DOCUMENTS LOCAL U~i~~ (1"11") '. UKIAH ,. ~@[K!A]~~~[}{]~~@DW~ ~[L&~ •CUMENTS DeAL Icitt\.; 1'11')"')l q ~-:'R'l J GI Department of Land Conservation and Development 1175 COURT STREET N.E., SALEM, OREGON 97310 PHONE (503) 378-4926 June 13. 1979 The Honorable Lloyd A. Waid Mayor. City of Ukiah Ukiah. OR 97880 Dear Mayor Waid: It gives me a great deal of pleasure to confirm that the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission, on June 7, 1979 officially acknowledged the comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances of the City of Ukiah as being in compliance with ORS 197 and the Statewide Plinning Goals. The acknowledgment signifies a historic step for the City's land use planning program. Ukiah is among the first of Oregon's cities to be in compliance with the Statewide Goals. 8y effectively planning ahead for the wise use of your valuable land, you have set an excellent example for others to follow. I would like to commend the city officials, staff and citizens of your community for their hard work and foresight in the field of land use planning. Congratulati ons :;./ -~-/.J:.-7,~lf44 . J. Kvarste irector Enclosure cc: Umatilla County Board of Commissioners Jeri Cohen, County Coordinator Jim Kennedy, Field Representative Henry Markus, Principal Comprehensive Planner, ECOAC Senator Michael Thorne Representative Jack Duff WJK:LC:krh/MC OCG31/6-13-79 BEFORE THE LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OREGON IN THE MATTER OF THE CITY OF UKIAH'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND IMPLEMENTING MEASURES ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLIANCE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ORDER On March 12, 1979 the City of Ukiah, pursuant to DRS Ch. 197.251(1) (1977 Replacement Part), requested that its comprehensive plan and implementing measures, consisting of Comprehensive Plan, Ordinance no. 20, adopted September 5, 1978; the Zoning Ordinance no. 21, adopted September 5, 1978; the Subdivision Ordinance no. 18, adopted August 1, 1978; the Mobile Home Park Ordinance no. 19, adopted August 1, 1978; and the UGB Agreement with Umatilla County, adopted September 5, 1978; be acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals. The Commission reviewed the attached written report of the staff of the Department of Land Conservation and Development on June 7, 1979 regarding the compliance of the aforementioned plan and measures with the Statewide Planning Goals. Section IV of the report constitutes the findings of the Commission. Based on its review, the Commission finds that the City of Ukiah's comprehensive plan and implementing measures comply with the Statewide Planning Goals adopted by this -Commission pursuant to DRS Ch. 197.225 and 197.245. •-2- Now therefore be it ordered that: The Land Conservation and Development Commission acknowl- edges that the aforementioned comprehensive plan and implementing measures of the City of Ukiah are in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals. Dated this 13;:-A day of June, 1979. _...!....:::c . . Kvarsten, Director for t e Land Conservation and Development Commission WJK: RE: jk/MC DCUS LAND CONSERVATION AND OEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ACKNOWLEOGMENT OF COMPLIANCE REPORT City of Ukiah OATE RECeIVeO: March 12, 1979 OATE OF COMMISSION ACTION: June 7, 1979 I. REQUeST: Acknowled9ment of Compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals for the comprehensive plan and implementing measures. II. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENOATIONS: A. Staff: Recommends the Commission acknowledge the City of Ukiah's comprehensive plan and implementing measures to be in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals. B. Local Coordination Body: Recommends the Commission acknowledge the City of Ukiah's Comprehensive Plan and implementing measures to be in compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals. FIELO REPRESENTATIVE: Jim Kennedy Phone: 963-2171 lX 412) COORDINATOR: Jeri Cohen Phone: 276-6732 LEAO REVIEWER: Claire Puchy Phone: 378-5455 Oate of Report: May 24, 1979 LEGEND STREET lright ot way) EXISTING STREET URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EXPANSION AREA CITY LIMIT RESIDENTIAL FUTURE RES. & PUBLIC RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL PUBLIC & SEMI'PUBLIC FARM INDUSTRIAL FLOOD PLAIN SLOPES ~ 12% FUTURE BRIDGE .. ~ .. (fUU '.: ~."9 Please refer to the most ~ecent U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development F.I.A. FTood Hazard Map for flood prone areas within the city limits. Adopted pursuant to City of Ukiah Ordinance No. 20 on 9/5/78. ..... , .. ...... . .. , '" '"" ., ., HIGH ST. I I , , , I I I ~"""""'"'''''''''''''''''''-''''~'''->'~'~':''''';.A-''''''''':···,_··_·-:·c:~:·-:c·..·__· _·.,..._·..··..·_ ·_· ·..·..· . .L: :: ::':".": :". . . ' ." ," .. t·::: ..r> ::' .. ::j: . . ~.' . . . . . ~.:: . .. .. . . . ..... ! .. ..... EXPANSIONj} .. !? .... f••••••••••••••••••••••••••••_••_._._.-.._._•••• ~:::: .. . . ·.·.·l . . ~ _ .. :.:-:;:..... . :-: .::::::: ::: . . :=..::.::=..::=..::.:::::.::.~::=.=.::=.;;::-~..::=..::.:::.:-.::=:::::=:.::::::..::::.::::::::::::::::.=·::.:::::::=:.*':"=·c·,-::·:::':.:~"':.:.':"=':::,..:.::::;;::::::,,::::.,:':c: ,.cc..::.::; :;:.:.::..: :." : COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ~OuW @[¥i' (lJJ~O&[}{] @ffi1~@(Q)~ City of Ukiah III. BACKGRUUNO INFORMATION: A. GEOGRAPHY: -2- The City of Ukiah is located in southern Umatilla County, apprOXimately 40 miles south of Pendleton. The City was incorporated in 1972. Ukiah's economy is dependent on the Umatilla National Forest. B. GOVERNING BODY: Mayor and a four member City Council. C. POPULATION: 1976 - 320 1975 - 320 1974 - 300 O. PLAN AND IMPLEMENTING MEASURES: Comprehensive Plan: Zoning Ordinance: Subdivision Ordinance: Mobile Home Park Ordinance: Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement: E. CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT INFORMATION: Adopted September 5. 1978 Adopted September 5. 1978 Adopted AU9ust 1. 1978 Adopted AU9ust 1. 1978 Adopted September 5, 1978 An Independent Committee for Citizen Involvement and the Citizen Involvement Program were approved June 18, 1976. F. COMPLIANCE STATUS: Planning Extension and Grant approved June 18, 1976. Planning Assistance Grant approved May 6. 1977. with compliance date of Ju'ly 1, 1978. Total amount received was $7.025 plus a portion of a joint grant awarded to ECOAC. Compliance date was extended to September 1. 1978. City of Ukiah IV. FINDINGS: A. General Overview: -3- The settlement of Ukiah has been influenced by mining, farming, ranching and timber interests in western Umatilla County. Ukiah was platted in 1890 by the Camas Land Company, but was not incorporated until 1972. Ukiah's economy depends primarily on the activities of the U.S. Forest Service in the Umatilla National Forest; most jobs in Ukiah are either directly or indirectly related to that forest. A Land Management Plan for the Umatilla National Forest will be issued in July 1979 by the U.S. Forest Service which will have economic and population growth implications for Ukiah. Ukiah's urban growth boundary encompasses a 201.9 acre area, 154.4 acres of which are within the city limits. Currently, the major land uses in Ukiah are residential (53.8 acres), public and semipublic (18.7 acres) and commercial (9.7 acres). An additional 71.3 acres are vacant. Most of the land within the UGB outside the city limits is in agricultural use. Ukiah's current population of 320 may reach 380 by 1995, but this is highly dependent on U.S. Forest Service plans. Because the City was not incorporated until 1972, no census data are available. The comprehensive plan, which was prepared by the East Central Oregon Association of Counties (ECOAC), is a well-organized, easily understood document. It should serve as a useful guide to citizens and decision- makers in achieving the City's goals and carrying out its policies. Ukiah's plan adequately addresses all applicable Statewide Planning Goals. Several items have been identified regarding Goals 10 (Housing) and 11 (Public Facilities and Services), however, which should be addressed at plan update. Goals 3 (Agricultural Lands), 4 (Forest Lands), 15 (Willamette Greenway) and 16-19 (Coastal Goals) are not applicable. B. Applicable Goals: 1. Citizen Involvement: (Goal 1) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, pp. 111-1-2, IV Plan Policies: Citizen Involvement Policies; p. 2 Implementing Measures: Zoning Ordinances (No. 21), Article 12 (Administrative Provisions); Subdivision and Partition Procedures and Approvals); Mobile Home Park Ordinance (No. 19), Section 2 (Procedures for Mobile Home Park Plan Approval) City of Ukiah -4- The Ukiah City Council functions as the approved Committee for Citizen Involvement. The City·s approved Citizen Involvement Program included public meetings of the Umatilla County Planning Commission and the Ukiah City Council, numerous public hearings and a community attitude survey (pp. IV-I-2; Community Attitude Survey). Ukiah is committed to citizen involvement in all future planning efforts (Citizen Involvement Policies, p. 2), and shall conduct periodic public opinion surveys. distribute the results of these surveys as well as other reports to the public and hold public meetings and hearings. Changing needs of residents or landowners within the UGB are grounds for review and amendment of the compre- hensive plan and ordinances (p. 7). The plan includes procedures for holding public hearings and notifying citizens of such hearings (pp. 7-8). Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 1. 2. Land Use Planning: (Goal 2) The City of Ukiah has adopted a comprehensive plan to serve as the basis for all land use decisions and actions (Ordinance No. 20). The plan includes inventories and other factual information, as well as identification of problems and alternative courses of action. All applicable Statewide Planning Goals have been addressed. Ukiah has adopted policies (Ordinance No. 20, Section 5) and has made land use designations within the UGB (Comprehensive Plan Map) consistent With the factual base. Preparation of the comprehensive plan and implementing measures was coordinated with state and federal agencies, special districts, and Umatilla County. None of these has identified any conflicts between its programs and the City's adopted plan and ordinances. Implementing measures, including zoning, subdivision and mobile home park ordinances, have been adopted by Ukiah (No. 21, 18 and 19 respectively) to carry out the plan and policies. Land within the UGB will be rezoned, consistent with plan map designations and provisions of the City Zoning Ordinance and Section III of the Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement (see the Goal 14 section of this report for deta il s) . . Umatilla County has amended its comprehensive plan (Ordinance No. 79-13) to adopt Ukiah's comprehensive plan for that area outside the city limits but within the UG8. Ukiah will review its plan and implementing measures at least annua lly and -amend these documents if neces_sary. Procedures for review and amendment are included in Ordinance No. 320 (Sections 6 and 7). Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 2. City of Ukiah -5- 3. and Natural Resources: The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, II-I, pp. 111-3, VII-3, VII-IO-ll, VIII-12, VIII-16-18 Plan Policies: Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources Policies, p. 3; Comprehensive Plan Map Implementing Measures: Zoning Ordinance (No. 21), Article 5.20 (Conditional Uses--Planning Conditions on a Permit); Subdivision Ordinance (No. 18), Section 4 (Requirements for Improvements, Preservation and Design) The City of Ukiah has inventoried all applicable Goal 5 elements including mineral and aggregate resources (p. VII-3), energy sources (p. VII-II), fish and wildlife habitat (p. VII-lO) and water areas (including groundwater) (pp. VIII-17-l8). No signifi- cant scientific, natural, historic or cultural areas are known to exist in the planning area (p. VII-II, VIII-12). Several sites and buildings were identified in a community attitude survey as having possible historical significance (p. VIII-12, Community Attitude Survey). The City recognizes (p. II-I) the need for an historic and archeological survey and literature search, and will incorporate such information into the plan at plan update. The plan indicates that all development will have impacts on fish and wildlife, but that creeks and floodplains are the most sensitive and should be protected (p. VII-lO). The City points out (p. VII- 10) the importance of concentrating residential, commercial and industrial development within the UGB, maintaining minimum stream flows, and carefully designing development adjacent to streams and in floodprone areas. Ukiah has adopted several policies (pp. 3, 4, 6) which reflect its concern for the protection of identified natural resources. In addition, the City has a policy (Open Spaces, Scenic and_Historic Areas and Natural Resources Policy pp. 2, 3) to "examine any publically owned lands including street rights-of-way for their potential open space use before their disposition." To carry out these natural resources policies, the City has excluded floodprone areas outside the city limits from the urban growth boundary (Comprehensive Plan Map), and has incorporated standards for development in floodprone areas within the UGB in its Zoning Ordinance (Article 3.42). In addition, Article 5.20 of the Zoning City of Ukiah -6- Ordinance allows the City Council to place conditions on conditional use pennits to establish an open space area, or to protect Uexisting trees, vegetation, water resources, wildlife habitat or another significant natural resource. II Section 4.9 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires the preservation of amenities such as trees and watercourses in all subdivision and land partitions. Ukiah intends to "protect archaeological and historic sites. structures and artifacts" (Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas. and Natural Resources Policy 3, p. 3). According to Article 5 of the Cityls Zoning Ordinance. conditional uses must be consistent with plan policies. Section 4.9 of the City's Subdivision Ordinance requires preservation of historic and archeological sites in the design of subdivisions and partitions. Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 5. 4. Air, Water and Land Resources Quality: (Goal 6) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, pp. 111-3, VII-3-11, VIII-I2-I6, VIII-1B, Soils Map, Natural Hazards Map, Sewerage System Maps Plan Policies: Air, Water and land Resources Quality Policies, p. 3; Economic Development Policies 2 and 3. p. 4; Public Facilities and Services Policies. p. 5 Implementing Measures: Zoning Ordinance (No. 21), Articles 3.30 (Ml, 5.20 (Conditional Uses--Planning Conditions on a Permit); Subdivision Ordinance (No. 18). Section 4 (ReqUirements for Improvements. Preservation and Design); Preliminary Capital Improvement Program The air. water and land resources quality in Ukiah is good (pp. VIl- lI). lack of a storm drainage system. as well as noise from truck traffic and snowmobiles, however. cause periodic nonpoint source and noise problems (p. VII-II). It is the City's policy (p. 3) to maintain and improve the quality of air, land and water by (1) limiting all discharge from existing and future development to meet applicable state and federal environ- mental standards. and (2) encouraging clean industry to locate in Ukiah. Public Facilities and Services Policy 5 (po 5) expresses the City's intent to develop a storm drainage system. It is developing a capital improvement program to do this (Draft Preliminary Capital Improvement Program). In addition. Ukiah's Subdivision Ordinance City of Ukiah -7- contains requirements regarding the provlslon of storm drainage and sewerage facilities as well as tree maintenance in areas of new development (Sections 4.3, 4.5 and 4.9, respectively) (see the Goal 11 section of this report for more details). No industry which will create a public nuisance because of noise, smoke, odor, dust or gas is allowed in the City's industrial (M) zone (Zoning Ordinance, Article 3.33). Ukiah intends to pave some streets within the City (p. VIII-19; Transportation Policies,- pp. 5-6; Draft Preliminary Capital Improve- ment Program). The City has coordinated its plan with both the Statewide Water Quality Mangement Plan-(303(e)) (p. VIII-16) and the Umatilla County Solid Waste Management Plan (p. VII-11). The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has commented that Ukiah's plan is one of the best they have reviewed for a small city (see comments attached). Conclusion: The City of Ukiah compiies with Goal 6. 5. Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: (Goal 7) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, pp. 11-1, 111-3, 111-4, VII-4-10, Comprehensive Plan Map, Natural Hazards Map, Soils Map Plan Policies: Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Policies, p. 4; Comprehensive Plan Map Implementing Measures: Zoning Ordinance (No. 21), Articles 3.42 (Additional Requirements--Hazard Areas), 5.20 (Conditional Uses--Placing Conditions on a Permit); Subdivision Ordinance (No. 18), Section 4 (Requirements for Improvements, Preservation and Design); Section 3 (Requirements for Improvements, Preser- vation and Design) Ukiah has identified three types of hazards within its planning area--stream flooding, steep slopes (greater than 12 percent) and soil limitations (pp. 111-3, VII-3-10). The locations of these are mapped (Natural Hazards Map, Soils Map, Land Use Map). The City recognizes (p. II-I) the need for a soil survey and a final flood hazard survey and intends to update the plan and ordinances as such information becomes available (pp. II-I, VII-5, VII-9). City of Ukiah -8- Nine acres in the southeast portion of the City are within the 100- year floodplain and nineteen acres within the planning area have slopes greater than or equal to twelve percent (p. 111-3). The City is not participating in the National Flood Insurance Program, but maps are currently being prepared for use by the City for possible future participation (ECOAG Principal Comprehensive Planner, personal communication, May 3, 1979). Ukiah has a policy (Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Policy I. p. 4) to "encourage development to locate outside floodplains, natural drainageways, steep slopes, or other hazardous areas. 1I Land within the floodplain outside Ukiah's city limits has been excluded ~rom the urban growth boundary. If a structure is proposed in any area subject to flooding or of greater than twelve percent slope, Article 3.42 of the Zoning Ordinance requires the developer to incorporate necessary safe- guards into site and building plans before the City can approve the building permit. Similar provisions are included in the Subdivision Ordinance (Section 4.1(4). 4.3(1). f.3(2)(f). 5.2(1)(e» and the Mobile Home Park Ordinance (Section 3.2). These provisions carry out Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards Policy 2 (p. 4). Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 7. 6. Recreational Needs: (Goal 8) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan pp. 111-3, VIII-12 land Use Map, Com- munity Attitude Survey Plan Policies: Recreational Needs Policies, p. 4; Comprehensive Plan Map Implementing Measures: Zoning Ordinance (No. 21), Articles 3.10 (R). 3.20 (RC). Subdivision Ordinance (No. 18). Section 4.8 (Public-Uses); Preliminary Capital Improvement Program Existing recreational facilities in Ukiah are described in the comprehensive plan (pp. 111-3. VIII-12. Land Use Map. Community Attitude Survey). Based on a community attitude survey, the City has determined the need for a community center (p. 111-3). Two policies have been adopted which express Ukiah1s intent to satisfy the recreational needs of its citizens and visitors (Recreational Needs Policies, p. 4): City of Ukiah -9- "To develop a community center to provide a pUblic meeting place and recreational facilities for all age groups," and "To plan community recreation facil ities in conjunction with existing and planned school facilities so that they complement each other in function." Land has been designated for parks and other pUblic uses on the plan map. Public and semipublic uses are allowed conditionally in the General Residential (R) and the Residential Commercial (RC) zones. The City is in the process of developing a capital improvement program which includes provisions for constructing a community center (Draft Preliminary Capital Improvement Program). Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 8. 7. Economy of the State: (Goal 9) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, pp. II-I-2, III-3-4, VIII-I-ll, IX-2, EXisting Land Use Map Plan Policies: Land Use Planning Policies 1, 3, 4 and 5, p. 2; Agricultural Lands Policies, p. 3; Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Policy 2, p. 3; Economic Development Policies, p. 4; Comprehensive Plan Map Implementing Measures: Zoning Ordinance (No. 21), Articles 3.10 (R), 3.20 (RC), 3.30 (M); Preliminary Capital Improvement Program "Ukiah's mainstay of employment is the U.S. Forest Service and area lumber and wood processing industries" (p. VIII-3). However, because of the seasonal nature of this industry and the fluctuations in the national housing market itself, Ukiah experiences_fluctuations in employment (p. VI II -4). "At present, the only permanent industry in Ukiah is a shingle factory employing five people (p. VIII-4). The City recognizes (p. 11-3) the need for additional industry to broaden the economic base. Ukiah has adopted several policies which express its desire to diversify and improve its economy (Economic Development Policies, p. 4). Among-these is a policy to encourage diversified, non- polluting industrial development and another to protect areas suitable for industrial development from encroachment of incom- patible land uses. City of Ukiah -10- The Umatilla County Economic Element (completed in February 1979,. the Umatilla County Comprehensive Plan and Technical Report (to be completed by December 1979) and the Umatilla National Forest Land Mana9ement Plan (to be completed by July 1979) will be reviewed by the City and further economic projections and land requirements for economic development will be developed and incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan (Land Use Planning Policies 3. 4 and 6. p. 2). Ukiah has designated 21 acres within its UGB as "Industrial II and 31.6 acres as lIResidential/Commercial. II The Zoning Ordinance establishes Industrial (M) and Residential Commercial (~C) zones which have been applied to these areas (see the Goal 14 section of this report for details). Ukiah has identified an area outside and adjacent to the urban growth bounda ry (!' Expans i on Area") whi ch is suitable for indus tri a-I development. However, recognizing the difficulty of making accurate population and economic projections prior to completion of the U.S. Forest Service Land Management Plan, the City has not included it within the UGB. If additional industrial land is needed at a later date, however, the City and County will revise the plan for inclusion of the Expansion Area within the urban growth boundary lP. lX-2}. Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 9. 8. Housing: (Goal 10) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, pp. ll-I-2, 111-3-5, Vll-3, Vll-8-9, VIII-6-9, VIII-1I-14, IX-2-3, IX-5, Natural Hazards Map, Soils Map, Land Use Map, Community Attitude Survey Plan Policies: Land Use Policies 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8, p. 2; Agricultural Lands Policies 2. 3 and 4, p. 3; Housing Policies, PP. 4-5; Comprehensive Plan Map Implementing Measures: Zoning Ordinance (No. 21), Articles 3.10 (R), 3.20 (RC), 5 (Conditional Uses); Subdivision Ordinance _ (NO. 18); MObile Home Park Ordinance (No. 19) . Buildable Lands Inventory Goal 10 defines buildable lands as It ••• l ands in urban and urbanizable areas that are suitable, available and necessary for residential use" lemphasis added). City of Uki ah Lands Suitable and Available for Residential Use - - - -11 Ukiah has inventoried its lands in terms of suitability and availability for housing (pp. II-I, VII-3-10, VIII-II, Natural Hazards Map, Soils Map) and has determined the income levels of its residents (pp. VIII-6-9). Based on 1970 data, 44 percent of Ukiah's residents had annual incomes below $5,000, while 33 percent earned over $8,000. These percentages are below both county and state averages for those income brackets (p. VIII-6). There are 53.8 acres of residential land within the city limits (p. VIII-II). A 1978 ECOAC survey reported 62 single family homes and 41 mobile homes in Ukiah (p. VIII-12). There are 71.3 acres of vacant land; 18.7 acres are in public or semipublic use and unavailable for development (p. VIII-II). According to a community attitude survey, there is a need for low cost housing (under $20,000) and rental homes and apartments (p. 111-4). The plan indicates (p. VIII-13) that Ukiah might be an attractive location for vacation homes or year-round dwellings for retired people. However, the primary determinant of housing needs is the U.S. Forest Service office in Ukiah, which either directly or indirectly provides most jobs in the community (p. 11- 2). The U.S. Forest Service Land Management Plan for the Ukiah area will be completed in July 1979 (p. II-I), at which time a more accurate assessment of housing needs will be made (Principal Comprehensive Planner, ECOAC, personal communication, May 3, 1979) . There is no official population growth. allocation for Umatilla County and its 12 cities (Principal Comprehensive Planner, ECOAC, personal communication, May 7, 1979). Because Ukiah was not incoporated until 1972, no population data are available from the 1970 census and the Oregon State Housing Division (p. VIII-12). However, ECOAC has made preliminary population projections for the City (p. VIII-14) which estimate that its 1977 population of 330 may reach 380 by 1995. This is dependent upon future U.S. Forest Service activities in Ukiah. Because population data are lacking, the City has not made an assessment of housing needs by type, acreage or numbers of units. Housing Policies The City of Ukiah would like to meet the housing needs of its citizens and provide for a variety of residential lot sizes, housing types and prices (Housing Policies, pp. 4-5). Approximately-YO acres within the UGB have been designated "Resi- dential," 31.6 acres "Residential/Commercial" and 58.4 acres "Future Residential and Publ ic" (p. IX-2, Comprehensive Plan Map). City of Ukiah -12- Ukiah has policies (land Use Planning Policies 3 and 4, p. 2) to develop population projections and to determine the land require- ments for projected population growth. The City will revise the comprehensive plan. implementing measures and UGB if necessary (land Use Policies 6, 7 and 8, p. 2). Implementing Measures The City Zoning Ordinance establishes two residential zones--the General Residential (R) zone (applied to 128.5 acres with the UGB) and the Residential Commercial (RC) zone (applied to 31.6 acres). Single family and two family dwellings are allowed outright in both zones. Mobile homes are allowed outright in the R zone and multiple family units are allowed outright in the RC zone. Multifamily dwellings and mobile home parks are conditional uses in the R zone. Article 5 of the City·s Zoning Ordinance contains the following approval standards for conditional uses: 1. The use will be consistent with the comprehensive plan and the objectives of the zoning ordinance and other applicable policies of the City. 2. Taking into account the location, size, design, and operating characteristics, the use will have minimal adverse impact on the (a) livability, (b) value and (c) appropriate development of abutting properties and the surrounding area compared to the impact of development that is permitted outright. 