA.PLEASE NOTIFY CROOK COUNTY GIS OF ANY ERRORS 541-416-3930. P r i n e v i l l e - P h y s i c a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n ( A d o p t e d 0 4 / 0 5 / 1 9 8 4 )P r i n e v i l l e - P h y s i c a l D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n ( A d o p t e d 0 4 / 0 5 / 1 9 8 4 ) Map Document: (V:\Departments\A_CC_GIS\Projects\PR_Planning\Development Plan\DP.mxd) 8/10/2006 -- 9:08:20 AM