3. The location and design of the site and structures for the use will be as attractive as the nature of the use and its setting warrants. 4. The design will preserve environmental assets of particular interest to the community. 5. The applicant has a bona fide intent and capability to develop and use the land as proposed and has some appropriate purpose for submitting the proposal and is not motivated solely by such purposes as the alteration of property values for speculative -purposes. The Oregon Business Planning Council (see letter attached) has corrmented that these standards contain some Ilvague or undefined terms ...of the types discussed in the Oleo memo regarding Clari- fication of the St. Helens Policy." Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies wit~Goal 10. City of Ukiah -13- Ukiah has assessed existing housing, income levels, and land suitability and availability in the planning area. However, because 1) the U.S. Forest Service is the major determinent of both population growth and housing needs in Ukiah, and 2) official population data are lacking, the City has not been able to make an assessment of specific housing needs by type, acreage or numbers of units. However, Ukiah will do so when the U.S. Forest Service Land Management Plan is issued in July 1979. Based on this analysis, amendments to the plan, implementing measures and urban growth boundary will be made, if necessary. The City has adopted several housing policies regarding meeting the housing needs of citizens and has designated land for residential use. The City has zoned this land, consistent with its policies. Conditional use approval standards 2, 3, 4 and 5 are unclear and discretionary. However, with the exception of mobile home parks, all residential housing types are allowed outright ~ at least one zone. Update Item: In carrying out Land Use Planning Policies 3 and 4 (p. 2), the City must assess its having needs by type, acreage and number of units when the U.S. Forest Service Land Management Plan is released. Amendments to the comprehensive plan, implementing measures and urban growth boundary must be made if necessary, as provided in Land Use Planning Policies 6, 7 and 8 (p. 2). Suggestion for Plan Improvement: The City of Ukiah should eliminate unclear conditional use approval standards from Article 5 of the Zoning Ordinance or replace them with clear, specific standards. 9. Public Facilities and Services: (Goal 11) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, pp. 11-2, 111-3-4, VIII-12-18, IX-2 Land Use Map, School District Boundaries Map, Oregon State Highway Division Map of Ukiah, Water System Map, Sewerage System Maps Plan Policies: Land Use Planning Policy 5, p. 2; Public Facilities and Services Policies, p. 5; Urbanization Policy 4, p. 6; Comprehensive Plan Map; Urban Growth Are~Joint Management Agreement City of Ukiah -14- Implementing Measures: Subdivision Ordinance {No. I8}. Section 4 (Requirements for Improvements, Preservation and Design); Mobile Home Park Ordinance (No. 19), Section 3 (Requirements for Improvements, Preservation and Design); Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement; Preliminary Capital Improvement Program The comprehensive plan contains an inventory of public facilities and services, including schools, police, fire. water, sewer, solid waste and communication services (pp. 111-4, VIII-12-18, Land Use Map, School District Boundaries Map, Oregon State Highway Division Map of Ukiah, Water System Map, Sewerage System Maps). All are adequate to meet anticipated growth needs within the urban growth boundary (pp. VIII-12-18) with the followin9 exceptions: I. The capacity of the only school in the Ukiah School District is 100 students and current enrollment is 114. There are presently no plans for expansion (p. VIII-12). The Ukiah School needs rehabilitation or replacement (p. 111-4). 2. The water distribution system is undersized and lacks adequate looping in a few sections of the City, resu'lting in inadequate pressure and flows (p. VIII-I?). 3. Fire hydrants are located on four-inch lines, rather than the minimum six-inch lines required by the Oregon State Health Division (p. VIII-I?). Additional hydrants are needed as well (p. 111-4). Ukiah does not have a storm drainage system, but states that such a system "should be implemented in the presently popUlated areas and design consideration given to future expansion to accommodate growth" (p. VIII-18). Ukiah has adopted a policy (Public Facilities and Services Policy 3, p. 5) to "develop, maintain, update and expand police and fire services ...water and sewer systems and storm drains as necessary to provide adequate facilities and services to the community." Another policy (Public Facilities and Services Policy 4, p. 5) states that the City will work with the County "to insure adequate provision for and control of solid waste disposal sites." The City is currently developing a capital improvements program (Draft Preliminary Capital Improvement Program) which addresses storm drainage construction and water system improvements. Ukiah has a policy (Public Facilities and Services Policy 6, p. 5; Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement, V) to "provide city water and sewer services only within the urban growth boundary and upon annexation, irrevocable consent to ann~x, or at the discretion of the City Council. II Subdivisions and other new developments are required to have public facilities (Public Facilities and Services Policy 1, p. 5; Subdivision Ordinance, Sections 4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.7; Mobile Home Park Ordinance, Sections 3.5, 3.7). City of Ukiah -15- The plan does not contain specific policies or implementing measures for rehabilitation or replacement of the Ukiah School or other means of accommodating current or future overflow enrollment. However, Land Use Policies 5, 6, 7 and 8 (p. 2) relate to the determination of facilities and services required to accommodate unmet public needs, establishment of additional policies and implementing measures and revision of the plan as necessary. Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 11. Public facilities and services are either adequate to meet antici- pated growth needs or will be improved or built through the City's capital improvement program. The exception to this statement is the public school which has exceeded its present capacity. However, the City does not anticipate significant growth over the next 20 years, and has several policies regarding establishment of additional plan policies and implementing measures as needed. Update Item: The City must coordinate with the Ukiah School District in carrying out Land Use Planning Policy 5 (p. 2) and Public Facilities and Services Policy 2 (p. 5) when the U.S. Forest Service Land Manage- ment Plan is released. Amendments to the comprehensive plan and implementing measures must be made, if necessary, as provided in Land Use Planning Policies 6, 7 and 8 (p. 2). 10. Transportation: (Goal 12) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, pp. III-4, VIII-19; Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement, Attachments 0-1 (List of County Roads Within Urban Growth Boundary) and 0-2 (Existing County Roads Within Urban Growth Boundary); Land Use Map; Street Plan Map; Community Attitude Survey Plan Policies: Public Facilities and Services Policies 3 and 5, p. 5; Transportation Policies, pp. 5-6; Comprehensive _Plan Map; Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement; Street Plan Map Implementing Measures: Subdivision Ordinance (No. 18), Section 4 (Requirements for Improvements, Preservation and Design); Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement; Draft Preliminary Capital Improvement Program Ukiah's comprehensive plan contains an inventory of all streets and highways in the planning area (p. VIII-19, Land Use Map, Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement, Attachments 0-1 and 0-2). Currently, the only paved street is State Highway 244 (p. VIII-19). The City has identified specific needed street improvements (p. VIII-19 Street Plan Map) and has adopted policies which address these City of Ukiah -16- needs (Transportation Policies, pp. 5-6). These policies also express Ukiah's willingness to work with the County and the State in making street improvements. Ukiah and Umatilla County have agreed to cooperatively develop an implementation policy regarding development and maintenance of streets and roads within the UGB, consistent with the comprehensive plan (Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement. VII). Other modes of transportation are not addressed in the plan. It was determined during the planning process that street development and improvement was the only element to be addressed under Goal 12 relevant to the City of Ukiah (Principal Comprehensive Planner, ECOAC, personal communication, May 11, 1979). Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 12. 11. Energy Conservation: (Goal 13) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan pp. 111-5 Plan Policies: Public Facilities and Services Policy 6, p. 5; Transportation Policies, pp. 5-6; Energy Conservation Policies, p. 6; Urbanization Policies 3 and 4, p. 6) Implementing Measures: Zoning Ordinance (No. 21); Article 5.20 Conditional Uses--Placing Conditions on a Permit); Subdivision Ordinance (No. 18), Section 4.9 (Preservation of Natural Features and Amenities); Urban Growth 'Area Joint Management Agreement Ukiah recognizes (p. VII-II) the potential for solar energy for water and space heating and solid waste (primarily noncommercial grade wood from the Umatilla National Forest) for space heating (p. VII-II). Five policies (p. 8) have been adopted which call for (1) revision of the zoning ordinance to protect solar access, (2) design of new streets and buildings to allow for utilization of solar energy and landscaping to reduce summer cooling needs, (3) energy efficient extension and upgradin~ of water and sewer lines, (4) protection of existing trees and (5) retrofitting of buildings to conserve energy. The City's Public Facilities and Services Policy 6 (p. 5), Transportation Policies (pp. 5-6) and Urbanization Policies 3 and 4 (p. 6) also reflect Ukiah's concern for the con- servation of energy. Article 5.20 allows the City Council to impose conditions on conditional use permits, including limitations on the height, size or location of a building or structure and preservation of existing trees. The Subdivision Ordinance (Section 4.9) requires preservation of trees as a condition for subdivision or partition approval. Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 13. City of Ukiah -17- 12. Urbanization: (Goal 14) The acknowledgment request includes the following to comply with this Goal: Factual Information: Plan, pp. 11-2, III-2, III-4-5, VIII-ll, VIII-I3-I4, Land Use Map, IX-I-3; Urban Growth Area Joint Management Analysis Plan Policies: Land Use Planning Policies 2, 4, 6, p. 2; Agri- cultural Lands Policies, p. 3; Public Facilities and Services Policy 6, p. 5; Urbanization Policies, p. 6 Implementing Measures: ·Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement City Ordinance No. 20 (Adopting the Comprehensive Plan); County Ordinance No. 79-13 (Adopting Ukiah's Comprehensive Plan) Urban Growth Boundary Ukiah and Umatilla County have mutually adopted (Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement) a site specific urban growth boundary to separate urbanizable land from rural land (Urbanization Policy 1, p. 6, Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement, II.B.). The boundary, which encompasses 201.9 acres (including 154.4 acres within the city limits) (pp. VIII-II, IX-2), was based upon the seven factors of Goal 14 (pp. IX-I-2). The U.S. Forest Service Land Management Plan will not be completed until July 1979 (p. II-I). However, the City has a policy (Land Use Planning Policy 4, p. 2) to determine land requirements for projected economic development and population growth, and a policy (Land Use Planning Policy 6, p. 2) to revise the comprehensive plan and UGB based on new information. The City has included three areas, totaling 47.5 acres, within the UGB which are currently outside the city limits (Comprehensive Plan Map). One area was included to allow expansion of the U.S. Forest Service facility. A second was included to accommodate the addition of a new street. A third area was included to provide additional residential sites to which water, sewer and streets can be easily extended (p. IX-2). - Two "Expansion Areas" have been identified by Ukiah outside the UGB--one suitable for residential development and one suitable for industrial development (p. IX-2). It is not known now whether these areas will be needed. If, at a later date, a need can be demonstrated, the plan and UGB will be amended to include these areas as provided for in Ukiah's Urbanization Policy 3 (p. 6), Land Use Planning Policy 6 (p. 2) and Urban Growth Area Joint-Management Agreement. City of Ukiah -w- Transition from Urbanizable Land to Urban Uses Umatilla County has adopted Ukiah's comprehensive plan, including land use designations. for that portion of the UGB outside the city limits (i.e., the urban growth area) (Ordinance No. 79-12). In addition, the County has adopted the substantive provisions of the City's implementing ordinances for all lands within the urban growth area except those zoned for Exclusive Farm Use (Ordinance No. 7~-12) and has rezoned the non-EFU lands consistent with the City Zoning Map. The Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement (Sections II and III) specifies that land zoned for Exclusive Farm ·Use shall remain in that USe until rezoning is requested. Such rezoning shall be consistent with the City's plan and shall require adequate findings for the need to rezone. The Urbah Growth Area Joint Management Agreement also states that the City Zoning Map shall apply to land within the urban growth area upon annexation to the City. The Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement of these juris- dictions inclUdes provisions for review and amendment of the comprehensive plan. UGB and ordinances. as well as a process for coordinating the provision of urban facilities and services with1n the urban growth area. Conclusion: The City of Ukiah complies with Goal 14. C. Comments Received: The following have submitted statements on the acknOWledgment request: Agency or Party Port of Umatilla Oregon Business Planning Council Uregon Department of Transportation Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Uregon Department of Economic Development *Statement attached. D. Overall Conclusions: Position Acknowledge Comments* Acknowledge Comments* Comments The City of Ukiah has done an excellent job in developing a comprehensfve plan and implementing measures which comply with all Statewide Planning Goals. Several items have been identified in Goals 10 (Housing) and 11 (Public Faci"lities and Services) which should be corrected during plan update (see Sections IV.B.B. and lV.B.9. of this report for details). City of Ukiah V. RECUMMtNDATIUNS: A. Staff: -19- Recommends that the comprehensive plan and implementing measures of the City of Ukiah be granted acknowledgment of compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals. However: 1. In carrying out Land Use Planning POlicies 3 and 4 (p. 2), the City must assess its housing needs by type, acreage and number of units when the U.S. Forest Service Land Management Plan is released. Amendments to the comprehensive plan, implementing measures and urban growth boundary must be made, if necessary, as provided in Land Use Planning Policies 6, 7 and 8 (p. 2). 2. The City must coordinate with the Ukiah SChool District in carrying out Land Use Planning Policy 5 (p. 2) and Public Facilities and Services Policy 2 (p. 5) when the U.S. Forest Service Land Manage- ment Plan is released. Amendments to the comprehensive plan and implementing measures must be made, if necessary, as provided in Land Use Planning Policies 6, 7 and 8 (p. 2). B. Local Coordination Body: Recommends the Commission acknowledge the City of Ukiah's Comprehensive Plan and implementing measures to be in compliance with the Statewide Plannning Goals. CP:ka/MC 5/23/79 '.~ .f 1178 CHEMEKETA. N.E. STAFF: KATHERIHEKEENE Piar"""'} DItec/Qr DAVID S. HILL NI ,utll Re"x"" .. (J/,.CIO' SALEM. OREGON 97301 April 11. 1979 PHONE (503)370-8112 D;:;?A;n:~,lG:NT0:: LAND CONSERVf-\TIO~1 SALEM Mr. Wes Kvarsten, Director Department of Land Conservation and Development 1175 Court N. E. Salem. Oregon 97301 Dear Wes: The Oregon Business Planning Council has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance submitted by the City of Ukiah for acknowledgement of compliance. Enclosed please find detailed comments. The following general comments summarize our concerns with the Ukiah Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 1. The City has some problems with the water storage capacity and water distribution system. These problems are only addressed in a general way in the Plan Goals and Policies. It seems at least one Policy relating to the water problems could be included. 2. The Plan, Goals and Policies do not tie in well with the Industrial Zone. On page 3 the Open Space Goal and Policies refer to protecting Camas Creek and insuring public access. On page 4 the Hazard Goal and Policies refer to locating development outside the floodplain. The Zone Map shows industrial areas in the floodplain. 3. The urbanization portion of the Plan document does not tie together the population projections with the amount of land needed. There are numerous tables and paragraphs of discussion, however, there seem to be be no conversion mechanisms, such as population densities, to translate the current amount of land into future land needs. It is hard to determine where the acreages in Table 15, page IX -2 came from. Of special interest to OBPC is the change from 0.9 acres of industrial land now within the city limits, Table 13, page V~II - 11 to 21 acres in the future, Table 15, page IX - 2. Some of the 21 acres are in the flood- plain and some of the acreage may even be in Camas Creek. "£"SEIIS: ."-SSOClAT£O OfllEGOtt I"'OOSTAJ£S - CQgon F<>test Iltdll.tr;.. ColI~ - C/nogotI ~r.if ColIIICit 'OAEGON ASSOCtATIO'" OF fIIEALTOfIIS • OREGON· COLUMBIA ChAPT£R ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS _ c..n.tnlCfIOIlllldllur., AdoI.fIC*_1 F_ • OREGON S TAT£ HONE8UllOERS ASSOCLA TION , , Wes Kvarsten April 11, 1979 Page 2 4. In the zoning ordinance, especially in the conditinal use section, there are several vague or undefined terms. Some of these are livability, value, minimal adverse impact and environmental assets. These terms are of the type discussed in the DLCD memo regarding Clarification of the St. Helens Policy. The OBPC prefers that vague or undefined terms and phrases be deleted from ordinances. We recognize that growth pressure in Ukiah is not great and that the city has recently accomplished a major feat in the completion of the sewage plant and system. However, planning has a purpose of preparing now for future events and we feel that the plan should address the concerns we have outlined. ,Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely, ~:!:~iJ Associate Planning Director JJ:paw Attachment cc: Jim Kennedy Jeri Cohen ECOAC City of Ukiah OREGON BUSINESS PLANNING COUNCIL 1178CHEMEKETA N.E. STAFF; IU.Jr'\ ,.....~" .... , "...., ...... .,.,. MAY 1 7 1979 SALEM We are writing in response to your notice that the Cities of Echo, Pilot Rock, and Ukiah have requested acknowledgsnent of their cooprehensive plans. The CoWlty has, of course, revi~ and accepted the cities I plans and is satisfied that state-wide goals have been ccrrplied with in a manner acceptable and suitable to the cities. At our hearings, the urban gro.vth lx>undaries of the cities received special con- sideration because of citizen questions. However, the County accepted the cities' urban g~vth boundaries since the cities justified them by recognizing citizen concerns. The City of Echo especially is to be C 0 0> (50 responses, 11-30-76) '-'" 0," 0 iS~<.!> Z ~z, Z 3 19 24 Streets and roads 1ns 1de the C1 ty 11 m1 ts 16 16 8including maintenance' 4 28 8 Streets and roads outside the city Hmits 5 24 7 2includinq maintenance IO 21 4 5 Street li9hts 3 2D 15 I 1 6 35 Sidewalks and curbs 4 11 22 . 3 2 3 4 31 Street cleaning 11 22 5 11 23 4 3 Parking availability 2 6 27 1 39 3 I Water supply 38 city water -L well ? 1 2 32 2Do 'you have 10 10 5 IO Sewage disposal. After the new system is built, 8 ? 8 1will you have ~ city sewer 4 a septic tank? 3 5 9 21 Storm water drainage 6 II 18 3(storm sewers and cul verts) 32 9 3 3 Garbage collection I 10 22 22 16 3 2 Operation of city government 2 11 13 6 7 16 16 2 Library facilities 6 13 12 1 27 IS 5 City parks and picnic areas 2 13 20 5 7 22 10 Public meeting places and recreation 13 15 9 1facilities for children 3 6 22 13 Public meeting places and recreation 13 16 8 1facilities for teenaqers 5 7 19 13 ~~~;~~+~~~t~~~ ~~~~;~ and recreation 12 16 9 I 2 4 14 21 Public meeting places and recreation 9 13 9 1facilities for senior citi~ens 11 25 7 Fire protection (fire department) 7 18 5 6 I 9 10 21 Law enforcement (police department), speed 6 14 16 2and traffic control I 13 8 20 Law enforcement \pOl1Ce department) , all 6 12 18 2other activities 2 1 14 26 Dog control 18 8 11 2 2 4 13 21 Junked car removal 14 17 6 1 2 8 7 23 Nuisance ordinance enforcement 5 18 11 2 2 9 7 21 Litter control 12 13 9 1 13 13 9 Qua1ity of education in local schools 11 9 7 3 1 2 11 20 Medical and health facilities 10 14 4 2 27. How badly we we need new industry and the new jobs it brings? ll..a great deal 14 quite a bit J.L not much _S_none _I_don't know 28. How badly do we need new non-industry employment opportunities (services, retail trade, etc.)? . . ll.. a great deal ~ quite a bit .li- not much 6 none 3 don I t know 29. Please describe your living quarters: 40 owner -6- renter home 19 -S apartment duplex mobile home 20 -2- other 30. How much choice of housing is there for new residents? quite a lot moderate 3 little 43 almostnochoice 1 don'tknow 31. What kind of housing is most needed in town (check all that apply)? 21 homes to buy under $IS ,000 ---S homes to buy over $20,000 17 apartments·· 14 homes to buy from $IS ,000 to $20,000 39 homes to rent 13 dupl exes ~·mobile homes -3-- don't know 32. Should the·city acquire more land for parks and recreation facilities? (For example: trailer park, overnight camping) . 37 No __7_ Yes lf~, what kind of parks or facilities, and where should they be? ball park - 1, public camping/trailer - 2, private camping/trailer - 3, mobile home park - 1 33. In what city do you buy most of the following? Pi 1ot La Other Ukiah Rock Pendleton Grande (specify) ----- clothes 2 S 41 14 Portland gasoline 24 9 17 -S- Tri-Cities groceries -9- Il" 40 11 Dale furni ture -1- 27 8 catalog hardward and -2- M 34 12 M-F building supplies Island City automobil es 1 2 34 8 Union 34. How many years have you lived ~ in or 3 outside Ukiah? 7 less than 1 year 3 1-2 years _3_ 3-S years _5__ 6-10 years 7 11-19 years 1i. over 20 years 35. How many years do you plan to remain in the immediate area? 2 less than 1 year _5_ 1-2 years 7 3-5 years _3_ 6-10 years 33 indefinitely 36. If you moved to Ukiah in the last 5 years, why did you come? Descri be: _~j"o",b_-~1",5,-,,-,-11,,·k"e'-"a-'.re"'a'-----'.I _ 37. How many people in your household fall into each of the following age groups? 14 age under 10 34 10-17 9 18-22 31 23-35 24 36-50 15 51-64 12 65 and over 38. What is the present primary occupation of the head of the household7 17 lumber industry T agriculture -3- education 10 retired 6 construction unemployed clerical/retall 1 ranching 2 professional I - managed a1 _1_ other (specify) high"ay 39~ If there is a second wage-earner in the household~ what is his/her present occupation? 1 lumber industry - agriculture -1- educati on 3 retired construction -1- unemployed 2 clericallretail - ranching 1 professional/ - managerial ~ other (specify) restaurant~ flY tier, cook, bookkeeper 40. In which area does the head of the household work? 34 Ukiah' 1 Pilot Rock '2 Pendleton 1 La Grande -l. other (specify) 41. If there is a second wage-earner in the household, where does he/she work? 8 Ukiah Pilot Rock Pendleton La Grande 1 other (specify) 42. How is your home primarily heated? 29 Electric 5 Gas 12 Oil 8 Wood 43. Do you have a secondary sources of heat? 20 No 22 Ves If yes, 3 Electric 7 Gas 4 Oil 17 Wood 44. If solar heating becomes economic. would you like information or assistance to add a solar heating system to your home? 20 No 20 Yes If yes, R information 5 assistance 45. Is additional growth of the city desirable? 17 No 21 Yes If yes, 5 added popul ati on 5 added acreage 13 both - -- - 46. What do you feel is the minimum. desirable acreage for land parceling or subdivision outside the city? 6 1ess than 1 acre 18 1-4 8 5-40 3 40 acres or more 47. Do you feel that 11 Ukiah, 1 the county, 8 both should consider collecting a development feeat the time landls parceled or subdivided to help cover the increasing cost of services which may result from parceling or subdivision? 19 No 19 Yes If yes, indicate for which services: _water _ sewer _ street _ school _ other (name) _ 48. Is there a need to provi de addi ti ona 1 control over horses, cattle, etc. in town? 26 No 17 Yes If yes, in wha t areas? _----'c:..:c1:...:t:.::s._-....;8"-",---,,d:.::o.;zg:::-s_-----=7_-,--_ 49. List the streets in Ukiah that are most in need of improvement. All - 11, Camas - 10, Alba - 9, School Hill/Cr~ek - 7, Well - 8, Other- 9 50. Are there sites or buildings which should be identified and recognized for their historical importance? "Corner House - Stage Stop - First F.S. Office (McMillian's)" "All archaeological (Indian) sites." "Yes, the old corner house - for the stagecoach stop." 51. Would you support city expenditures for the following: No Yes If yes, indicate minimal moder'ate level: subs tanti a1 Law Enforcement Fire Protection Community Center and City Hall 34 T 18 3 -7- 7 3 19 13 -6- 2 52. Should the City provide water and/or sewerage servlce outside the city 1imits? 24 No 20 Yes If yes, how should the services be provided? 3 To a service district only --9-- Only after annexation 13 At the same cost as city users 53. Do you feel being met? that shopping and residential needs ;n the area are adequately If no, how can they be improved? shopping residential 15 Ves -7- Ves 3D No 26 No Shopping: Add another competitor Better supplies Too high of prices - unfriendly services Larger inventory on everyday items Great need for another store Lower prices More available Not enough supplies are carried More items They tend to take advantages of the monoply state in the corrmunity Enlarge Better supplied store Better stock on hand New management; In past our needs were more adequately met with present facilities Need more· competition for those here As a big enough need arises and it becomes profitable, the need will be met. There is no place to shop Have competitive stores and service station - 2 each Need more competitive choice and price Ukiah badly needs competition to improve quality and service. More competition Encourage population growth and thus attract new and larger retail outl ets. Residential: More places to live Dupl exes More homes opened (many empty houses not being used) Building Offer more housing More available Not enough housing Need for housing Not enough housing rentals; find someone with money that will invest There'is nothing in Ukiah to rent and this drives people away from Ukiah There is no place to live More housing Need more places to 1"i ve; 1and and houses Need more housing availability 54. What has Ukiah done on the past five years about v/hich you are proud? Dur park Water system. park improvement Nothing Have a good park Park improvement. sewer project 54. Continued " Fire protection Improvement on church, a school, and park Dedication of city park They managed to get by without a planning commission There has not been much change. Most of us like what Ukiah is now, not what bigger towns have. Constructed a park with play ground faciliti~s - for all. Sponsored the annual Basque Barbeque Improved the fire protection service so it has lowered our fire insurance. Made improvements in the park. Fire protection . Fixed up the park . Fi re department, sewer development Improved park and fire department Water and sewer system Water system and fire protection also the city park Established a water and sewer system Improvement to city park Water, fire City park Put water system in Nothing Added the park The park improvement, fire fighting facilities, water, and sewer systems Park - play ground, water system Park - play ground, - (oil side roads), addition to school, city water. Done most of its improving without outside help Water system, fire protection, city park Nothing Our water system is the best in the United States The park Increased number of christians in area Held city taxes to zero, no law. enforcement 55. What are the most serious problems in Ukiah? Lack of housing Schools, housing Bad roads Not being able to collect due for TV Don I t know The size of the high school Discrimination Speed limit too fast through town. Winter time maintenance on high- ways is not as good as could be. None None Sewerage Streets and old shacks Lack of housing and law enforcement We have no way of forcing people to pay TV dues; too many freeloaders who are on payrolls and won't pay 55; Conti nued The availability of liquor and dope to our minors School financing, teenage drinking, contributing to minors No law enforcement and attitude of people toward it Oon1t need too many tax levys all at once and let the local people have the town jobs and school , Dump - like looking places and more clean up needs to be done and better streets and lighting Teenage drinking - drugs - parents and children disobeying laws concerning minimum age of driving "Better school with lower property tax - a new base found to support our school. No place to congregate to exercise and to meet people except the school. The fact that a planning commission is being established. Problems that came to us from larger communities. Streets improved and some of the junky shacks either fixed or cleaned up, street lights Children driving snowmobiles in town. They have no knowledge of traffic laws, someone is going to get hurt. Vacant lot left'unattended for the weeds to grow and create·a fire hazard in the fall. The lack of jobs. and recreation for young people. The feeling of some people that most of the citizens should change long established living freedoms. Let more of the local people run our town and schools and take the jobs ~hat the forest service people hold. Poor housing, poor recreation areas for the young and the old. Streets, sewage Sewer ana streets, street lights Dogs, young people (under age) drinking in public, trucks going too fast within city limits. Poor school and city governmental practices; city is very one sided. Should try recognizing new people and ideas. Lack of shopping facilities. Could use more complete grocering and :hardward line, clothing. The most serious problem is the state highway through'the center of town. Disrespect and disregard of the law. Adults providing liquor for the young people! The lack of law enforcement and recreation for the younger people. Also when people come into the area they are discouraged due to lack of housing. Decent housing for low income groups (under $10,000 per year). 56. What would you like to see accomplished in Ukiah during the next five to ten years? Improved streets and housing More rentals and homes, more business competition Sewerage Move the high school to Pilot Rock A place for young people to gather, old houses torn down or cleaned up, a community center built, and old cars removed. More home building, addition of play ground for school. 56. Continued Sewage up grading of the home and building new homes. I would like to see a YMCA or similar building for the people to meet and have recreation (teens especially). I would like to see th,e schoo1 get a new gym. I would like to see the planning commission done away with - also zoning. But why wait five or ten years, let's do it now. Continuation of our freedom and way of life. Not to follow the same path of larger towns. Improve street and install street lights. Clei\n up some of the lots and old houses. Street improvement, community center. Paved streets - let's get rid of the dust. Refence the park. Another store, another garage, better streets, and a community center for people to go who don't like going to the bar. The need of the people met with a little interference from organized social groups. A place for the kids to have recreation such as pool, shuffle board, dancing, pot lucks, etc. Better street lights, better streets, better housing. Sewer system completed, streets paved. Sewer and streets, street lights. Improved housing, streets, litter and dog control. Improved land planning. See the city park cleaned up and see all of the people in Ukiah com- bined in their efforts for a better city. Added shopping facilities A community building provided for the young people for decent recrea- tion. A concern about the drugs and drinking problems so prevelant. A general clean up. The improvement of the city in cleaning a lot of junk from around the st~eets and improving the streets and walk areas for pedestrians. Better housing and shopping. 57. Please list in order of preference those projects listed in questions 55 and 56 for which you would be willing to support a bond issue or taxing 1evy, if needed. None Some street improvement Bad roads Schools Home building, play ground for school Sewerage Law enforcement, housing improvement No None All volunteer work and donations, all town people work together help get this done, no tax levy needed. Street improvement and lighting, children (older) recreation facilities. No more taxes of any kind, unless everyone pays their fair share. New gym at the school, building for other recreation needs. Both of them if success were quaranteed. 57. Continued None. We have too much government and taxes now. Street lights Paved streets Don't need tax levy for this volunteer, cake, cookies, etc. sales to ra i se money volunteer money and work on it. Al so di.nners gi ven to raise money. City should handle the street lights, improve the city streets and more housing for people to rent. Sewer (already passed a bond issue), streets All Dog control. improved streets (s i dewa1ks, curbs, ,"; ghts) Law enforcement, fire department, water and sewer New attitudes Housing - double wide mobile homes with 1,000 or more feet. 58. Please make any comments which would help to make Ukiah a better place to live. or any other comments you want to make. ~ more representative governing body of both city and school. Vacant old fire ~rap houses removal and junk removed. Could tie made a pretty city.· Not only junk cars but other piles of junk as just beyond city water building. A good close restaurant: Request a county law officer to be stationed in Ukiah as they do in Hermiston and Milton-Freewater. Better housing. Parents policing their own children to obey state laws . .If·you·own.land you should not betoldhow to parcel. Friendly reception and attitude toward new arrivals. We like a simple small town life and would like to leave it that way. Retail businesses should conform to needs of community instead of trying to get rich. Improvement of streets would help greatly and enlarging or building new eating facilities would help plus other trades such as clothing or department stores. Its been real good up to now. Like to see people keep their noses out of other peoples' business. I have never seen a larger town or city that has anything that I want enough to trade my way of life and personal freedom for. Working together as a community and not squabling over every issue. All helping instead of a selected few who do all the· park cleaning, mowing, etc. or any other project. 58. Continued The parents of children who have snowmobiles, should encourage them to ride outside of town. It \~ou'ld be much safer for everyone. , More job opportunities for teenagers. If there was jobs available there would be less kids needing something to do and getting bored with whatever they have they can do. They would have less time and less energy that needs worked off. The park has been real good for the boys and gi rl s basketball, and tenni s. To bad someone c.an I t get the kids interested in roller skating and ice skating. All of the facilities in the world isn't going to do any good unless someone can get the kids interested in using what they have. If the adults would show interest in a few recreational sports (outdoor) it wouldn't be long until the teenagers joined in. Whats badly needed is adult leadership and supervision or organization. Construction equipment or large machinery shouldn't be parked inside of city limits on vacant lots next to peoples' residents. People should not be able to put up gas tanks next to neighbors' fences if the homes are close to the fences. Gas tanks should have to be buried inside of the city. 'r~achinery should be fenced so kids won't play on it and get hurt. ' . I am persuaded in my own mi nd it woul d hel p if peopl e comi ng into the community whether hunters from out of town or the 4th of July doing, realized there are those who don't like the drinking, loose talk, and the effect it has on the young people. Its almost a law of our society that if you aren't drinking or smoking pot, you can't have any fun 'and all the adults seem to be out 0f prove its right. I still believe in free social and private ·Iiving without outside, forced compliance to self imposed laws, so that a few people can make themselves look important. Most persons that live here do so, so that they can have these fel'l 1uxuri es of pri vate self-re1iance without interference. If any organizing is to be done, it should be done to insure personal and social freedoms that are now being enjoyed because of lack of too much government. The city should have no control outside its own boundaries. The city should not be in competition with a free enterprise. Any services supplies by a city should fill the need of those who live there which cannot be supplied any other way. The reason of answer on 55 is because so many forester people are here awhile then gone and we do have local people that can handle the jobs fine. Also the elderly people here should have a place to hold there get togethers, volunteer material labor, etc. could make, this possible. Also have a work crew to do labor for the elderly lawns, fixing things for them, etc. I don't think the people of Ukiah really know what they are getting into expecial'ly the cost of zoning. I came from a small town like Ukiah that was zoned and it was a disaster and they are still stuck with it. Please relook at all your zoning plans it effects everyone. 58. Cant i nued We need a recreation place for the young people badly as there is nothing for them to do. They don't like to sit,at home everyniQht watching television like the older people do. Keep improvement costs within the people's ability to pay. Use mostly state and federal monies. People in town seem to feel that if they pay $4.00 a month for water they!ll just use as much as possible. Maybe water meters would be a good idea. Really need a laundromat in town. If all the peop1e"in Ukiah would not be so selfish and remember that no one person owns or runs this town. All the people have a voice that should be listened to. To provide~calm and collective city government. More brotherly love and more consideration for others. Each -person 1i vi ng in Uki tih is a res i dent of, Uk; ah and thereby , considers this his home. Because of that, each citizen should be allowed equal)y under a democracy to constructively voi ce and state his opinion concerning city government and the ~chool. There ·are two major areas that directly affect everyone Newcomers' opinion and corrments unless they· agree with the "few" are not solicited or welcome. New faces, new opinions would be beneficial on the school board but they are not allowed! This is wrong! and undemocratic. New ideas might bring change, but changes for progress are good and needed in Ukiah: The people of Ukiah have a very good meeting place with the recrea~ tion facilities in the school if they can be used then there would be no need of building something different. Newcomers are discouraged by having to go 100 miles roundtrip for supplies and having to live in substandard housing. 59. Additional Comments (su9gested questions) Is the person or persons filling out this questionnaire taxpayers? Are you a taxpayer? __ Yes __ No IN THE COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR UMATILLA COUNTY AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION OF Equity } Law No~.----- STATE OF OREGON. o County of Umatilla }ss. I. .,.-....:C"-'o"-'-"n'-'n"'i""e'--'f~Q>J.Lr--"d'-- .,.- being first duly I 51- '·E~i2. --- :-~ : ''!. '"\......... ~ PUILIC Nonce - .'•• The' UIIIi., City Council .,d . IPlanning Commission will hofd • ~ Wbllch...lng to Obtain comments/ on the. UkiM'll~~ Draft.. ' Com. .: Ipre-he-nsive. Plan.- on Tuesday Jctnuaf'"Y 3",197', at 1:30 p:m. at tne Ukiah School LlrIch Room. . Land presentJy' in itliJ"iC\lltura~ use- tin ~en includftd with;n the pr_ ...- ..................,.. After .ooption of the plan ·and growth bomdary any land within tne bOmdNy may continue to be' f"rmeet untlJ~fh. I.ndown.~ de-cide'S to con.....rt the land '10 ur~n usn. Such- conversion Is~ $Obi«t to city, county.-and stlrl~ policies and- regulations. AnYOM whO has questions- or comments concerning the draft· plan Of" tecmica' report may ... contact Hmry MDr:"us, Carr;· pre-hensl.,. Plano..-, east Central' .Ot'"e-gon Assoc:~jon of Counties. . Post Offlce.Box 339, Pendletonr Or~n 97801. 27~732. Ukiah City Council . .•.. Ukiah Plarmin9 CommissiOn' I: "". De<:em~,. 23, V, 1977, J."uary J. 1978 - ... "'. -. was published iIi. 0 the entire issue ,lanUCJr~9-.J.J!, , \~'.?~<~ e~&.J,C~~'?..c~.-I;.2.;;.3~1,;;;.;3."-7':>'1-J.1J.o ~ <1aLln--,-.- -, 3_/c--0-'-:-=;;;""-o--,.--¥!---,-:-:7r'.----'-' 19~ /,i i . ,.J~~~:cribed and_s~or:: _~. bef?r::~:. ~~ .__-_-_-_-_",S",.t"".ub_.-.--..-...-, ~_a_y.of I i ~ ~ ~ printed 'cOpy of which is hereto~exed.i . '. . ., ff said newspaper for ':1"',_"'--__ successive an,d consecu:tive .; n so Q~ '!- , Q n 81 i . :the following iss}le5: MY CC',,: . 5E,':-7, d, 1 ~G) :.~ .. I I IN THE COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR UMATILLA COUNTY AFFIDAVIT OF PUBUCATION OF Equity ILow No_.----- STATE OF OREGON. County of Umatilla I. _--"C::.o""c.""i"e=-..:F,,o"'r'-"d being first duly sworn. depo5e and say that I am the principal clerk of the: publisher of the: East Oregortian. a newspaper of general circ:ulatioo. as deEined by QRS 193.010 • " " .. '..~ • 1. --'-p-"o'-'-trL;,e>,,.,..i-"o'-'-!-,-,tul-,,·C,-,,~...,/k,,- being first duly IN THE COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR UMATILLA COUNTY AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION OF } No.EquityLaw }ss.STATE OF OREGON, County of Umatilla swOrn, depose and say that I am the principal clerk of the publisher of the East Oregonian, a newspaper of general circulation. ~ defined by ORS 193.010 ! -~'.c.~ •... · .......·E0-445;"'~~ ..~_"':·t·'='-:- -= PusLle NOTICe :-r"-' ~t The Umatilla County Board of Commissioner$ will hold public h.earlngs on fhe draft comprehen.. Slve plans for th~..cjty of Pilot . Rock lind the £it¥ gf llkji'h In ae-. coraetnce w.fR Uie Resolution and Order entitled, "In t~ Matrt"r of the Deyelopmenf and Adoption of Procedures and Standards for County Review of City Compre- hensive Plans::. for the follOWing purposes: ·1 .'."... _. '.,.' (1) To review the Citin of Pilot Rock and Ukiah Draft Compre- . henSI''1t" Pilins for compliancl!-' . with the Ortgoo Stftewide Plan- ,t nlng Goals; I ~, ": · ....>:D (2) To revi~ the Pilot rock and! Ukiah Draft Comprehensive' ~ Plans for coordination with lIf. : - feeted ~over!,mentalagencies; . ~ _(3) To Idenflfy potential city... · . county issues that ""d to be .. • ~ ruolve.d prior to final adoption · "ofthe draft plans by the county; "~ (Ons "may' contact Dave Bishop, Umafilla ~ounly Planning Direclor. Uma. tdla County Courtnouse, Pendle- ~~~~ ~r<...-J «2 ~;.--< x..-,ecA J Notary Public of Oregon issues: •..J -:::j ..., , ; -. "'. .~ .( ,.. f"'\ '_1" Subscribed -;;;d _._._------_ •.._----_.__._---_._---~--_._-- ! ~ . ""~j •..., :a printed copy ot whichI· 's r- 'pf said newspaper fo.ri i ,',- jthe followiD.g . ,I I I ! I I ! '1 IN THE COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR UMATILLA COUNTY • AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION OF Equity ILaw No. _ • STATE OF OREGON. County of Umatilla RECEIVED JUN - 81978 - E.C.O.A.C. I. ~8iP""v~p~r",-1~YLJI(u:r~o~s~tui~n~g'l- being first duly sworn. depose and say that I am the principal clerk of the publisher of the East Oregonian. a newspaper of genual circulation. as defined by DRS 19.3.010 and J93.020; printtd and published at Pendleton in the aforesaid county and \ ' Subscribed and sworn to before me this -'b"-"t~h'_ day of Notary Public of regon the following issues: state:; that thi__·-:E"'.O:-7.:-:.7"O-'-P"u"b"1"i"c:-N=o"t"i"c,,p'- ----- of said newspaper for __-,,2~__ successive and consecutive i n se rt i onlil ________J""'u"O"'''==f 19-Th }~ \.....:;.0'G L l .. C ,Lt$. a printed copy of which is hueto annvced. was published in the entire issueI" :>.. t.:Y c:....· ,~,_.~ C''.?IR=.:5 s;;:".,. o. 19€O IN THE COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR UMATILLA COUNTY AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION OF 378"'l--Li '"teEIVED } No., _EquityLaw ) the following issues: ('"1t ..~ .i;'-~-~~EO-I71'. :(., t""":.. ;.. ~ ....~.".O ~U.L1C;NOTtCE;"'""'-r-fJ ~'.The Umatill. County PtClooir,.:- ~ Commission will hold public he.,.·· "'iogs 'to- r"e"W'5ew ~'Obtliln pUblic :comment Ion· ......' T hn . " ports of·the r,ff e I ""P'T;. I ro~ "t'11Ua. an ,e d. a cflo. on Jv- 19 12. 1911 at 1:I5 p.m.• O~aflll. County CourthOuse. Room 20, PendleTon. Oregon. Results of the ,hearings will be" in the form of recomm.oo6Tfons to 1he Umatilla County Board 0( Commluioners... . Persons wishing fvr1flref". i"~. formation- ma contact Henry Markus. Compr.n.ntiw Planner. East C~ntTal 0re90n As.sociatiOt'l Of CountlH. 920 s. w. Fr..tt~r~ Pendl~ton# OrerUral Of'~ AUOd.tion of Counties..920 South~.West Fraur._ Pendleton. Oregon 77101;- I t~lephone: 776-6m. :.' ~ DATeD !his. 20fn day of {July,. 1978... .... ~ • ..1.--;......, • ~ UMATILLA COUNTY ,::;:' BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ' July 20, 1978~ ~., . , , - .. ----------'J=--=:o/;:::o~ 19~ / ../ -. . /' r-;l 'v~t.) (J/ y,a-rated PJrtion of the City of Ukiah proposed Urban GI'CNlth Boundary. On Wednesday, FebruaI1' 14, 1979, at 10:00 a.m. in Rcx:xn 114 of the Co\.Ulty Courthou<-ic in Pendleton, the Umtilla County Board of Qxrm.i.ssioners will consider adoption of the City's CarqJrehensive Plan and Zoning for these lands. Adoption will change the land classification and approved land uses fran County to City designations. Current County P1an Classification: ~ __ -, Orrrent County 'Zoning Designation: _ Proposed City Conprehensive Plan Classification(s) : __ Proposed City Zoning llesignation(s) : _ For further infonro..tion I City plans amI maps are available for your inspection at City Hall, at the ColUlty Planni.ng Departrrent in the County O:mrthouse in Pendleton, and at East Central Oregon Association of Q)unties (920·SW Frazer, Pendleton). .. IN THE COURT OF THE 5TATE OF OREGON FOR UMATILLA COUNTY I=r:Q -, '7 iJ~ l..l.-' I I .J}No. _EquityLaw AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION OF i .~.~J~ :··(~~~:.~~~:::·l;c;·~ .:~.~:;~ . - :;;- -. PUBLIC NOTICE .:.~ .\~ 'THE': UMATILLA COUNTY . ~ BOARD OF. COMMISSIONERS ,will hold- PUblic hurings on the' . tinali~ed Compreh~n!oivt" Plans lor , .th~ ciTies of Pilot Rock •.Ulnr In Ih. CounTy Courlhouse in Pefldleton. and at EaST Cen~rdl Oregon AssO(.;ation of Counties (920 S.W. Fra.er. Pend'~lon).· • ' D.HED tni$ Jrd Fe::.ru.ry.19J9, .# U:., Tl'..LA COUNTY 80ARD Or: CO v,o\ISSIONERS February 3. 1919 .. ;", - ,. --~-,---~_.-'.-"0.'~:;....;... _., ...... ·.i":'r-.o:.: ~ .. ' .. ;~--:' ::.,,,, C. was 'published in the entire issue .~ .' Feb. 7"/ _=-~"'---_',_'_,,' 19_,_· «::l <~/c"<~ / cO, ~~~~\-.- > ~~ b ~ ; Notary Public of Oregon issues: feb. 3rd 19 7'1 _~_'(~.~-,,=,,''''''''A·.!."'-'!'-'-"'""'"'t~r t;n lW±~)__:' \ 5th : : Subscribed and sworn to before me this -,- day of Beverly ~rostil\!-JI. -'- c'-- being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the principal clerk of the publisher of the Eas( :::TATE OF OREGON. County of Umatilla Ort:gonian. a newspaper of general circulation. as defined by ORS 193.010 and 193.020; printed and published at Pendleton in the aforesaid' county and i"sfate; -thilHhe---t.O- ·:;::'8 h .. n lie ootiCf; "-l:om;>I' ~rli;!n5i v ~--p LUIs ~ the following ; a printed copy of which· is hereto annexed. l ., "iof said ne\~spaperfor 1_' . successive and consecutive _i,_ii_:"_c _,,,_.,_t_:._:_G_:ln •GOALS AND POLICIES OROINANCE NO. ~ AN OROINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF UKIAH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SECTION 1. AUTHORITY .~ Pursuant to Oregon Rev.i sed Sta tutes Chapter 92. 197. 215 and 227. the Statewide Planning Goals, and in coordination with Umatilla County and other affected governmental units. the City of Ukiah hereby adopts the City of Ukiah Comprehensive Plan including plan goals and policies as enumerated herein and the plan map included as Attactunent uA". SECTION 2. PLAN TECHNICAL REPORT The technical report provides the background information. facts and considerations that the city's comprehensive plan goals, policies and map are based on. The technical report is not adopted as part of the plan but remains the supporting document that is subject to re- visan as new technical data becomes available. When new data indicates that the city's plan should be revised. amendments shall be made as provided in Section 7. SECTION 3. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES All plan implementation measures including but not limited to the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance, Mobile Home Park Ordinance, and Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement between' the City and County, shall be consistent with and subservient to the City Compre- hensive Plan. SECTION 4. AVAILABILITY OF PLAN After the City Comprehensive Plan receives acknowledgement of com- pliance from the Oregon Land -Conservation and Development Commission, the comprehensive plan, technical report and implementation measures shall be available for use and inspection at Ctty Hall, County Planning Department office, East Central Oregon Association of Counties office in Pendleton, and the Department of Land Conservation and Development office in Salem. SECTION 5. PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES The following statement of goals and policies provide a general long- range basis for decision-making relative to the future growth and develop- ment of the City. The goals are patterned after and are in direct response to applicable Oregon Statewide Planning Goals. The policy statements set forth a guide to courses of action which are intended to carry out the goals of the plan. The policy statement present the City's position on matters pertaining to physical improvements and development. A. Citizen Involvement GOAL: To devetop a citizen invotvement program that insures oppor- tunity for citizens to participate in aU phases of the ptanning process. It shall be City Policy: 1. To conduct periodic community surveys to ascertain public opinion and collect information; tabulated survey results shall be dis- tributed. 2. To encourage people to attend and participate in city council meetings and hearings. 3. To make technical reports available for public inspection. 4. To distribute the comprehensive plan to the public for use as a reference in making decisions -affecting land use. B. Land Use Planning GOAL: To estabtish a tand use ptcmning process and poticy framework as a basis for att decisions and actions retated to use of tand and to assure an -adequate fac'tuat base for such decisions and actions. It shall be City Policy: -1. To prepare data inventories on natural resources, man-made struc- tures and utilitieS, population and economic characteristics, and the roles and responsibilities of affected governmental units. 2. To identify lands suitable for development and areas where develop- ment should be-restricted. 3. To develop economic and population proj ections. 4. To determine the land requirements for projected economic develop- ment and population growth. 5. To determine the public facilities and services required to accom- modate existing unmet public needs and expected economic and popu- lation growth. 6. To revise the comprehensive plan and urban growth boundary for the City of Ukiah as necessary based on available information, citizen input, coordination with affected governmental units, and the goals and policies adopted herein. 7. To prepare, adopt and revise as necessary zoning, subdivision and mobile home park ordinances. 8. To establish additional policies and implementation measures con- sistent with the Comprehensive Plan as necessary. 2. C. Agricultural Lands GOAL: To presep/)e and maintai:n agriculf;ural lands. It shall be City Policy: 1. To identify agricultural lands which should be preserved and protected from urban development. 2. To encourage residential, commercial, and industrial develop- ment within the urban growth boundary. 3. To restrict residential, commercial, and industrial development outside the urban growth boundary. 4. To retain land within the urban growth area presently zoned for Exclusive Farm Use for farming until rezoning is requested. D. Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources GOAL: To conserve open space and proteat naturat, scenia.. and cultural. resources. It shall be City Policy: 1. To protect Camas Creek and insure public access. 2. To examine any publicly owned lands including street rights-of- way for their PC?tential open-space use before their disposition. 3. To protect archaelogical and historic sites, structures, and artifacts. 4. "To conserve the area's natural resources. E. Ai r, Water ,and Land Resources Quality GOAL: To maintain and improve the quality of the air" water and land resources of Ukiah. It shall be City Policy: 1. To limit all discharges from existing and future development to meet applicable state or federal environmental quality statutes, rules, and standards. 2. To encourage industries to locate in Ukiah which would have no signficant detrimental effect on the environmental resources of the' area. 3. F. Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards GOAL: To protect Ufe and property from natural, disasters and hazards. It shall be City Policy: 1. To encourage development to locate outside floodplains, natural drain- ageways, steep slopes, and other hazardous areas. 2. To require site specific information clearly determining the degree of hazard present from applicants who seek approval to develop re- sidential, commercial, or industrial uses within known areas of natural disasters and hazards. G; Recreational Needs GOAL: To· satisfy the recreational, needs of the citizens of Ukiah and visitors. It shall be City Policy: 1. 1.0 develop a community center to provide a public meeting place and recreational facilities for all age groups. 2. To plan community recreation facilities in conjunction with existing and planned school facilities so that they complement each other in function. . H. Economic Development GOAL: To diversify and improve the economy of Ukiah. 1. To encourage commercial development to meet the needs of residents and visitors. 2. To protect those areas suitable for industrial development from encroachment of incompatible land uses. 3. To encourage diversified, non-polluting industrial development in order to provide a stable job market for area residents. 4. To maximize the utilization of local manpo~ler as job opportunities increase. I. Hous i ng Goal,: To increase the suppl,y of housing to al,l,ow for population growth and to provide for the housing needs of the citizens of Ukiah. 4. It shall be City Policy: 1. To encourage a moderate rate ~f growth. 2. To cooperate with agencies involved in the development of low and moderate income housing .. 3. To encourage future residential developments which provide prospective buyers with a variety of residential lot sizes, a diversity of housing types, and a range in prices. J. Public Facilities and Services GOAL: To pl.an and develop a timely, orderly, and efficient arrangement of pubZic faailities and services to serve as a framework fop urban deveZopment. It shall be City Policy: 1. To reguire underground installation of utilities in all nevI 5ub- divislons. 2. To cooperate with agencies involved in providing and coordinating social services. to the community. 3. To develop, maintain. update, and expand police and fire services, streets and sidewalks, water and sewer systems, and storm drains as necessary to provide adequate facilities and services to the cOlllTlunity. 4. To work with Umatilla County to insure adequate provision for and control of solid waste disposal sites. 5. To plan public facilties, utilities and services to meet expected demand through development of a capital improvement program. 6. To provide city water and sewer services only within the urban growth boundary and upon annexation, irrevocable consent to annex, or at the discretion of the City Council. K. Transportation GOAL: To provide and encourage a safe~ convenient~ and economic trans- portation system. 1. To encourage Umatilla County to pave County Road Nos. 275 and 448 within the city limits and replace the bridge over Camas Creek. 2. To encourage the State of Oregon to repave State Highway No. 244 within the city limits. 5. ·~~·Il.?t_H~'-"""" """:- ""'''-'''''''''''''''''''' • _ 3. 4. To prioritize the sequence for the paving of city streets. To contract with Umatilla County or the State of Oregon to pave streets within the City when they are doing work in the area. L. Energy Conservation GOAL: To conserve energy and develop and use renewable energy resources. . . It shall be City Policy: 1. To revise the zoning ordinance to protect solar access. 2. To encourage orientation and design of new streets and buildings to allow for utilization of solar energy and provision of land- scaping to reduce summer cooling needs. 3. To design the extension and upgrading of water and sewer lines and facilities to minimize energy use. 4. To protect existing trees. 5. To encourage building owners to retrofit their buildings to conserve energy and reduce operating costs. M. Urbanization GOAL: To provide for an orderly and 'efficient transition from rural to urban land use. 1. Io establish an urban growth boundary to identify and separate urbanizable land from rural land. 2. To develop a cooperative process between Ukiah and Umatilla County for the establishment and change of the urban growth boundary. 3.. To first consider land in designated expansion areas for- inclusion within the urban growth boundary. 4. To consider only those areas that are within the urban growth boundary for annexation to the city. 5. To work with Umatilla County to develop policies and regulations to manage land development within the urban growth boundary outside city 1imi ts. 6. To tax land within the urban growth boundary based on current use and market value. 6. SECTION .·6 .. PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATION MEASURE REVIEW The City Comprehensive Plan and implementation measures shall be reviewed at least annually to determine conform~ty with changes in: Oregon Revised Statutes and administrative rules; Oregon Case Law; Oregon Statewide Planning Goals; Requirements of the City; Needs of residents or landowners within the City or urban growth area; and Concerns of the County and other affected governmental units. If the City Comprehensive Plan, implementation measures, or both fail to conform to any of the above criteria, the non-conforming . document(s) shall be amended as necessary and as soon as pt'acticable. SECTION 7.. PLAN AMENDMENT After th~ City Council determines that proposed amendments should be considered, amendment of the Comprehensive Plan shall be based" on the following procedure and requirements. "A.The City Council shall set a public hearing date and give notice thereof through a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing and if applicable. notice shall be mailed to: 1. Property owners within 250 feet of land subject to a proposed amendment to the plan map; and 2. Affected governmental units which may be impacted by or who have requested opportunity to review and comment on proposed amendments. B. Copies of proposed amendments shall be made available for review at least ten (10) days prior to the City Council hearing. C. Within ten (10) days after the close of the public hearing, the City Council shall make findings of fact and adopt. adopt with changes, or deny the proposed amendments. Adoption of plan amendments is effective upon: 1. City adoption in case of amendment of the plan map for an area within the city limits. 7. 2. County adoption i.n the case of amendment of plan policies or the plan map for the urban growth area; and 3. County adoption and Land Conservation and Development Com- mission approval in case of amendment of plan goals or urban growth boundary location. D. Copies of plan amendments adopted by City shall be sent to the County and the Land Conservation and Development Commission within ten (10) days after adoption. SECTION 8. SEVERABILITY The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If an article, sentence. clause, or phrase shall be adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the decision shall- not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. ~PPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Ukiah City Council on this ~:s-~ day of ~tt;.,-I:.t~' 1978. ~d2t~Mayo ATTEST: ~CJ!/#City Recorder _)7 8. ON3~31 I I I ttIJ\ ................... ......... ................-.-. ,', '8L/S!6uoO~'oN8:;»ueu!pJO lllt!'tI110,(tl~atIUensJndpe.dopy 'SIIW!I AI]:)lM.Ilul41lMse~ueaUOJdPOOIIJO, dewpJeleHP001:l....T.:IlU8wdo,e".c ueqmpueI5U!snOH,0lU8W1JedaQ 's'nlU8::»8JI.OW84101J8~.J.se~d:::I10N ':':<';':':';6"1O':':':'~~<,o-'f.,n..'1.'",,"0::0, ....•....•.•.~i)0A'"IJU~<>= •=- ~ •• o o Wl:IV-:1 'Y11H301S3l::1 11Wl1...ll:)- Y3l::1YNOISNYdX3 Al::IYONnOS H1MOI:H)NYBl::In 1331:U.S~NllSIX3 [.(eM10146PIl33U1S ")0'""3"n.ln,)( %UcS3dQ1SD NIY'd000l.=JOC¥:~ lYIl:USnONJ 0I1Snd-IW3SIiOI1Snd ,YI:lU3WWQO lVI1N301S3l::1 :)118ndY'531::1::n:ln.ln.:l I I I .."." ............... ... .•...... .- .-:.: BEFORE THE BOARD OF OOUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR UMATILLA COUNTY Regarding the adoption of the City of Ukiah Cor-nprehensive Plan as an amendment to the Umatilla County Comprehensive Plan. ) ) ) ) ) ) Ordinance No.~~ WHEREAS, the City of Ukiah. Oregon. has adopted as part of its Comprehensive Plan an Urban Growth Boundary encompassing land lying outside the Ukiah corporate city limits, hereinafter referred to as the Ukiah Urban Growth Area; and WHEREAS J the Ukiah U roan Growth Area is included in the Ci.ty·of Ukiah Comprehensive Plan, with Goals, Objectives, ancl Policies and the Land Use Plan being applied to the Area; and WHEREAS, that land within the Ukiah Urban Growth Area is presently under the jurisdiction of Umatilla County and included within the Umatilla County Comprehensi.ve Ptan; and WHEREAS, the Umatilla County Planning Commission reviewed the City of Ukiah Comprehensive Plan and held a public hearing on December 20, 1978; and WJ-tEREAS, the City of Ukiah and Umatilla County proposed to enter into an agreement entitled the Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement, which provides for Umatilla County administering land use controls \Nithin the Ukiah Urban Growth Area utilizing the City of Ukiah Comprehensive Plan and zoning and subdivision standards, and providing opportunity for the City to review and comment on many land use requests affecting the Ukiah Urban Growth Area; and WHEREAS, the Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement was approved by the Ukiah City Council on September 5, 1978; and WHEREAS, a public hearing on this ordinance and the Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement was held before the Umatilla County Board of Commissioners on Wednesday, February 14, 1979, and notice of the hearing was published in the East 0 regonian on February 3, 1979; and WHEREAS, notice by First Class MailI was given January 22, 1979 to those Urban Growth Area property owners who would experience changed land-use designations unde r this 0 rdinance, and indicating present land classification and zone, proposed land classification and zone, and time and place of the public hearing on this Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Umatilla County Board of Commissioners: approved the Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement on February 14, -1979. The Board of County Commissioners for Umatilla County, Oregon, hereby ordain as follows: The. Umatilla County Comprehensive Plan, originally adopted on April 6, 1972, is amended to adopt the City· of Ukiah Comprehensive Plan for that land designated as being within the City of Ukiah Urban Growth Boundary, but outside of corpor~te ci~ limUs, referred to as the City of Ukiah Comprehensive Plan as adopted by the Ukiah City COuncil on September 5, 1978. The sub- stahtive provisions of the City of Ukiah Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances are also adopted by reference for application only in the Ukiah Urban Growth Area. • Dated this 7dday of , 1979. ATTEST, County Clerk UMATILLA COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ~'('~L...-...-__ F. K. Starrett, Chairman Ford ~ertson, Vice Chairman J. Dean Fouquette, County Clerk '7f.vv"..- 0,W~IJ~1 < - , CITY OF UKIAH, OREGON APPLICATION TO AMEND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ORDINANCE APPLICANT . Name _ Address _ Phone No. _ TYPE OF APPLICANT (Check one) Landowner (agent*) within Urban Growth Boundary ___ Resident (renter) within Urban Growth Boundary __ Governmental Unit: City of Ukiah __' County __, Special District __' State Agency __ Federal Agency __ *Note: If agent, attach written authorization to represent landowner. TYPE OF AMENDMENT Text: Goal __' Policy __' Other __; Section(s) _ Applicant shall prepare and attach a copy of proposed text. amendment to this application. Map: Present Land Use Classification is _ Proposed Land Use Classification is __ Inside city 1imits (yes or no) _ Outside city limits but within Urban Growth Boundary (yes or no) _ Amendment to Urban Grcwth Boundary (yes or no) Applicant shall prepare and attach the following to this appl ication: (1) 81/2" X 11" location map of area subject to proposed map amendment drawn to scale, (2) Either assessor's map or other parcel map drawn to scale showing proposed map amendment, and (3) A list of names and addresses of property owners** whose property is subject to the proposed map amendment or within 250 feet of the exterior boundary thereof. **Note: This information available from county assessor's office. Page 1 of 2 pages JUSTIFICATION FOR AMENDMENT Applicant shall prepare and attach a presentation of facts and reasons which establish need, appropriateness and purpose of the proposed amendment. FEE Refer to fee schedule adopted by City Council. ~$ __ I, , Circle one: Landowner, agent, resident, representative of government unit) swear that the details and information contained in the above application and attachments thereto are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of Applicant Date I, , City Recorder of Uk i ah, Oregon, att~st that the foregoing application and attachments thereto were received by me on the day of _ 19 __' from ------__----_--- accompanied by a fee of $ _ City Recorder Page 2 of 2 pages 2/79 SCHEDULE AND C~ECKLIST APPLICATION TO AMEND CITY OF UKIAH COMPREHENSIVE PLAfl ORDINANCE Date 1. Appl i·cation submitted by appl icant 2. City Council hearing date set 3. Public notice of City Council hearing a) Mailed to property owners b) Mailed to affected governmental units c) Published in local newspaper 4. City Council hearing held 5. City Council decision (within ten days of hearing) 6. Applicant notified of decision If plan map amendment for an area within the city limits, then 7. Effective date, if amendment adopted by City Council 8. Amendment sent to County Planning Department. County Assessor and LCOC for their records If plan map amendment for an area within the Urban Growth Boundary but outside city limits or plan policy amendment, then, 7. Application and hearing record referred to County for action if amendment adopted by City Council 8. Effective date, if amendment co-adopted by County 9. Amendment sent to LCnC for their records, if co-adopted by County If Urban Growth Boundary or plan goal amendment, then 7. Application and hearing record referred to County for action if amendment adopted by City Council 8. Application· and hearing record(s) referred to LCDC for re- view if amendment co-adopted by County 9. Effective date, if amendment approved by LCDC Page 1 of 2 pages , I CITY RECORDS APPLICATION TO AMEND CITY OF UKIAH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ORDINANCE 1. Application and attachments thereto 2. Schedule and checklist 3. Copies of public notices 4. Analysis of applicable plan goals and policies 5. City Council hearing record, findings of fact, conclusions, decision 6. Copy of notice to applicant of decision 7. If amendment approved, copies of notices to County Planning Department, CountJ' Assessor, LCDC ... as appropriate. Page 2 of 2 pages 2/79 CITY OF UKIAH URBAN GROWTH AREA JOINT MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT The parties to this Joint Management Agreement shall be the City of Ukiah, Oregon, hereinafter referred to as the City and Umatilla County, Oregon, hereinafter referred to as the County. The terms of this Joint Management Agreement shall be applicable to the City's urban growth area. For the purposes of this Agreement. the urban growth area shall be defined as that area of land extending from the City's corporate limits to the City's urban growth boundary as referenced and mapped in the City's Comprehensive Plan on Septembe~ 5. 1978, and hereby incorporated into and made a part of this document (see Attachment A). This Joint Management Agreement is entered into purusant to DRS Chapters 190 and 197 and the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals for the purpose of facilitating the orderly transition from rural to urban land uses within the City's urban growth area. Words and phrases used in this Joint Management Agreement shall be construed in accordance with ORS Chapters 92, 197, 215, 227 and 446 and app1icabl~ Oregon Administrative Rules and Statewide Planning Goals unless otherwise specified. In the event two or more definitions are provided for a single word or phrase~ the most restrictive definition shall be utilized in construing this Agreement. I. Introductory Information A. This Joint Management Agreement is the culmination of a series of actions intended, in part, to facilitate the orderly and efficient transition from rural to urbanizable to urban land uses within the urban growth area. Such actions include the preparation of a city comprehensive plan, the cooperative establishment of an urban growth area, coordination with affected governmental units, and county review of the city comprehensive plan. B. The City Council has adopted a comprehensive plan ordinance which includes an urban growth boundary and planning goals and policies. II. General Comprehensive Plan Provisions - A. The County shall retain responsibility for land use decisions and actions affecting the City's urban growth area, such responsibility to be relinquished over any land within this area upon its annexation to the City subject to provisions of ORS 215.130(2)(a). ., Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement Page Two B. The City's urban growth area has been identified as urbanizable and is considered to be available uver time for urban expansion. In order to promote consistency between the City's planning effort and County land use decisions· and actions affecting the urban growth area, the County shall incorporate that portion of the City's Compre- hensive Plan which addresses· the urban growth area into the County Comprehensive Plan (see Attachment B). : C. After the City's Comprehensive Plan has been reviewed by the County Board of Commissioners, and after County concurrence with and approval of the Plan for the area within corporate city limits and adoption of the Plan for the urban growth area, all public sector actions which fall within the scope of the City's Comprehensive Plan shall be consistent with the Plan. D. Land within the urban growth area presently zoned for Exclusive Farm Use shall remain Exclusive Farm· Use until rezoning is requested, and sueh rezoning shall be consistent· with the City's Comprehensive Plan. E. It is the. policy of the City and County to maintain a rapid exchange of information relating to their respective land use decisions which affect the City's urban growth area .. III. Zoning, Subdivision and -Mobile',Home Park Ordinances A. The substantive, as opposed to procedural, portions of the City's Zoning, Subdivision, and Mobile Home Park Ordinances (see Attachments C-1, C-2, and C-3) shall be incorporated by refel'ence into and ~iJade a part of the County Zoning, Subdivision and Mobile Home Park Ordinances with exceptions as necessary and as agreed upon in writing by bnth parties to this Joint Management Agreement no later than 30 days after acknowledgement of compliance of the city plan and implementation measures by Land Conservation Development Commission. B. For the purposes of this Joint Management Agreement: 1. Substantive provisions of a zoning ordinance shall be those sections of the ordinance which establish outright uses, conditional uses, and zone requirements (e. g. minimum lot sizes, setback requirements, etc.) and the zoni ng map; and, . 2. Substantive provisions of the subdivision and mobile home park ordinances shall be those sections of the ordinances which establish design standards for required improvements. C. The City Zoning Map, when adopted as part of the City Zoning Ordinance, shall include the urban growth area and shall: 1. Apply to land within the city limits upon adoption by the City; 2. Apply to land wihtin the urban growth area upon annexation to the City; Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement Page Three 3. Be a recommendation to the County for rezoning all lands within the urban growth area where existing zoning is inconsistent with the City Comprehensive Plan by type of use allowed except: a. Land zoned Exclusive Farm Use pursuant to Section II(D)above; and b. Land may be rezoned to a lesser density or intensity of use (i.e. low-density versus medium-density residential). 4. After action is taken by the County pursuant to Section III(C)(3) above, all subsequent rezoning by the County shall be consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map except that: a. Adequate findings for the need to rezone land shall be required, and; b. Land may be rezoned to a lesser density or intensity of use (i. e. low-density versus medium-density residential). D. The above mentioned incorporated Ordinances shall only be applied to zone change, conditional use, variance, subdivision, major partition, minor partition, and mobile home park requests affecting the City's urban growth area. The County may approve building permits without referral to the City except when the building is to be served by either city water, or sewer or both. IV. Referred Application/Situations A. The County Planning Department shall refer each request affecting the City urban growth area to the City for its review and comment within five (5) days of the date the request was filed with the County Planning Department. B. The City shall review the request and submit its recommendation to the County Planning Department within thirty (30) days of the date the request was received by the City or within five (5) days after the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting whichever is sooner. C. It is agreed that the County will refer any proposed discretionary action back to the City for its review and comment in the event such action was not addressed -in the original request for review. The same time limitations imposed by Sections IV A and B above shall be applicable. D. The County shall retain final decision-making responsibility for all land use actions affecting the City urban growth area, but such decisions shall only be made after the receipt of timely recommendations from the City. I Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement Page Four E. Should no recommendations be forthcoming within established response times, absent a request for an extension the City shall be presumed to have no negative comment regar9ing the application. F. After the County makes a decision on the application, the City shall be promptly informed of the action taken by the County. V. City Services A. The City may extend city services to any site located within the City urban growth area at the affected property owner's request and expense. Such extension of city services to sites not contiguous to the City may be conditioned upon an unlimited agreement signed by the affected property owner that the site may be annexed by City Council action as soon as the site becomes contiguous to the City. B. For the purposes of this Joint Management Agreement, city services shall be limited to sewer and water. C. Service and hook-on charges shall be established by the City Council. VI. Annexati on Annexation of sites within the City urban growth area shall be in accordance with relevant annexation procedures contained in the Oregon Revised Statutes, Oregon case law, and City Ordinances and shall not occur until such sites become contiguous to the City as required by the Oregon Revi sed Statutes. ".t.'-,.} ". l J' VII. Roads .' The 'County and City shall cooperatively develop an implementation pol icy regarding streets and roads within the City urban growth1area and corpor- ate limits which is 'consistent with the City COinprehensivePlan. Such policy shall include, but not be limited to, the following. A. The circumstances under which the City will assume ownership of and maintenance responsibility for County Roads within the cor- porate limits. B. The conditions under which new streets and roads' win 'be developed in conjunction wi'th subdivisions within the City urban growth area. C. The conditions under which new public streets and roads, other than subdivisions, will be developed within the City urban growth area. O. The conditions under which existing county roads and bridges within the urban growth area will be improved. E. See Attachments 0-1 and 0-2 for existing county roads within the corporate limits and the urban growth area. Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement Page Five VIII. Appeals A. As the County retains responsibility for land use decisions and actions affecting the urban growth area, appeals from such decisions and actions shall be in accordance with. the appeals process specified in the County Zoning, Subdivision, or Mobile Home Park Ordinances, applicable state statute 9r administrative rule. B. In the event that either the County Planning Commission or the County Board of Commissioners, disagrees with the City comment and recommen- dation provided for in Section IV of this Joint Management Agreement, the City shall have standing to appeal as provided in Section VIII A above. IX. Comprehensive Plan and Implementation Measure Review and Amendment A. The Ctty Comprehensive Plan, including this Joint Management Agreement, and the zoning, subdivision. mobile home park, and other implementation ordinances or measures shall be reviewed at least annually to determine conformity with changes in: 1. Oregon Revised Statutes and administrative rules; 2. Oregon Case Law; 3. Oregon Statewide Planning Goals; 4. Requirements of the City; 5. Needs of residents or landowners within the City urban growth area; 6. Concerns of affected governmental un; ts; a~d 7. County administration of land use regulations within urban growth areas. B. If the City Comprehensive Plan, implementation measures, or both fail to conform to any or all of the above-mentioned criteria, the non- conforming docume~t shall be amended as necessary and as soon as practicable. C. Amendments to this Agreement and the Comprehensive Plan for the urban growth area shall be adopted by a majority of both the full City Coun- cil and the County Board of Commissioners after a recommendation has been received from the County Planning Commission. X. Severability The provisions of this Joint Management Agreement are severable. If an article, sentence, clause, or phrase shall be adjudged by a court of com- petent jurisdiction to be invalid, the decision shall not affect the va- 1idi"ty of the remaining portions of this Agreement. 1 ---- -_. ------ Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement Page Six IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement is signed. and executed by: UMATILLA COUNTY . BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DATE: ;2- ILl - 79 UKIAH CITY COUNCIL DATE: September 5, 1978 Ukiah Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement Page 7 ATTACHMENTS A * Ukiah Comprehensive Plan Ordinance (No. 20) B * Umatilla County Ordinance No. 79-13 amending the County Comprehensive Plan by its adoption of the City Comprehen- sive Plan for the urban growth area. C-1 * Ukiah Zoning Ordinance (No. 21) C-2 * Ukiah Subdivision Ordinance (No. l8) C-3 * Ukiah Mobile Home Park Ordinance (No. 19) D-l * list of existing county roads within City urban growth boundary 0-2 * Map of existing county roads within the City urban growth boundary Ci ty o f Uk iah A tta ch m en t 0- 1: Ur ba n Gr ow th A re a- Jo in t M an ag em en t Ag ree m en t* Li st o f Co un ty Ro ad s W ith in Ur ba n Gr ow th Bo un da ry Le ng th Le ng th Ri gh t o f M ee ts' St an da rd s o f Na me No . W ith in W ith in Wa y Pa ve m en t (ye s/n o) Es tim ate d* * UG A Ci ty Li m its W idt h W idt h Co un ty Ci tv Co st Uk iah -A lbe e Ro ad 44 8 an d Al ba St re et Ca ma s St re et an d 47 3 Un na me d Co un ty Ro ad 1 Pi ne Cr ee k Ro ad 38 1 '" So ur ce : U m at ill a Co un ty Ro ad D ep ar tm en t, Fe br ua ry 19 79 . N ot es : * Th is ta bl e sh ou ld be co m pl ete d w he n th e Ci ty an d Co un ty be gi n to im ple m en t Se ct io n VI I o f· th e ag re em en t. * * Es tim ate d c o st to im pr ov e ro ad to Ci ty o r Co un ty st an da rd s. . , ~; ' I I f , , ! I" I ...1 'I: Attachment D-2: Existing County Ukiah Urban Growth Area - Joint Management Agreement Roads Within Urban Growth Boundary (February, 19791 .K t 448 U~IAH ~ '"I"/' --~ I U",A,TlL..LA COUNTY. O~"GON §.."...AT._....."%."...--~...... ..-_-.rr.~ ,--.... _ ............. 5nrn<...;~:.. :::-..:::::=:.7;; , .---.._ --y ...ail"- _ __lO:~y ....... ~ "_._ ......_... _' "'_11 =-_-..-. -----.."".... ......-=$ __ . . . '. =::; ..,. ...-...fO...,..O:.......• , _.ll".... .-o OT' ""fl. • •• 0('0' -- ..... ,...." • .......0: "'" It" CIfY , CO" ~''''''''''AA_' ......... --- _....._..- ---.._..._- ---- _1.. _lin T5S filII •IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 5.10 Authorization to Grant or Deny Conditional Uses 5.20 Placing Conditions on a Permit ..•... 5.30 Application for a Conditional Use .... 5.40 Procedure for Taking Action on a Conditional Use Application .....•.••... 5.50 Time Limit on a Permit for A Conditional Use 5.60 Time Limit on Reapplication Ordinance No. 2{ City of Ukiah ZONING OROINANCE TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS 3.10 General Residential Zone, R 3.20 Residential-Commercial Zone, RC 3.30 Industrial Zone, M.• '. 3.40 Additional Requirements ," , 11 11 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 7 8 8 8 9 9 9 10 11 • • . " • • • • . . . . . . . . . Non-conforming Use . . . . . . . . Title _ . Purposes . . . . . . . Scope .•. . . . . . . . . Zoning of Areas to be Annexed Definitions . . .. 2.10 Classification of Zones 2.20 Zone Boundaries . 2.30 Location of Zones 4.10 Definition .......• 4.20 Circumstances for Allowing a 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 ARTICLE 5. CONDITIONAL USES. . . . . . ARTICLE 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONES ARTICLE 4. NON-CONFORMING USES . . . ARTICLE 3. USE'ZONES .••.. ARTICLE 1. ARTICLE 6. VARIANCES . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.10 Authorization to Grant or Deny Variances. 12 6.20 Circumstances for Granting a Variance. . . . . . . . 12 6.30 Procedure for Taking Action on a Variance Application 12 6.40 Time Limit on a Permit for a Variance 12 ARTICLE 7. MOBILE HOME REGULATIONS •. 7.10 Installation Requirements 13 13 ARTICLE B. (RESERVED FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) 13 i ARTICLE 9. (RESERVED FOR OFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING) 12.10 Form of Petitions, Applications and Appeals 12.20 Notice of Public Hearings . 12.30 Building Permits· .••.•. 12.40 Amendments· ••...•..• . . . . . . . .'. -, ~ . ....... 13 13 13 14 14 14 15 - ~ . 15 15 16 16 16 16 17 17 17 .. '';-'.::,- - . ..13.10 Interpretatl0n .•...••• 13.20 Authorization of Similar Uses 13.30 Penalty • . • . . 13.40 Severabil ity • -', . . . . . . . :~ '. ARTICLE 10. SIGNS •...•••••. 10.10 Sign Requirements ... ARTICLE 11. SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS . 11.10 Exceptions ••.• '. '" ~ ..• 11.20 Accessory Uses and Facilities ARTICLE 12. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS .•. ARTICLE 13. INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT. . p • .:~ " .;~...... - . i. i Or.dinaneeNo. 2.-1 An Ordinance Providing for the Establishment of Zoning Regulations for the City of Ukiah, Oregon ARTICLE 1. INTRODUCTORY PROVISIONS 1.10 Title. This ordinance together with the zoning map attached hereto as Appendix A shall be known as the zoning ordinance of the City of Ukiah, Oregon. 1.20 Purposes. This ordinance ;s enacted for the purpose of promoting the pUblic health, safety. and welfare; to encourage the most appropriate use of property within the city; to stabilize and protect the value of property; to provide adequate light and air; to prevent overcrowding; to lessen traffic congestion; to facilitate adequate and economical provisions for public improvements, all to implement the eomprehensi':e plan of the City of Ukiah; to provide a method of administration and to proscribe penalties for violations of the provisions herein. 1.30 Scope. No structure or lot shall hereinafter be used or occupied, and no structure or part thereof shall be erected, moved, reconstructed, extended, enlarged or otherwise altered except as permitted by this ordinance. . 1.40 Zones of Areas to be Annexed. Prior to the annexation of any land to the City of Ukiah the city council shall determine, .by reference to the comprehensive plan, the appropriate zoning for the property to be annexed. The zoning of the property to be annexed shall be in accor- dance with the comprehensive plan. 1.50 Definitions. 1. Accessory Use or Structure. subordinate to the main use same lot with the main use. A use or structure incidental and of the property, located on the Example - home occupation. 2. Alley .. A street through a block primarily for vehicular access to the bacK or side of property otherwise abutting on another street. 3. Building. An structure having a roof intended for the support, shelter or enclosure of any persons, animals, property or business activity. 4. City. The City of Ukiah, Oregon 5. City Council. The city council of the City of Ukiah, Oregon. 1. 6. Comprehensive Plan. Th.e. comprehensive pla.n of the. Ctty of Ukiah, Oregon. 7.Dwelling Unit. One or more, rooms designed for occupancy oy one.' family, containing complete ~ouse.keeping facilities.' For the pur- poses of this ordinance dwelling unit does not include mobile homes or recreational vehicles. . ._., --- -!. ... --. -' 8. Dwelling, Single Family. unit. A detached building containing one dwelling 9. Dwelling, Two Family. A detached ouilding containing two dwelling urlHs:' - ~j:; . 10. Dwelling, Multi-family. A building containing tFiree or more dwelling units. 11 • • 12. 13. , Family. An indi'vidual or two or more persons related by marriage, blood, lega1 adopti'on ,or guardi'anship,'and not more than two un- related persons living together i'n onedwelli'ng unit; or not more than five unrelated persons living together in one dwelling unit. Farming, Farm'Use. The use of land for raising and harvesting crops, or for the feeding, breeding and management of livestock, or for' dairying, or for any other agricultural or horticultural, use, or any combination thereof, including disposal of such products by marketing or otherwise. Farming also includes the use and construction of build- ,ings customarily used in the above activities. ' Floor Area. The total area of all floors of a building as measured to the outside surfaces of exterior walls, including halls"stair- ways, elevator shafts, attached porches and balConies, excluding open court yards and vent shafts. 14. 15. 16. Grade. The average elevation of the fini'shed ground elevation at the centers of all walls' of a building, except that if a wall is parallel to and within five feet of a sidewalk, the sidewalk 'elevation nearest the center'of the wall shall constitute the ground elevation. Height of Building. The vertical distance from the grade,to the. highest point of the coping of a flat roof, to the deck line on a mansard roof, to the mean point between the eaves and highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. Home Occupation. Accessory use of a dwelling, employing only the inhabitants of the dwelling, wherein the residential character of the dwelling is maintained. The occupation must be lawful and must be conducted in such manner that storage or display of mer- chandise, equipment or machinery is not visible from off the property on which the occupation is located, and the occupation may not infringe upon the right of neighboring residents to enjoy the peaceful occupation of their dwellings. ?, . 17. Lot. A parcel of land having sufficient area to meet the minimum not requirements in the zone in which it is located and having its principal frontage on~ or permanent access to a street. 18. Lot Area. The total area within the boundary lines of the lot. 19. lot, Corner. A,lot abutting on two or more intersecting streets~ other than alleys, where the angle of intersection of the streets does not exceed 135 degrees. 20. Lot Oepth. The horizontal distance from the midpoint of the front lot line to the midpoint of the rear lot line. 21. Lot Line. The boundary line of a lot. 22. Lot Line, Front. The line separating the lot from the street other than an alley or the nearest line to the public street. In the case of a corner lot. the shortest lot line along a street other than a~ alley. 23. Lot Line, Rear. Any boundary line opposite and most distant from a front lot line,"and not i~tersecting a front lot line, except in the case of a corner lot. 24. Lot Line, Side. Any lot line not a front or a rear lot line. 25. Lot Width. The mean horizontal distance between the side lot line, ordinarily measured parallel to the front lot line. 26. Mobile Home. A structure designed or used for residential occupa~cy dependent upon e~ternal utility connections and built upon a frame or chassis to which wheels may be attached by which it may be moved upon a highway, irrespective of whether or not such structure has, at any given time, such wheels attached~ or is supported upon posts~ footings or a foundation. 27~ Mobile Home Park. A place where four or more mobile homes are located within 500 feet of one another on a lot, tract or parcel of land under the same ownership; the primary purpose of which is to rent space or keep space for rent to "any person for a charge or fee paid or to be paid for the rental or use of facilities or. ta offer space free in connection with securing the trade or pat- ronage of such person. 28. Modular Home. A sectional or factory built house built to meet the housing standards of Oregon Department of Commerce, designed to be affixed to real property on a permanenet foundation. 29. Owner. The owner of record of real property as shown in the records of the County Assessor, or the registered agent of such owner. 3. 'I 30. Parking Space. An area adequately sized, hav\ng access to a public street, used or intended to be used for the parking of a vehicle. , 31. Public Use. Butlding or use such as a ~ity hall, fire station, city shop, school~ cOl11TIunity" center, park,"and similiar uses. 32. Recreation*Vehicle. A vacation trailer or other vehicular or portable unit which is either self-propelled or towed or is carried by a motor vehicle; which is intended for human occupancy and is designed for vacation or recreation purposes but not resldenti"al.use. 33.': Recreation Vehicle Park. A lot which is operated on a fee or other basis as'a place for the parking of occupied recreation vehicles. 34. Semi-Public Use. Building or use such as a church, hospital, sani- tarium, rest home, nursing or convalescent home, utility structure, and'similiar uses. 35. Sight Obscuring Fence. A solid fence' or slat fence at least six feet in height that completely obscures·:vision. 36. Sight Obscuring Planting. A dense perennial evergreen planting with sufficient foliage to Qbscure vision and which will reach an average height of at least six feet within thirty' mOnths after planting. . 37. Sign. An identification, description or'device which directs attention to a product, place, activity, person, institution or business~ and' which is affixed to or repres~nted upon a building, structure or . land. Each display surface of a sign structure shall be considered a separate sign. . 38. Street. A public right of way for the use of pediestrian or vehicular traffic. 39. Yard. An open space on a lot which is unobstructed from the ground upward except as othe~lise provided in this ordinance. Unless other- wise provided in this ordinance, paving is defined as an obstruction. _ .=.M 40: Yard, Fr.ont. That yard lying between the front lot line and the front of the building. '. 41. Yard, Rear. That yard lying betwe~n the rear lot line and the rear of the building. 42. Yard, Side. That yard lying between the front and rear yards between the building and the side lot line. 4. 43. Urban Growth Area. That land between the incorporated limits ·of the city and the Urban Growth Boundary. 44. Urban Growth Boundary. The Boundary designated in the City's Comprehensive Plan which identifies and separates urbanizable' land from rural land. ARTICLE 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF ZONES 2.10 Classification of Zones. For the purpose of this ordinance the following zones are hereby established. ZONE 1. General Residential Z. Residential Commercial 3. Industrial DESIGNATION R RC M 2.20 Zone Boundaries. Unless othe~ise provided in this ordinance, zone boundaries are section lines, subdivision lines, lot lines. center lines of streets or railroad rights of way, or such lines extended. 2.30 Location of Zones. A zoning map showing boundaries of the zones as hereby established shall be adopted and made part of this ordinance and attached hereto as Appendix A. Said map and all notations. re- ferences or amendments thereto shall be and remain on file with the City Recorder. ARTICLE 3. USE ZONES , 3.. 10 General Residential Zone, R. In an R zone the .following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright . .1. Single-family dwelling 2. Two-family dwelling 3. Mobil e home 4. Crop cultivation J truck gardening or plant nursery. 3.11 Conditional Uses Permitted in a R-1 Zone. In a R-1 zone the following uses and their accessory uses are permitted when ·authorized.in accordance with Article 5 et. seq. 1. Multi-family dwelling 2. Mobile home park 3. Public or semi-public use 5. 3.12 Dimensional Standards in an R:Zone" In' a R.zone the following dlmenslonal standards shall apply. 1. The front yard shall be a minimum of 15 feet. 2. Each side yard shall be a minimum of five feet, except that ! .. on a corner lot the side yard on the street side shall be a minimum of 15 ·feet. .:.~.I 3•. The rear yard shall be a minimum of ten feet. 4. The lot area shall be a minimum of 6,000 square feet and shall exceed the minimum by 1,000 square feet for each dwelling unit over one. . 5. The lot width at the front building line shall be a minimum of 50 feet. 6. The lot depth shall be a minimum of 90 feet~ 7. Building height shall be a maximum of 35 feet. . . . 8. Not"more than 40 percent of the lot area shall ue covered by buildings. 9. The minimum street frontage shall be 50 feet· except on a cu1~de-sac where the minimum shall be 30 feet. 3.20 Residential COll111ercialZone, RC. In a RC zone the follo\~ing uses and thelr accessory uses are permitted.cutright. 1. Retail or wholesale trade establishment 2. Repair or maintenance establishment 3. Eating or drinking establishment 4. Office 5. Amusement establishment 6. Single family dwelling 7. Two-family dwelling 8. Recreational vehicle park 9. Multiple dwelling including hotel and motel 3..21 Conditional Uses Pennitted in a RC Zone. In a RC zone the following uses and their accessory uses are pennitted when authorized in accordance with Article 5 et. seq. 1. Veterinary clinic 2. Public or semi-public use 3.22 Dimensional Standards in a RC Zone. In a RC zone the following dimensional standards shall apply. 1. In a RC zone the dimensional standards of the R zone apPlY to a lot or structure whose primary use is for a dwelling. 2. The lot area shall be a minimum of 6,000 square feet. 3. The rear yard shall be a minimum of ten feet unless the rear lot line is abutting on an alley. 4. Building height shall be a maximum of 35 feet. 5. The street frontage shall be a minimum of 50 feet. 3.30 Industrial Zone, M. In a Mzone the following uses and their accessory uses are permitted outright., 1. lumber mill or processing plant. 2. Manufacturing,. repairing, compounding, processing, and storage. 3. Wholesale distributing facility or warehouse. 4. Farming, not includi.ng intensive livestock or poultry operations such as commercial feed lot or poultry plant. 3.31 Conditional Uses Permitted in a MZoe,. In a Mzone the following uses "are permitted when authorized in accordance with Article 5 et. seq. 1. Commercial livestock sales yard 2. Commercial .grain elevator 3. Wrecking yard 4. Public building or use such as a fire station or shop 5. Utility structure 6. Surface mining, rock crushing, asphalt plant 7. Any other industrial use except those uses which are designated as nuisance industries by the city council. 3.32 Dimensional Standards in a MZone. In a Mzone the following dimensional standards shall apply. 1. The lot area shall be a minimum of 10,000 square feet. 2. The minimum street frontage shall be 100 feet. 3. 'The-front, side and rear yards shall be a minimum of lO.feet each. 4. Building height shall be a maximum of 35 feet. 3:33 Limitations on Use. In a Mzone, the following limitations and conditions shall apply. 1. A use which creates a nuisance because of noise, smoke, odor dust, or gas is prohibited. 2. Materials shall be stored and grounds shall be maintained in a manner which will not attract or aid the propagation of insects or rodents or otherwise create a health hazard. 7. ·:;" . 3. Any use of property within 100 feet of a lot in a residen- tial zone shall be subject to the revie~ and aooroval of the G.it.y,council. The,city,counciY rmIY impose such, ' limitations as may be required_to~r.educe conflicts'between uses; 'i, j ~)", , 3.40 Additional Requirements 3.41 Clear Vision Areas. 'A clear vision area sliall be'maintained on the corners of all property at the intersection of two streets or a street and a ra 11 road. " 1. A clear vision area shall ,consist of a triangular area, tldO sides of wnicn are lot lines measured from the corner inter- section of the street lot lines for a distance specified in this regulation. or where the lot lines have rounded corners. the lot lines extended in a straight line to a point of inter- section and so measured. and the third side of whicn is a line across the'corner of the lot joining the non-intersecting ends of the other two sides. 2. A clear vision area shall ~ontain no p1anting,- fence. wall. structure or temporary or permanent obstruction exceeding two and 1one-ha1f'feet in height. mea~ured from tha top of curb or. where no Curb extsts. from the established street centerline grade, except that trees exceeding this lieight may be located in ·this area. provid~d all branches and foliage are removed to, a height of eight feet above the grade. 3. The following measurements shall establish clear-vision areas:, a., In a residential zone. the minimum distance shall be 30 ~, feet or. at intersections including an alley. 10 feet. b. In all other zones where yards are required, the minimum distance shall be 15 feet. or at intersections including an alley ten feet. except, that when the angle of inter- section between streets other tlian an alley. is less than 30 degrees. the distance shall be 25 feet. . , c. Where no yards are required.'the minimum distance shall be as ,in CD} above and buildings may be constructed within the clear-vision area. providing, that any portion of the structure wJthin the clear-vision area is more than eight feet above the top of the curb or street centerline grade and is supported by not,more than' two columns not more than eight inches in diameter. 3.42 Hazard Areas. If a structure is proposed for,any area subject to floodlng or of greater than twelve percent slope, the developer shall show that he is aware of the flood hazard or steep slope condition and has incorporated necessary safeguards into his site and building plans before the,City signs the building permit. ARTICLE 4. NON-CONFORMING USES 4.10 Definition., A structure or use lawfully in existance at the time this ordinance or any' amendment thereto becomes effective. which does not conform to the requirements of tlie zone in wfiich it ts located. 8. 4.20····Circumstances for Allowing a Non-conforming Use. 4.21 Contjnuatjon and Improvements. A non~conforming use may be continued although not in conformity with the regulations fo~ the zone in which the use is located and improvements to the property or structure or both may be made when necessary to continue but not expand the use. 4.22 Changes and Alterations of Use. A non-conforming use or structure may not be replaced, changed, or altered to another use unless the change or alteration is to the same use classification as permitted in the ordinance, or to a classification that more nearly conforms to the regulations for the zone in which the use is located. 4.23 Discontinuation of Use. If the non-conforming use is discontinued for a per.iod of one year further use of the property shall cqnfor~ to this ordinance. ' 4.24 Destruction of Structure. If a non-conforming structure or a structure containing a non-oonforming use is destroyed by any . cause to an exteot exceeding 80 percent of its valuation as determined by the County Assessor the non-conforming use or structure shall not be reestablished. A future structure or use on the site shall conform to this ordinance. 4.25 Pre-existing Permits. Noting contained in this ordinance shall requi-re any -change in the plans, construction, alteration or designated use of a structure for which a permit has been issued or approved by the city and constructi~n has commenced prior_to the adoption of this ordinance, provided the structure, if non- conforming or intended for a non-conforming use, is completed and in use within two years from the time the permit was issued. ARTICLE 5. CONDITIONAL USES 5.10 Authorization to Grant or Deny Conditional Uses. A conditional use listed in this ordinance shall be permitted, altered or denied in accordance with the standards and procedures of this article. In the case of a use existing prior to the effective date of this ordinance and classified in this ordinance as a conditional use, a change in the use or in lot area or an alteration of structure shall conform with the requirements for conditional use. In judging whether or not a conditional use proposal shall be approved or denied, the city council shall weigh the proposal·s appropriateness and desirability or the public convenience or necessity to be served against any adverse conditions that would result from' authorizing the particular development at the location proposed and, to approve such use as proposed, shall find that the following criteria are either met, can be met by observance of conditions, or are not applicable.. 1. The use will be consistent with the comprehensive plan and the objectives of the zoning ordinance and other applicable policies of the city. -----------_ ... - ---_.- ------------ 2. Taking into account location, size, design, and operating characteristics, the use will have minimal 'adverse impact on the tal livability, (b) value, and tc) appropriate develop- ment of abutting properties and the surrounding area compared to the impact of development that is permitted outright. 3. The location and design of the site and structures for the use will be as attractive as the nature of the use and its setting warrants. 4. The design will preserve environmental assets of particular inter.est to the community. 5. The applicant has a bona fide intent and capability to develop and use the land as proposed and has some appropriate purpose for submitting the proposal and is not motivated solely by such purposes as the alteration of property values for speculative purposes. 5.. 20 Placing· Conditions on a Permit. In permitting.a new conditional use or the alteration of an existing conditional use, the city council may. impose conditions which is finds necessary to avoid a detrimental impact and to otherwise protect the best interests of the surrounding area or the community as a whole. These conditions may include the following: . 1. Limiting the manner in which the use is conducted, including re- stricting the time an activity may take place and restraints to minimize such environmental effects as noise, vibration,. air pollution, glare and odor, 2. Establishing a special yard or other open space or lot area or dimension. 3. Limiting the height, size or location of a building or other structure. 4. Designating the size, number, location and nature of vehicle access points and off street parking spaces: 5. Increasing the amount of street dedication,·roadway width or improvement within the street right-of-way. 6. Designating the size, location, screening, drainage, surfacing or other improvement of a parking area or truck loading area. 7. Limiting or otherwise designating the number, size, location, height and lighting of signs. 8. Limiting the location and intensity of outdoor .lighting and requiring its shielding. 9. Requiring diking, screening, landscaping or another facility to protect adjacent or nearby property and designating standards for its installation and maintenance. 10. 10. Designating the size, height, location and materials for a fence. 11. Protecting and preserving.existing trees, vegetation, water re- sources, wildlife habitat or another significant natural resour,ce. 12. Imposing other conditions to permit the development of the city in conformity with the intent and purpose of the conditional classif- ication of uses. 5.30 Application for a Conditional Use 1. A reque~t for a condjtional use or modification of an existing conditional use may be initiated by a property owner or the authorized agent of the owner by filing an application with the city council in accordance with Article 12.· In addition to the requirements of Article 12 the applicant must show that the proposed conditional use reasonably meets the need recognized by the ordinance. 2. In addition to filing an application the city council may require the applicant to post bond up to the amount of the cost of meeting conditions and standards specified QY this ordinance or the city council. The bond shall be returned upon proof by the applicant that the conditions and standards have been met. If conditions and standards required are not met·within one year, the bond shall be forfeit and the city may institute proceedings under Article 13 of this ordinance. ' ) 5.40 Procedure for Taking Action on a Conditional Use AVPl ication. The pro- cedure for taking action on a conditfonal use app ication shall be as follows. SAl Public Hearing Requirements. Before the city council may act on an application for conditional use a public hearing shall c be held as provided in Article 12. 5.42 Application Review. Upon receipt of the application the· city recorder shall provide copies of the application material to the city council members. 5.43. Notice to Applicant of Action Taken. Following the close of the hearing the City Recorder shall provide the applicant with written notice of the action taken as provided in Article 12. 5.50 Time Limit on a Permit for a Conditional Use. Authorization of a conditional use shall .be void after one year or such time as the authorization may specify unless all requirements of this ordinance and of the city council have been met. The city council may extend such authorization for a period not to exceed one additional year. 5.GO Time Limit on Reapplication. No application for a conditional use permit shall be considered by the city council within one year of the denial of the request, unless in the opinion of the city council. new evidence or a change of circumstances warrant it. 11. ARTICLE 6. VARIANCES 6.10 Authorization to Grant or Deny Variances. The city council may authorize variances from the requirements of this ordinance where it can be shown that owing to special and unusual circumstances relating to a s~~cific piece of property, strict application of the ordinance would cause an undue or unnecessary hardship. No variance shall be granted to allow the use of the property for a purpose not authorized within the zone in which the proposed use would be located. In granting variances the city council may attach conditions which it finds necessary to protect the best interests of the surrounding property or vicinity and otherwise achive the purpose of this ordinance. 6.20 Circumstances for Granting a Variance. A variance may be granted only in the event that ALL of the following circumstances exist. 1. ,. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which dO not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and which result.from lot size or shape, topography, or other· circumstances ·over which the owner of the property, since the enactment of this ordinance, has no control. 2. The variance is necessary for the preservation of a property ·right of the applicant substantially the same as ~wners of other property in the zone or vicinity possess. 3. There is a public need for the purpose to be achieved by the variance. ~ 4. The public need is reasonably met by the variance. 5. The variance would not be·materially detrimental· to the purposes of this ordinance, or to property in the same zone or vicinity in which the property is located~ and the variance.is in compliance with and is not a deviation from the comprehensive plan for the city. . 6. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alle- viate the hardship. .. 6.30 Procedure for Taking Action on a Variance Application. The procedure for taking action on an application for a variance shall be as follows: 1. A property owner may initiate a request for a variance by filing an application as provided in Article 12. 2. Before the city counci.l may act on a variance application, it shall hold a public hearing thereon, following the procedure prescribed in Article 12. 6.40 Time Limit on a Permit for a Variance. Auth.orization for a variance shall be void after· one year unless substantial construction has taken place. However, the city council may extend authorization for a period not to exceed one additional year on request. 12. ARTICLE 7. MOBILE HOME REGULATIONS 7.10 Installation Requirements . The mobile home shall be installed in accordance with the rules established by the Oregon Department of Commerce, or itl.laccordance with the instructions of the manufacturer which have been approved by the Department of Commerce. Such require- ,ments shall'be'met within seven (7) days after the mobile home ~as been placed On the lot. ARTICLE B. (RESERVED FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT)' ARTICLE g. (RESERVED FOR OFF STREET ,PARKING AND LOADING) •, ARTICLE 10., SIGNS 10.10 Sign Requirements ,10.11 Residential Zone Requirements. In a residential zone the following regulations shall apply. 1. One sign shall be allowed per lot advertising the property for sale, lease or rent and the sign shall not exceed six square feet. A IIfor sale l' sign shall not be allowed to remain on the property after the property is sold. 2. One sign shall be allowed per subdivision advertising lots or homes for sale. Such sign shall not exceed fifty square feet in area and shall be set back at least twenty feet from the nearest street. " 10.12 COmmercjal lone Requirements. In a commercial zone the following regulations shall apply. • T 1. Signs shall be set back at least ten feet from any residential lone. 2. Flashing signs are prohibited. 3. Signs visible from residential properties shall be shielded or directed so as not to constitute a nuisance to residential property owners and shall not interfere with, confuse. or mislead a vehicle operator. 13. 10.13 Industrial Zone Requi.rements. In an tndustrial zone. the followlng regu1attons shall apply. 1. Signs shall be set back at least ten feet from any residential zone. 2. Flashing signs are prohibited. 3. Signs visible from residential properties shall be shielded or directed so as not to constitute a nuisance to residen- tial property owners and shall not interfere with, confuse, or mislead a vehicle operator. ARTICLE 11. SUPPLEMENTARY PROVISIONS 11.10 Exceptions 11.11 Projections from Buildings. Cornices, eaves; canopies; sun- shades, gutters, chimneys, flues and other architectural features may project not more than two feet into a required yard of open space as established by this ordinance. 11.12 Height Exceptions. The following types of structures or structural parts are not subject to the building height limitations of this. ordinance: chimneys, church spires, belfries, radio and television antennae, flagpoles, smoke stacks and other similar projections. 11.20 Accessory Use,- and Facilities. Accessory uses and facilities shall be· permitted in any district when incidental to and assoCiated with a permitted use or facility, or when incidental to and associated with an allowable and authorized conditional use therein, subject to the provisions of this section. 11.21 Accessory Uses and Facilities. Accessory uses and facilities shall meet the followi.ng requirements. 1. Shall be subordinate to the primary activity of the principal use or the principal facility, respectively. 2. Shall contribute to the comfort, convenience, efficiency, or necessity of the occupants or the activities of a principal use, or the function of a principal structure. 3. Shall be located on the same site as the principal use or structure served. 4. Shall not violate setback requirements or maximum lot coverage standards provided for in Article 3. 11.22 Accessory uses and facilities include, but are not limited to, the following examples. 1. A home occupation is an accessory use in a residence. 2. A residence is an accessory use in a business .. 14. 11.23 Continuation of Allowable Accessory Use. No use or facility permitted as an accessory use or facility pursuant to this section shall be con- strued to be permitted as a principal use or facility unless specifi- cally authorized as a permitted or conditional use in the distr.ict in which it shall be located. Operation. occupancy. and continuance'of allowable accessory uses and facilities shall be conditional upon the occupancy or use of the principal use or f~cility being served. ARTICLE 12. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS 12.10 Form of Petitions. Applications and Appeals. Petitions. applications and appeals provided for in this ordinance shall be made on fonms. prescribed by the city. Applications shall be accompanied by plans and specifications. drawn to scale. showing actual shape and dimensions of the lot to be built upon; the size and locations of existing and proposed structures; the intended use of such structures; the number of families. if any. to be accoomodated thereon; the relationship. of the lot to the surrounding property; the legal description of the lot; the location of any off-street parking; the names and addresses of owners of property within 250 feet of the exterior boundaries of the lot; and such other information as is needed to determine con- formance with this. ordinance. Applications shall be accompanied by a filing fee in an alOOunt established by the cHy council. 12.20 Notice of Public Hearings. 12.21 Published and Posted Public Notice. Notice of public hearing on a proposed application, petition. amendment to the text of this ordinance or appeal shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the city at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing. In the alternative. if there is no news- paper of general circulation. each notice of hearing authorized by this ordinance shall be posted in at least two conspicuous places within the city continuously beginning at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing. 12.22 Personal Written Notice. In addition. a notice of a hearing on a conditional use. a variance or an amendment to the zoning map which would change boundaries, classi'fication or uses shall be sent to owners of property within 250 feet of the property for which the conditional use. variance or amendment has been requested. Such notice shall ~e mailed at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing. 12.23 Failure -to Receive Notice. Failure of a person to receive notice as prescribed in this article shall not impair the validity of the hearing. 12.24 Purpose of Public Hearing. The hearing shall allow interested property owners the opportunity to be heard and to present and rebut evidence. 12.25 Recess of Hearing. The city council may recess a hearing in order to obtain additional information or to serve further 15. notice upon other property owners or persons it decides may be interested in the proposal being considered. Upon re- cessing the time and date when the hearing is to be resumed shall be announced. 12.26 Notice to Applicant of Action. Within ten days following the close of a hearing the city recorder shall provide the applicant with a written notice of the city council's action on the application, the findings of fact on which the action is based, and any conditions imposed, signed by the mayor and ci ty recorder. 12.30 Building Permits. No permit shall be approved by the city for the construction, reconstruction, alteration.or change of use of a structure' or lot that does not conform to the requirements of this ordinance. 12.~0 Amendments. 12.51 Authorization to Ini~iate Amendments: . An amendment to the text of this ordinance or to a tone boundary may be initiated by the city council, an affected governmental unit, or by application of a property owner or resident of the city. The request by a property owner for an amendment shall be accom~ plished by filing an applicatiori with the city recorder. 12.52- Public Hearings on a Proposed Amendment. A public hearing shall be held by the city council with the public notice given as provided in Article 12.20, on any proposed amendment to the.zoning ordinance, at its earliest practicable meeting . after the amendment is proposed. Th~ city council shall, within 40 days after the hearing, approve, disapprove, or conditionally approve the proposed amendment stating the findings of fact upon which the decision was based. 12.53 Record of Amendments. The city shall maintain a record of amendments to the text and maps of this ordinance in a form convenient for use by the public. 12.54 Limitation on Reapplications. No application for· an amendment to the text of this ordinance or to a zone boundary shall be considered by the city council within the one-year period immediately following a previous denial of such request, ex- cept the city council may permit a new application if in the opinion of the city council new evidence or a change of cir- cumstances warrants it. . ARTICLE 13. INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT 13 .10 Interpretation. Works used in the present tense include the future,. I the singular form includes the plural, the plural includes the singular.· Where a provision of this ordinance is less restrictive than a pro- vision of another ordinance or requirement of the city, the provision which is more restrictive shall govern. 16. Approved and Adopted by the Ukiah City Council on this ~ 1978. , 13.20 Authorization of Similar Uses. The city council may rule that a use not specifically listed among the allowed uses in a zone shall be permitted as an allowed use, if it is similar to the allowed uses in the zone, if its effect on adjacent properties is sub- stantially the same as that of allowed uses, and if it is not specifically listed as an allowed use in another zone. 13.30 Penalty. _p< person violating a provision of this ordinance shall upon conviction, be punished by imprisionment for not more than 10 days, or by a fine of not more than $1,000,00, A violation of this ordi- nance shall be considered a separate offense. for each day that the violation continues. In the alternative, where a use exists or is proposed to be located, constructed, repaired, altered or used in violation of thfs ·ordinance the city may institute i.njunction, abatement or other appropriate . proceedings to prevent, abate or remove such use. 13.40 Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If a article, ·sentence, clause or phrase shall be adjudged by a court of competent jurisdicti.on to be i,nva1id, the decis,·on shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. day Of~<>r- ATTEST: J;fqC-~~" x 11" diagram of the property. to be provided by the applicant. indicating its location relative to adjacent property owners within 250 feet and at least two clearly marked public streets. (5) Public Hearing: (a) The City Council shall hold a public hearing on the final plan within 45 days following submission of the final plan. (b) The public hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements governing the conduct of quasi-judicial hearings on land use matters pursuant to ORS 215.412 and 227.170. (c) If necessary. the City Council may resolve to continue the public hearing giving the date. time. and place the hearing will be continued. (6) Actien on Final Plan. (a) Within fifteen (15) days following the close of the public hearing the City Council shall give written notice to the applicant of approval. disapproval or conditional approval of the final plan. Approval shall be indicated by the signature of the Mayor on the plan. (b) One copy of the final plan shall be returned to the developer with the date of approval. conditional approval or disapproval and the findings and concl us ions upon which the City Council' sdeci s i on was based accompanying the plan. 4 SECTION 3. REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS. PRESERVATION, ANO OESIGN 3.1 State Requirements. All improvements included in ORS Chapter 446 and OAR Chapter 814.28 are hereby incorporated by reference into this Ordinance and shall be required. 3.2 Character of the Land. Land which is subject to flooding. poor drainage. steep slopes, rock formations, adverse earth formations or topography. utility easements or other features which will reasonably be harmful to the safety, health, and general welfare of the future inhabitants of the mobile home park shall not be developed. Existing features which would add value to the development or to the City as a whole. such as trees, watercourse, historic and archaeological sites, and similar irreplaceable assets, shall be preserved in the design. 3.3 General. Applicable standards of the City Subdivision Ordinance shall be followed by the developer. 3.4 Phasing. If the mobile home park is to be built in phases, each phase shall be built in accordance with these regulations and the improvements required as each phase is constructed shall be determined based upon the total number of mobile home spaces which will exist after completion of all phases. 3.5 Required Improvements. The following improvements shall be required subject to applicable ~tandards as approved by the City Gouncil upon recommen~ation of the City Engineer; (1) Interior streets. (2) Water lines and fire hydrants. (3) Sewer lines. (4) Underground utilities. (5) Provision for adequate drainage, and (6) Six (6) foot sight obscuring perimeter fence or landscaping. 3.6 Optional Improvements. The following improvements may be req~ired subject to applicable standards as approved by the City Council upon recommendation of the City Engineer: (1) Curbs or sidewalks or both. (2) Street lights. (3) Guest or Recreational Vehicle parking or both, (4) Fenced play area or park or both, (5) Recreational facilities, (6) Groundcover or trees or both. (7) Laundry facilities. and (8) Other suitable improvements as determined by the City Council. 3.7 Connection with Public Water and Sewage Systems. Mobile Home Park water and sewer lines shall be connected to City water and sewer systems. The developer may be required to pay for or perform the work or both to extend or increase the capacity of lines or both of City water or sewer lines or both to the site. 5 --- -----------------;------------------- 3.8 Deferral or Waiver of Required Improvements. The City Council giving their reasons therefore, may defer or waive the provision of one or more improvements as, in its judgement, are not requisite in the interests of the public health, safety, and general welfare, or which are inappropriate. SECTION 4. SITING AND INSTALLATION OF MOBILE HOMES IN MOBILE HOME PARKS 4.1 Mobile Horne Spaces. Each space' for a mobile home shall contain not less than 1,600 square feet exclusive of space provided for the common use of tenants, such as roadways, general use structures, guest parking, walkways and areas for recreation and landscaping purposes. 4.2 Setback Requirements. No mobile home in the park shall be located closer than 15 feet from another mobile home or from a general use building in the park. No mobile home accessory building or other building or structure on a mobile home space shall be closer than 10 feet from a mobile home accessory building or other building or structure on another mobile home space. No mobile home or other'building or structure shall be within 25 feet of a public street, property boundary or 10 feet of another boundary. APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Ukiah City Council on this day of Installation Requirements. The mobile home shall be installed in accordance with the rules established by the Oregon Department of Commerce, or in accordance with the instructions of the manufacturer which have been approved ,by the Department of Commerce. Such requirements must be met within seven (7) days after the mobile home has been placed on the space. I Ia7~',1978. I *t!;;r/J I I I I I 4.3 < 6 CITY OF UKIAH, OREGON APPLICATION TO AMEND MOBILE HOME PARK ORDINANCE APPLICANT Name -,-- _ Address _ Phone No. TYPE OF APPLICANT (Check one) Landowner (agent*) within Urban Growth Boundary ___ Resident (renter) within Urban Growth Boundary ___ Governmental Unit: City of Ukiah , County ___ Special District , State Agency Federal Agency _ *Note: If agent, attach written authorization to represent landowner. TYPE OF AMENDMENT Applicant shall prepare and attach a copy of proposed text amendment to this application. ·Section(s) to be amended ___ JUSTIFICATION FOR AMENDMENT Applicant shall prepare and attach a presentation of facts and reasons which establish need, appropriateness and purpose of the proposed amend- ment. FEE Refer to Fee Schedul e adopted by Ci ty Counci 1. $ _ I. , (Circle one: Landowner, agent, resident, representative of government unit) swear that the details and infonmation contained in the above application and attachments thereto are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of Applicant Date I, ==--:-;:==-==-=~=_:_:_:==-==;_:,==_=c;_'City Recorder of Ukiah,Oregon, attest that the foregoing application and attachments thereto were recei ved by me on the day of , 1g ___ from ________________ accompanied by a fee of $ _ Ci ty Recorder 2/79 SCHEDULE AND CHECKLIST APPLICATION TO AMEND CITY OF UKIAH MOBILE HOME PARK ORDINANCE Date 1. Application submitted by applicant 2. City Council hearing date set 3. Public notice of City Council hearing a) Mailed to affected governmental units b) Published in local newspaper or posted 4. City· Council hearing held 5. City Council decision (within 10 days of hearing) 6. Notice to applicant of decision 7. Effective date, if amendment adopted by City Council 8. County Planning Department notified if amendment approved CITY RECORDS APPLICATION TO AMEND CITY OF UKIAH MOBILE HOME PARK ORDINANCE 1. Application and attachments thereto 2. Schedule and checklist 3. Copies of public notices 4. Analysis of applicable plan goals and policies. Note: All amendments to the Mobile Home Park Ordinance must be consistent with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. 5. City Council hearing record, findings of fact, conclusions, decision 6. Copy of notice to applicant of decision 7. Copy of notice to County Planning Department if amendment approved 2/79 CITY OF UKIAH, OREGON MOBILE HOME PARK SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION OWNER: Name _ Address -'-- _ Phone No. APPLICANT' (if different from above) Name _ Address _ Phone No. *Note: Attach written authorization to represent landowner. BACKGROUNO INFORMATION Zoning classification of property is _ Is a Mobile Home Park allowed as a conditional use in this zone? Note: No the City by the City for the proposed(yes/no) ___ use permit. approved by (yes/no)' ___ If no, the applicant may apply for a Zoning Ordinance amendment (text or map). Note: All amendments to the Zoning Ordinance must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Has a conditional use permit been approved Mobile Home Park? If no, the applicant may apply for a conditional Mobile Home Park Sketch Plan Application will be until a conditional use permit is approved. Has the applicant met with the City Engineer to discuss the City's Mobile Home Park design requirements? (yes/no)' _ If no, this should be done before application is submitted to the City. Has the applicant contacted the Oregon Department of Commerce to discuss State Mobile Home Park design requirements? (yes/no) _ If no, this should be done before application is submitted to the City. ATTACHMENTS The applicant shall prepare and attach the following to this application: 1. A map showing all land which the applicant proposes to develop, and if the mobile home park pertains to only a part of the tract owned or controlled by the developer, then the applicant shall also in- clude a sketch of a tentative layout for streets in the remaining portion. Page 1 of 2 pages I2. An affidavit of ownership, which shall include the dates the respec- tive holdings of land were acquired, together with the book and page of each conveyance to the present owner as recorded in the County Clerk's office. The affidavit shall list the legal owner of the property and as applicable the contract owner of the property, the date contract of sale was executed and, if any corporations are in- volved, a complete list of all directors, officers and stockholders of each corporation owning more than 5% of any class of stock. 3. Five (5) copies of the sketch plan showing: a) Natural Features (see Ordinance section 3.2) b) Required Improvements (see Ordinance sections 3.1 and 3.5) c) Other Improvements (planned by the developer) d) Mobile Home Spaces and Stands (see Ordinance sections 4.1 and 4.2) 4. If necessary, a request for a .waiver of one or more required improvements including justification for the request. (see Ordinance section 3.8) 5. A plan showing how the Mobile Home Park water and sewer lines could be connected to City water and sewer systems. (see Ordinance section 3.7) FEE AND DEPOSIT Refer to fee schedule adopted by City Council. Fee Deposit Total $------- (to pay for engineer/legal fees) I, , (Circle one: Landowner, agent) swear that the details and information contained in the above application and attachments thereto are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of Applicant Date I, ______~----------------------------, City Recorder of Ukiah, Oregon, attest that the foregoing application and attachments thereto were received by me on the day of , 19 , from -------- --------- -- --------- ___________________ accompanied by a fee and deposit of S ~-- City Recorder Page 2 of 2 pages 2/79 SCHEDULE AND CHECKLIST CITY OF UKIAH MOBILE HOME PARK SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION Date 1. Application submitted by applicant Note: Do not accept application unless a conditional use for a Mobile-Home Park has already been approved by the city or applications for a conditional use and a Mobile Home Park sketch plan are submitted at the same time. If a Mobile Home Park is not a conditional use in the zone in which the property is located do not accept a Mobile Home Park sketch plan appli- cation, a zone change is required first. 2. Application referred to City Engineer for review Note: Engineer's fee to be paid for out of applicant's deposit. 3. Oregon Department of Commerce notified that the City has received an application for a Mobile Home Park. 4. Review of sketch plan by City Council Note: At least fifteen (15) days after application sub- mitted to allow for review by City Engineer. 5. Decision made by City Council (within fourteen days after review completed) 6. Applicant notified of City Council's decision 7. Affected governmental units (especially Department of Commerce) notified of City Council 's decisio~ CITY RECORDS CITY OF UKIAH MOBILE HOME PARK SKETCH PLAN APPLICATION 1. Application and attachments thereto 2. Schedule and checklist 3. City Engineer's report 4. City Council meeting record, findings of fact, conclusions, decision 5. Copy of notice to applicant of decision 6. Copy of notice to affected governmental units 2/79 CITY OF UKIAH. OREGON MOBILE HOME PARK FINAL PLAN APPLICATION OWNER: Name ~ _ Address _ Phone No. _ APPLICANT' (if different from above) Name _ Address ---------~----'---- Phone No. _ *Note: Attach written authorization to represent landowner. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Zoning classification of property is -----~-~. Conditional Use Permit approved on ------------ Mobile Home Park Sketch plan approved on ' Note: Final plan application must be submitted within one year of sketch plan approval. ATTACHMENTS The applicant shall prepare and attach the following to this application: 1. Ten (10) copies of the final plan showing: a) Natural Features (see Ordinance section 3.2) b) Required Improvements (see Ordinance section 3.1 and 3.5) including conditions specified at the time of sketch plan approval. c) Other Improvements (planned by the developer) d) Mobile Home Spaces and Stands (see Ordinance sections 4.1 and 4.2) 2. If necessary, a request for waiver of one or more required improvements including justification for the request (see Ordinance section 3.B) Page 1 of 2 pages 3. A plan showing how the Mobile Home Park water and sewer lines will be connected to City water and.sewer systems subject to approval by City Council. (see Ordinance section 3.7) 4. 8 1/2" x 11" location map of Mobile Home Park and adjacent property and at least two clearly marked public streets. FEE AND DEPOSIT Refer to fee schedule adopted by City Council. Fee Deposit Total $ --------- $====== (to pay for engineer/legal fees) I, , (Circle one: Landowner, agent) swear that the details and information contained in the above application and attachments thereto are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Signature of Applicant Date I, ______-------- , City Recorder of Ukiah, Oregon, attest that the foregoing application and attachments thereto were received by me on the day of , 19, ____, from _ _____________~accompanied by a fee and deposit of $ , Ci ty Recorder Page 2 of 2 pages 2/79 SCHEDULE AND CHECKLIST CITY OF UKIAH MOBILE HOME PARK FINAL PLAN APPLICATION Date 1. Application submitted by applicant 2. Application referred to City Engineer for review Note: Engineer's fee to be paid for out of applicant's deposit. 3. City Council hearing date set 4. Public notice of City Council hearing a) Mailed to property owners b) Mailed to affected governmental units c) Published in local newspaper (two times) d) Posted S. City Council hearing held Note: At least fifteen (lS) days after application sub- ----- mitted to allow for review by City Engineer 6. City Council decision (within fifteen (lS) days after hearing) 7. Applicant notified of City Council's decision 8. Affected governmental units (especially Department of Commerce) notified of City Council's decision CITY RECORDS CITY OF UKIAH MOBILE HOME PARK FINAL PLAN APPLICATION 1. Application and attachments thereto 2. Schedule and checklist 3. City Engineer's report 4. Copies of public notices 5. City Council hearing record, findings of fact, conclusions, decision 6. Copy of notice to applicant of decision 7. Copy of notice to affected governmental units 2/79 RESOLUTION NO. City of Ukiah Land Use Application Fees, and Variable Development Oeposits Costs WHEREAS the City of Ukiah Plan Ordinance No. 20, Zoning Ordinance No. 21. Subdivision Ordinance No. 18. and Mobile Home Park Ordinance No. 19 require application fees, en- gineering and legal reviews and other variable development costs, and WHEREAS the City will incur costs in reviewing applications including but not limited to staff time. public notices, hearings, and overhead, and WHEREAS the cost of engineering or legal reviews or both will vary, and WHEREAS applicants should pay for those costs incurred by the city. NOW, therefore, the Ukiah City Council the attached uLand Use Application Fee mary of "Variable Land Use Devetment __~;"'-=-'_ day of #41'''''4 Approves and Adopts Schedule" and sum- Costs ll on this • 1979. ~;rla2f/JMyor Attest: J/ue~LRecorder ~ City of Ukiah Land Use Application Fee· Schedule Plan Ordinance (No. 20) Ordinance Amendment (text or map) Zoning Ordinance (No. 21) Ordinance Amendment (text or map) Conditional Use Variance Subdivision Ordinance (No. 18) Ordinance Amendment (text) Minor Partition (1-3 lots wlo street) Sketch Plan Major Partition (1-3 lots wi street) Tentative Plan Final Map Subdivision (4 or more lots) Sketch Plan Tentative Plan Final Plat Mobile Home Park Ordinance (No. 19) Ordinance Amendment (text) Sketch Plan Final Plan Fee $ 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 50.00 30.00 30.00 50.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 Deposit*; $ 50.00 100.00 100.00 200.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Combined Fee Two or more applications made at the same time for the same piece of land with combined public notices and hear- ings. 75% of separate fees and deposits *Note: Deposit will be used to pay for engineering or legal reviews or both as necessary. Applicant will be charged actual cost of such review(s). City of Uk i ah Variable land Use Development Costs Plan Ordinance (No. 20) Zoning Ordinance (No. 21) Conditional Use' Subdivision Ordinance (No. 18) Major Partition (if improvements made after final map approval) Subdivision (if improvements made after final plat approval) Facilities Inspection Fee Extension of water or sewer lines or both to site, additional water storage if necessary Maintenance (9ne-year period) Mobile Home Park Ordinance (No. 19) Extension of water or sewer lines or both to site. additional water storage if necessary None Bond Bond* Bond* 2% of estimated cost of improvements At cost or fair share as determined by City Council Bond At cost or fair share as determined by City Council *N6te: Bond or other guarantee of financial security. IDraft* City of Ukiah Preliminary Capital . Improvement Program Project 1. Street Paving 2. Storm Drainage (surface) 3. Water System Improvements 4. Community Center 5. 6. 7. *Note: To be completed by April 1979. Estimated Cost Funding Sources IDraft* City of Uki ah Preliminary Capital . Improvement Program Project 1. Street Paving 2. Storm Drainage (surface) 3. Water System Improvements 4. Community Center 5. 6. 7. *Note: To be completed by April 1979. Estimated Cost Funding Sources •NATURAL ENVIRONMENT UKIAH CHAPTER VII NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Climate Umatilla County is located in the southeastern part of the Columbia Basin. This Basin ;s bounded on the south by the high country of central Oregon, on the north by the mountains of western Canada, on the west by the Cascade Range and on the east by the Blue Mountains and the north Idaho plateau. The gorge in the Cascades through which the Columbia River reaches the Pa- cific is the primary break in the barriers surrounding this basin. These physical features have important influences on the general climate of Umatilla County_ The Columbia River approaches the area from the northwest to its junction with the Walla Walla River at an elevation of 351 feet and some 25 miles north of Pendleton, then turns southwestward to be joined a few miles- below by the Umatilla River. Both the Walla Walla and Umatilla Rivers have their sources in the Blue Mountains and flow westward to the Columbia. Precipitation is definitely seasonal in occurrence with an average of only 10 percent of the annual total occuring in the three month period July- September. Most precipitation reaching this area accompanies cyclonic storms moving in from the Pacific Ocean. These storms reach their greatest intensity and frequency from October through April. The Cascade Range west of the Columbia Basin reduces the amount of precipitation received from the Pacific cyclonic storms. This influence is felt, particularly, in the desert area of the central part of the Basin. A gradual rise in elevation from the Columbia River to the foothills of the Blue Mountains again results in in- creased precipitation. This increase supplies sufficient moisture for pro- ductive wheat~ pea~ and stock raising activity. The lighter summertime pre- cipitation ususally accompanies thunderstorms which often move into the area from the south or southwest. On occasion, these storms are quite intense, causing flash flooding. Under usual atmospheric conditions air from the Pacific, with moderate temper~ ature characteristics, moves across the Cascades or through the Columbia Gorge to result in mild temperatures. When this flow of air from the west is impeded by slow-moving high pressure systems over the interior of the .continent~ temperature conditions sometimes become rather severe; hot in summer and cold in winter. During the summer or early fall, if a stagnant high predominates to the north or east, the hot, dry conditions may prove detrimental to crops during late May and June and cause fire danger to rise in forest and grassland areas. During winter, coldest temperatures occur when air from a cold high pressure system in central Canada moves southwest- ward across the Rockies and flows into the Columbia Basin. Under this condition the heavy cold air sometimes remains at low levels in the Basin for several days while warmer air from the Pacific flows above it, to give comparatively mild temperatures at higher elevations. VII-l TABLE 1: 1976 CLIMATOLOGICAL DATA Factor Echo/Stanfield*l .. Pilot Rock Ukiah Temperature High (date) 101 (7-17) 101 (7-)7) 93 (9-1) Summer Average 73.0 69.5 61.1 Low (date) 7.0 (2-6) 1.0 (2-5) -12.0 (2-6) Winter Average 33.2 35.3 25.6 Ra i nfa 11 Annual 6.06 11.23 14.71 Departure from -2.87 . -3.25 -3.51Normal Growing Season (# days between 32? lows) J75 111 4*2 NOTES: *1 OSU Agriculture Experiment Station. *2 # of days between 28° lows - 72 SOURCE: "Climotological Data, Annual Surrmary, Oregon, 1976," Vol. 82, #13, NOAA, Asheville, N.C. Geolo9Y The Blue Mountains are a complex of mountain ranges and intermountain basins and valleys which occupy an area of about 21,000 square miles in the north- eastern corner of Oregon. During the early middle Pliocene, a major deforma- tion raised the modern Blue Mountains, probably partly by renewed uplift along older Tertiary fold axes. On the north, the basalts were folded up to form the northeast-trending Blue Mountain front at or along which all other folds and faults die out. Although the Blue Mountain region is widely re- garded as a subdivision of the Columbia Plateau, actually it separates, or is a broad transition zone between, the Columbia Plateau (of which the Des- chutes-Umatilla Plateau is the southern part) and the Basin and Range geo- logic provinces. The northwestern boundary of the region follows the crest of the Blue Mountain front, which is a monoclinal fold that extends 180-200 miles southwestward from north of the State line to the vicinity of Prineville. VII-2 The area along Camas and Owens Creeks is Alluvium (Qal) made up of unconsol- idated gravel, sand and silt. This area of Qal is surrounded by a larger area of Sedimentary Rocks (Ts) bounded on the southwest by several faults. The Ts area is a large graben which is a depression of the earth's crust between two parallel faults. Much of southern and central Umatilla County is part of the Columbia River Gro~p (Tcr) which is mostly columar jointed basalt flows ten to one-hundred feet thick. Mineral and Aggregate Resources Ukiah is located in T5S-R31E. Five rock quarries and two gravel pits are located in this area. Please refer to "Rock Material Resources of Umatilla County, OregQn," Oregon State Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Portland, 1976, for further information. Topography and Natural Hazards Ukiahls elevation is approximately 3,400 feet above sea level. is located in a large graben or basin which may be outlined by 4,000 feet contour on topographic maps of the area. Mountains the basin rise to 5,000 - 6,000 feet. Key features shown on the Natural Hazards Map include: The community following the surrounding 1. The community is bounded on the north by a forty foot high bluff and on the south by the floodplain of Camas Creek, 2. Drainage is east to west, and 3. The areas north and southwest of Ukiah are relatively level. Areas subject to flooding or of slopes greater than 12% generally should not be developed. If such areas are developed special care should be taken to protect structures onsite and adjacent property. According to present Department of Housing and Urban Development, Federal Insurance Administration emergency flood insurance program regulations land use and control measures adopted by the community for the flood plain must: "'b' When the Administrator has designated areas of special flood hazards (A zones) by the publication of a community's FHBM, but has neither produced water surface elevation data nor identified a floodway or coastal high hazard area, the community shall: (1) Require permits for all proposed construction and other developments including the placement of mobile homes, within Zone A on the com- munity's FHBM: VII-3 (2) Require the application of the standards in paragraphs (a) (2), (3), (4), (5), and (6) of this section to development within Zone A on the community's FHBM; (a)(2) Review proposed development to assure that all necessary permits have been received from those governmental agencies from which approval is required by Federal or State law, including Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, 33 U.S.C. 1334; (a)(3) Review all permit applications to determine whether pro- posed building sites will be reasonably safe from flooding. If a proposed building site is in a flood-prone area, all new construction and substantial improvements (including the placement of prefabricated buildings and mobile homes) shall (i) be designed (or modified) and adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure, (ii) be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage, and (iii) be constructed by methods and practices that minimize flood damage; (a)(4) Review subdivision proposals and other proposed new develop- ment to determine whether such proposals will be reasonably safe from flooding. If a subdivision proposal or other pro- posed new development is in a flood-prone area, any such proposals shall be reviewed to assure that (i) all such proposals are consistent with the need to minimize flood damage within the flood-prone area, (ii) all public utilities and facilities, such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems are located and constructed to minimize or eliminate flood damage, and (iii) adequate drainage is provided to reduce exposure to flood hazards; (a)(5) Require within flood-prone areas new and replacement water supply systems to be designed to minimize or eliminate in- filtration of flood waters into the systems; and (al(6) Require within flood-prone areas (i) new and replacement sanitary sewage systems to be designed to minimize or eli- minate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharges from the systems into flood waters and (ii) on- site waste disposal systems to be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. (3) Require that all subdivision proposals and other proposed new develop- ments greater than 50 lots or 5 acres, whichever is the lesser, in- clude within such proposal base flood elevation data; (4) Obtain, review, and reasonably utilize any base flood elevation data available from a Federal, State, or other source, until such other data has been provided by the Administrator, as criteria for requiring that (i) all new construction and substantial improvements of resi- dential structures have the lowest flood (including basement) elevated to or above the base flood level and (ii) all new construction and substantial improvements of nonresidential structures have the lowest floor (including basement) elevated or floodproofed to or above the base flood level; VII-4 (5) .For the purpose of the determination of applicable flood insurance risk premium rates within Zone A on a communityls FHBM~ (i) obtain the elevation (in relation to main sea level) of the lowest habit- able floor (including basement) of all new or substantially improv~d structures, and whether or not such structures contain a basement, (ii) obtain, if the structure has been floodproofed, the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) to which the structure was flood- proofed, and (iii) maintain a record of all such information ~ith the official designated by the community under ~ 1909.22 (a)(9) (iii); (6) Notify, in riverine situations, adjacent communities and the State Coordinating Office prior to any alteration or relocation of a watercourse, and submit copies of such notifications to the Adminis- trator; (7) Assure that the flood carryin9 capacity within the altered or re- located portion of any watercourse is maintained; (8) Require that all mobile homes to be placed within Zone A on a com- munity's FHBM shall be anchored to resist flotation~ collapse, or lateral movement by providing over-the-top and frame ties to ground anchors. Specific requirements shall be that (i) over-the-top ties be provided at each of the four corners of the mobile home, with two additional ties per side at intenmediate locations and mobile homes less than 50 feet long requiring one additional tie per side; (ii) frame ties be provided at each corner of the home with five additio~al ties per side at intermediate points and mobile homes less than 50 feet long requiring four additional ties per side; (iii) all components 'of the anchoring system be capable of carrying a force of 4,800 pounds; and (iv) any additions to the mobile home be similarly anchored; (9) Require that an evacuation plan indicating alternative vehicular access and escape routes be filed with appropriate Disaster Pre- paredness Authorities for mobile home parks and mobile home sub- divisions located within Zone A on the community's FHBM." (From Chapter X-Federal Insurance Administrations, Subchapter B-National Flood Insurance Program, Part 1910.3 [b].) As more current flood plain maps and elevations. are available, lenders, insurance salesmen, and city officials will be notified. City flood plain management ordinances and regulations will need to be updated and brought into compliance as new information is available if the city wishes to con- tinue to participate in the program. If the city ·chooses not to participate, flood insurance would not be available for city residences and businesses. Soils Soil conditions are one of the most important features related to land use planning. Soils concerns are twofold: (.1) capability or productivity po- tential and (2) limitations related to development. These limitations VII-5 Ican be overcome, although in many instances, substantial expenditures will be required. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service defini- tions forthe various soils capabilities are given below. Capabil ity Cl asses. Capi\bil i tyclasses show the suitabil ity of soil s for most kinds offield crops including soil limitations, ,risk of soil damage, and soil res,ponse to vari ous treatments. Roman numerals I through VI II indicate capability classes with progressively greater limitations and narrower choices for practical use. They are defined as follows: Class I soils have few limitations that restrict their use. Class II soils have moderate limitations that reduce the choice of plants, require moderate conservation practices. Class III soils have severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants, require special conservation practices, or both. Class IV soils have very severe limitations that reduce the choice of plants, require very careful managemerit, or both. Class V soils are not likely to erode but have other limitations, impracticable to remove. that limit their use largely to pasture; range, woodland. or wildlffe. Class VI soils have severe limitations that make them generally un- suited to cultivation and that restrict their use largely to pasture or range. woodland, or wildlife. Class VII soils have very severe limitations that make them unsuited to cultivation and that restrict their use largely to pasture or range, woodland. or wildlife. Class VIII soils and landforms have limitations that preclude their use for commercial plants and restrict their use to recreation, wildlife, water supply, or to esthetic purposes. Letter designations are often added to the capability numerals, and indicate the fo 11 owi ng: (e) Shows that the main limitation is risk of erosion unless close- growing plant cover is maintained. Cs) Shows that the soil is limited mainly because it is shallow. droughty. or stony; (w) Shows that water in or on the soil interferes with plant growth or cultivation (in some soils the wetness can be partly corrected by artifical drainage. (c) Shows chief limitation is climate that is too cold. too dry. or too cloudy for production' of many crops. VI 1- 6 The soil mapping unit boundaries (see soils map) are determined by soil scientists digging pits and auger holes into the soil, studying road cuts, measuring slopes and soil depths, estimating percent gravel, cobbles, sand silt and clay and considering any limiting or enhancing features of the various soils. A combination of stereoscopic study, aerial photograph inter- pretation and walking over the land is used to determine Kinds of land forms and soils present. Limitation Rating Each soil mapping unit has definite limitations for specific uses. The limitations are rated as follows: Slight soil limitation is the rating given soils that have properties fa- vorable for the rated use. This degree of limitation is minor and can be overcome easily. Good performance and low maintenance can be expected. Moderate soil limitation is the rating given soils that have properties mOderately favorable for the rated use. This degree of limitation can be overcome or modified by special planning, design, or maintenance. During some part of the year the performance of the structure or other planned use is less desirable than for soils rated slight. Some soils rated moderate require treatment such as artificial drainage. run-off control to reduce erosion, extended sewage absorption fields. extra exca- vation. or some modification of certain features through manipulation of the soil. For these soils. modification is needed for those construction plans generally used for soils of slight limitation. Modification may include special foundations. extra reinforcements. sump pumps. and the like. Severe soil limitation is the rating given soils that have one or more pro- pertles unfavorable for the rated used, such as steep slopes. bedrock near the surface. flood hazard, high shrink-swell potential. a seasonal high water table, or low bearing strength. This degree of limitation requires major soil reclamation, special design or intensive maintenance. Some of these soils, however, can be improved by reducing or removing the soil feature that limits use, but in many situations, it is difficult and costly to alter the soil or to design a structure to compensate for a severe degree of limitation. Some of the specific uses evaluated include: Dwellings with and without basements, as·considered here. are for structures not more than three stories high that are supported by foundation footings placed in undisturbed soil. The features that affect the rating of a soil for dwellings are those that relate to capacity, to support load and resist settlement under load. and those that relate to ease of excavation. Soil properties that affect capacity to support load are wetness. susceptibility to flooding. density, plasticity, texture, and shrink-swell potential. Those that affect excavation are wetness. slope, depth to bedrock. and content of stones and rocks. VII-, , , TABLE 2 UKIAH AREA SOIL INFOR~':ATIOU ------ . ~ Soil H 92D Soil Name Rock Creek extremely cobbly loam, 2-20% slopes Septic Tank Absorption Field Rating/Restrictive Feature Severe-Depth to rock slow perculation Land Cap. Class VIIs Non-irr. Kind of Land Rangeland 230A 232A Klamath silt loam, 0-2% slopes Klamath silty clay loam, 0-2% slopes Severe-Slow permeability, high Vw seasonal water table, occa- Non-irr. sional flooding 242A 245B 660B 661B 661B* 670B 682E 683F 690C 690C* 690C-D 692F 700C 701C-B Veazie gravelly silt loam, 0-3% s.lopes Emily cobbly loam, 2-5% slopes Ukiah silt loam, 1-7% slopes Ukiah stony silt loam, shallow variant, 1-7% slopes Same as above except 15-35% slopes Wilkens silt loam, 1-7% slopes Klicker very stony silt loam, 20-40% slopes . Same as above except 40- 75% slopes Tala silt loam, 2-12% slopes Tala like soil but more droughty Tala silt loam, 35%-65% slopes Couse silt loam, deep 1- 12% slope (as mapped all slopes less than 7%) Couse silt loam, moderate deep, slopes less than 7% Severe-Floods, wet, Above flood prone area ~ wa ter table below 48" Sl i ght Severe-Slow perculation Severe-Slow perculation Severe-Slow perculation Severe-Wet, perculates slowly, floods Severe-Depth to rock, slope Moderate-Slope Moderate-Slope Severe-Slope Severe-Perculates slowly IVs Irr. IVs Non-irr. IVe Non-irr. Ive Non-irr. VIIs ·Non-irr. Vw Non-irr. VIIs Non-irr. II Ie Non-irr. IlIe Non-irr. VIle Non-irr. IIle Non-i rr. Meadow Woodland Rangeland Rangeland Rangeland ~~eadow Woodl and \/oodland Rangeiand \/oodland \/oodland 701C 7mc* 7030 7030* Couse silt loam, moderate Severe-Perculates slowly deep, 1-12% slopes Couse - 1i ke soi 1 but more droughty Couse silt loam, shallow Severe-Perculates slowly stony variant, 7.-20% slopes Couse like soil but more droughty IIle Non-irr. VIs Non-irr. Woodland Rangeland Woodland Rangeland Source: Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Pendleton, Oregon December 13. 1976 VII-8 Small commercial buildings, as considered here, have the same requirements and features as described for dwellings. The main difference for commercial buildings is a reduction of slope limits for each limitation class. Canneries, foundries, and the like are not considered here because foundation require- ments generally would exceed those of ordinary three-story dwellings. Local roads and streets, as rated here, have an all-weather surface expected to carry automobile traffic all year. They have a sUbgrade of underlying material; a base consisting of gravel, crushed rock, or soil material stabi- lized with lime or cement; and a flexible or rigid surface, commonly asphalt or concrete. These roads are graded to shed water and have ordi'nary pro- visions for drainage. They are built from soil at hand. and most cuts and fills are less than six feet deep. TABLE 3: CITY OF UKIAH SOIL LIMITATION RATINGS Soil Number Dwellings without basements Dwellings with basements Small Commercial buildings Local roads and streets 230A 242A 660B Severe Severe* Severe Severe Severe* Severe Severe Severe* Severe Severe Severe* Severe 661B* Severe Severe Severe Severe 701C-B Moderate Severe r10derate Severe *NOTE: Moderate limitation if land is above flood prone area and the water table is below 48". SOURCE: Soil Conservation Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, Pendleton, Oregon, December 13, 1976. Boundaries delineated by the soil mapping units (see soils map) are seldom sharp or clearcut. Since soil type boundaries are transitional or grade into each other, the map delineations shown may include up to 15 percent other soil types. Careful examination of the soils information presented here will aide in general decision making, but does not preclude the need for specific on- site data. Information included here will: 1. Provide preliminary estimates of soil limitations for general planning of buildings sites, highways, drainage systems, and other community developments. VII-9 2. Indicate potential sources of topsoil, sand or gravel. 3. Aid iri developing land· use regu~ations. 4. Aid in planning locations for developments. 5. Indicate areas pa~ticularly susceptible to erosion or flooding. 6. Supplement the information obtained from other published maps and reports. The soil ·survey tables suirrnarize information associated with each soil mapping unit as shown on the soil map. Fish and Wildlife In Umatilla County there are 26 species of amphibians and reptiles, 12 species of fish, 259 species of birds and 89 species of mammals. Fish and wildlife provided several hundred thousand recreation days with a value of over $7.7 million in 1977. Hunting and outdoor recreational activities contribute to the economy of Ukiah and are an important part of local life-style. Fish in Camas Creek include Summer Steel head and Rainbow Trout. Land . adjacent to the creek and its tributaries provide important wildlife hab- itat; The area is used by deer and elk for grazing during the winter. All development will have impacts on fish and wildlife. Creeks and flood- plains are the most sensitive areas and should be protected .. Concentrating residential, commercial and industrial development within the urban growth boundary will help maintain the fish and wildlife carrying capacity of the area. Steel head move up Camas Creek from the John Day River to headwaters in the Blue Mountains. Minimum stream flows should be maintained in order to pro- tect fish. Bridge construction, flood prevention measures, and development adjacent to streams and floodprone areas should be designed to maintain stream integrity and wildlife habitat. Management of agricultural, grazing and forest lands in southern Umatilla County affects fish and wildlife in the Ukiah area. For example, deer and elk require adequate grazing areas for forage in both summer and winter. The city should be concerned with and review and comment on county and Forest Service plans and private agriculture, grazing and forest activities to pro- tect fish and wildlife. Also, area industries depend on the sustainability of timber supply. Overcutting, too little reforestation or harvesting of timber in sensitive areas will hurt the city's economy, liveability and environment. Air, Water, and Land Resources Quality Please refer to the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality "Handbook for environmental quality elements of land use plans" (July 1978) for detailed information on environmental regulations. The handbook covers coordination, VII-10 air quality, noise control, solid waste and water quality. Ukiah should approve or deny a DEQ request for a llstatement of compatib;-lity" for site specific actions affecting land use based on the best available informati"on and technical advice. Air quality in Ukiah is good. There;-s no apparent conflict with Class II PSD (Prevention of Significant Deterioration) air quality standards or vio- lation of the eight-hour carbon monoxide standard. Major sources of noise in Ukiah are trucks and snow mobiles. New industries could create noise problems. Requirements to control noise may be included in the zoning ordinance. A solid waste disposal site is located north of Pilot Rock and pickup service is available. Umatilla County completed its Solid Waste Management Plan on 8-14-74. Ukiah should work with the County to update the plan as necessary. Solid waste may be recycled, used as an energy resource or disposed of in a sanitary landfill. Ukiah provides adequate sewage treatment. The sewage collection and treat- ment system was completed in 1978. The urban growth boundary should be es- tablished, in part, based on sewage collection system design requirements. Low density residential areas within the growth boundary may need to be served by the central treatment facility if soil tests done by DEQ show that septic tank absorption fields will not work adequately. If development of a storm drainage system is considered, a settling basin may be needed to re- move particulates before water is released to Camas Creek. Scientific, Natural and Cultural Areas No significant, natural or cultural areas are located in the Ukiah urban plan-· ning area. However, Camas Creek and flood prone areas provide important fish and wildlife habitat. Please refer to the fish and wildlife section of this chapter for additional information. Energy Resources Potentially usable energy resources in Ukiah include solar energy and solid waste. Solar energy could be used for water and space heating. The main type of solid waste available is non-commercial grade wood from the Umatilla National Forest. Wood may be used for space heating. VII-ll : .-.J - -- . " ..X10 _ .",,, """ 'I ,.. _ ,,, .... ....... • • • 12 ARDS (Q)~~@(Q)[K!J ---- NATURAL HA ©DlrW (Q)~ [UJ~D~[}{]~ 11 PLAINFLOOD LEGEND SLOPES ~ 12 % 100 YEAR PERENNIAL STREAM INTERMITTENT STREAMS -,)400- CONTOUR LINE 120 fl. interval I SOURCES: FLOOD PLAIN-US Corps of Engineers, Walla Walla, WA, January 1976 • !!!!!!!!!!!!~!!!!l.BiiA~S~E.,.MiI!iAP-US Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado, 1967 ~L"---/~ ". o IS.... Jl6.' .."'_I • ( T [IllS SOILS MAP ~DuW @~ llJJ~D ~[}[]@~o SOURCE: USDA Soli Con- ••nation Servic., Pendlatoft, January 1977 .' .-- ..' LEGEND: 1--- SOIL BOUNDARY ',2 230 A SOIL NUMBER I••• t.xtl PERENNIAL STREAM INTERMITTENT STREAM FLOOD PLAIN BOUNDARY PAVED ROAD IMPROVED ROAD UNIMPROVED ROAD APPROXIMATE SECTION CORNER .., .' " .... 701 C 242 A .' t·. ' . .... ; '" .........•. ...... ./ 701 C .' 700 C ..... .........3F ..// .' ..// r-P''''N'''-E__.:::C~RE''-'E'''K'--t"..!R~Ol·~i.:~--- , ) ~ / '41'3 '--,,~C:l'O::... ~R~O~.:!--·!::;~i~~N!!.0~.'""::~4~4~9;-~242 Ar_~~!.-~c:-J:::;l~~INOTE: T.n.II•••olla m.p _ .......-Id...lopad Irom old aur••y. and a.rlal photograph Intar r.tallon. SUbJact to !I.ld ch.ck. 701 C 661 B -----,, SOCIO -ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT UKIAH Chapter VIII Socioeconomic Environment Economic History and Resource Base Prior to white settlement in Umatilla County, the native Cayuse Indians of the region often summered in the Ukiah" vicinity. The mountain meadows, streams, and forests of southern Umatilla County provided roots, berries, fish and game, the key elements in the Indian hunting and gathering economy. After the arrival of wild horses from the Southwest. these were pastured in the. Blue Mountains during the summer as well. The great westward migrations of the 1840's and 1850's passed through Umatilla County without settlement. The Indian population was decimated, however, by disease and, after the destruction of the Whitman Mission on the Walla Walla River in 1846, by wars with white settlers from the Willamette Valley. In 1855 and 1858, warfare broke out between the native inhabitants and the increasingly populous white settlers. During this period, the main reservations in Eastern Oregon and Washington were established, including the Umatilla. After the Cayuse War of 1847 and 1848 and the Treaty of 1855, the local Indians retired to the Umatilla Reservation. They fought on the- side of the white set- tlers against the Bannocks in the last Pacific Northwest Indian war in 1878. The decisive conflict occurred at Battle Mountain near the Umatilla/John Day Basin divide in the Blue Mountains north of Ukiah. The discovery of gold in the John Day area led to the establishment of perma- nent settlements in southern Umatilla County, which arose to supply the needs of miners and teamsters traveling up the canyons of the Birch Creek Forks, over the divide and down into the John Day River North Fork drainage. During the 1870's, Umatilla County experienced an expansion in livestock pro- duction, centered on sheep, that lasted for thirty or more years. During the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the county's mix of lower elevation winter pasture and irrigated hay fields in stream bottoms combined with higher elevation summer grazing lands provided an ideal environment.for sheep. The rich,native grasses of the region were already suffering depletion from over- grazing by 1885. In 1905, Pendleton was still the leading wool railhead in the world. By this time, however, the growth of grain production and restric- tions on grazing in the newly established National Forests had limited the area's potential for sheep production. Where the sheep had eaten down the bunchgrass and broken up the sod with their feet, farmers began planting wheat. Early experiments in grain production had been attempted in the higher rainfall areas of eastern Umatilla County in the late 1860's, but it was not until after 1880 that large scale wheat farming developed in Umatilla County. Commercial grain farming was made more econom- ically feasible by the arrival of the railroad in 1883. Prior to that time, sacks of grain had been hauled by wagon to the Columbia at Umatilla or Wallula from the higher elevation Columbia Plateau farmlands of eastern and southern Umatilla County. VIII - 1 Irrigation Farmers have practiced irrigation in Umatilla County since the fur trapping days of the early nineteenth century. The Hudson Bay Company farm near present-day Umapine in the Walla Walla Valley used canals to irrigate its crops through the summer. The Whitman Mission west of Walla Walla also used diverted river flows to irriga~e its crops. For most of the early settlement period, irrigation was limited to streamside canal techniques. Later in the nineteenth century, as commercial farming spread on the Columbia Plateau, some farmers used windmill pumped groundwater for domestic, livestock and crop purposes. These were increasingly replaced by gasoline and later elec- tric power during the first four decades of this century. In 1882 the Columbia Valley Land and Irrigation Company under O. D. Tee1 took over a ditch built in the 1860's south of Echo to divert Umatilla River flows onto dryland farms. This earliest irrigation canal in the West End was still in use when the Federal projects began after 1900. The first large scale irrigation project attempted on the lower elevation Co- lumbia Bnsin lands, however, was the Hermiston Project, completed in 1908. Cold· Springs Reservoir was the surface impoundment providing water to the canal system dug for this project, which enabled the production of field and truck crops on the sand and loam soils of the Columbia Basin. About this time, .a proposal known as the Teel Project was promoted to transfer water through a mountain tunnel from Snipe Creek in the John Day drainag.e to . the upper reaches of Butter Creek in the Umatilla drainage basin ...This proposal has recently been revived by Butter Creek irrigators in the form of the Snipe Creek Project, which similarly calls for development of a reservoir north of Ukiah connected by a tunnel with Butter Creek's East Fork. In 1916, the West Extension was added to the Hermiston Project in hopes of irrigating sandy soils to the west of Hermiston and in Morrow County around Irrigon. It was less successful than the original Cold Springs system. Since 1969, the West End of Umatilla County and northern Morrow County have experienced rapid increases in agricultural production due to new irrigation techniques. Relying on water pumped from raised pools behind the John Day and McNary Dams and from deep wells, improved alkalinity leaching methods and center pivot and wheel-line sprinkler pipe irrigation, corporate and family farms have watered about 90 thousand acres of previously un- or under-produc- tive land in Oregon's Columbia Basin during the last nine years. Production of alfalfa, wheat, and especially potatoes on this land has enabled the devel- opment of a vigorous food processing industry in the West End of Umatilla County. The Camas Land Co. platted Ukiah in 1890 and a post office opened the same year with DeWitt C. Whitney as postmaster. It was named by E. B. Gambee for Ukiah, California, his former home. It was incorporated in 1972 with Lloyd Waid the first mayor. Ukiah Businesses. C & D Motel and Trailer Park Marshall Trailer Court VIII - 2 Exterior Wood Products Ken's Chevron Klothes Barn Rhodes Supply Panhandle Construction Company Trailroom Cafe and Bar Source: 197B Phone Directory Employment Ukiah's mainstay of employment is the U.S. Forest Service~ and its fire crews. during the summer months. and area lumber and wood processing industries. The pine beetle infestation that has plagued Eastern Oregon forests from 1973 to 1976 has produced some benefits to Ukiah in the form of increased employment and industry. The disaggregation of the Ukiah Ranger Station Zone meant a loss of twelve temporary employment positions to Ukiah. TABLE 4 Head of Hs'hold 2nd Wage Earner TOTAL Number % Number % Number % Wood Processing and Lumber 17 47.2 1 11. 1 18 40.0 Agriculture 6 16.7 6 13.3 Education 3 8.3 1 11.1 4 8.9 Construction 6 16.7 6 13.3 Clerical Retail 2 22.2 2 4.4 Ranching 1 2.7 1 2.2 ProfIManageria1 2 5.6 1 11 . 1 3 6.2 Other 1 2.8 4 44.4 5 11.1 TOTAL 36 100.0 9 100.0 45 100.0 Table 4 derived from the City of Ukiah Community Attitude Survey displays the dom- inance of lumber and wood processing in Ukiah's employment. The problems of this kind of dominance are illustrated when one considers the employment data for Umatilla County's lumber and wood processing sector. in Table 5. VIII - 3 TABLE 5 UMATILLA COUNTY EMPLOYMENT 1976 Lumber and Wood Processing J F M A M J J A S o N D ' Number 830 680 770 780 800 870 890 920 940 940 960 900 Percent of Total 4.2% 3.5% 3.9% 3.9% 3.8% 3.4% 4.1% 4.0% 4.4% 4.3% 4.6% 4:3% Employment Low Employment Low Production High Employment Full Producti on SOURCE: State of Oregon Employment Division Research and Statistics. February. 1977. The labor force is subject to the seasonal nature of this natural resource based economy and suffers the consequences of high employment and full production dur- ing spring. summer and early fall. low production and lower employment during winter and early spring months. The instability produced by these fluctuations is further reinforced by the other negative aspects of a silvaculture based econ- omy; most specifically its dependance on national housing starts and mortgage interest rates. and susceptibility to natural forces (eg. insect infestation). which affect the production and sale of wood products. All these parameters. are out of the control of local businessmen. thus, the labor force finds itself in the same predicament. This impact becomes more apparent when one realizes that though comprising an average of 4.1% of the yearly employment for Umatilla, County. the fluctuations from month to month would become much more ~evere to a city with ,nearly half of its work force employed in lumber and wood products processing. The information contained in 1970·census data gives some basis for this assumption. According to these statistics (see. Income section Table 7)· 44% of Ukiah families have incomes of less than $5,000. This compares unfavorably with the comparable County ratio of 22%. and State ratio of 19%. One can safely assume this results first from low annual income because of seasonal employment. and secondly the lack of any other kinds of industries. trade or service orga- nizations in Ukiah or within easy commuting distance from Ukiah. At present the only permanent industry in Ukiah is a shingle factory employing five people. Clearly. lack of opportunity limits the capability of the labor force to the unstable income of the lumber and wood processing industries in Ukiah. VIII - 4 TA BL E 6 U m at ill a Co un ty Em plo ym en t by Pl ac e an d M ajo rS ec to r, 19 76 Pl ac e Po pu la tio n M an uf . Go v1 t. Tr ad e Se rv ic es O th er U m at ill a Co un ty NU MB ER % NU MB ER % NU MB ER % NU MB ER % NU MB ER % NU MB ER % Ad am s 25 0 . 5 - - - - - - 39 . 96 24 . 5B (0) . 22 At he na 97 0 2. 0 30 5 8. 30 25 . 62 47 1. 14 (0) . 22 68 7. 93 Ec ho 52 0 1. 0 (0) . 14 (0) . 12 18 . 44 31 1. 35 12 1. 40 H el ix 16 5 . 3 (0) . 14 (0) . 12 (0) . 12 79 3. 44 He rm is ta n 6, 64 0 13 .2 1, 13 1 31 .0 0 91 9 22 .7 0 71 0 17 .1 7 34 2 14 .9 0 24 4 2B .50 ~Ii 1t on -F re ew at er 4, 60 0 7. 2 31 1 8. 50 60 1 14 .8 0 31 9 7. 72 28 8 12 .6 0 11 8 13 .8 0 "" - Pe nd le to n 14 ,3 00 28 .6 1, 29 7 35 .00 1, 99 3 49 .2 0 2, 59 8 62 .9 0 1, 23 4 53 .8 0 21 5 25 .00 - - Pi lo t Ro ck 1, 71 5 3. 4 39 7 10 .9 0 61 1. 50 45 1. 10 76 3.3 1 (0) . 5B '" St an fie ld 1 , 08 0 2. 2 (0) . , 4 2B . 69 21 . 51 60 2. 62 Uk iah 32 0 . 6 (0) . 14 (0) . 12 (0) . 12 14 . 61 24 2. 80 U m at ill a 2, 00 0 4. 0 34 . 90 26 7 6. 60 16 0 3. 90 60 2. 62 13 6 15 .4 0 W est on 62 5 1. 3 13 9 3. 80 10 . 25 (0) . 12 89 3. 90 (0) . 5B Re m ain de r o f Co un ty 16 ,81 5 33 .6 23 . 60 93 2. 30 17 6 4. 30 11 . 48 30 3. 50 TO TA LS 50 ,00 0 10 0. 0 3, 65 7 10 0. 00 4,0 51 10 0. 00 4, 13 3 10 0. 00 2, 29 4 10 0. 00 85 7 10 0. 00 (D) - Le ss th an te n es ta bl is h~ en ts , n o t re po rte d fo r di sc lo su re pu rp os es . AS Slm led to be an a v er a ge o f fi ve job s fo r a n a ly tic al pu rp os es . SO UR CE : " D is tr ic t 12 La bo r M ar ke t A na ly si s, CE TA T itl e I Ev al ua tio n, " EC OA C, Ec on om ic Co ns ul ta nt s Or e9 0n , Ju ly 19 77 , pa ge 31 , Ta bl e II . 14 . Income Table 7 shows the distribution of family and unrelated individual's income for the City of Ukiah and surrounding rural area comprising Enumeration Districts 61 and 62, and compares these figures with income data for Umatilla County and the state. The Ukiah data is based on a 20% sample of the 1970 census and ~s the latest available information for the city, the county and state figures are also taken from 1970 census data ·to be comparable. TABLE 7 1970 HOUSEHOLD INCOME Ukiah Umatilla Count Ore on Income Level # of %of Households Households # of . % of # of % of Households Households Households Household $ 0-$ 2,999 $ 3,000-$ 4,999 $ 5,000-$ 7,999 $ 8,000-$ 9,999. $10,000-$14,999 $15,000+ TOTALS 68 47 66 25 45 23 274 26.0 18;0 23.0 9.0 16.0 8.0 100.0 1,224 1,252 2,661 1,883 2,974 1,533 11 ,527 11.0 11.0 23.0 16.0 26.0 13.0 50,100 53,942 104,197 83,987 152,677 97,580 SOURCE: Ukiah information from 1970 U.S. Census of Population and Housing, Fifth Count Summary Tape, File C. Oregon. County and State figures from General Social and Economic Characteristics, Oregon, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1970. When 1970 income information is compared for the Ukiah area, Umatilla County and Oregon, it becomes apparent that Ukiah has a much higher percentage of its population (44% comparedto 22% and 19% respectlvely) earning less than $5,000 annually than do the other jurisdictions. Correspondingly, the city and surrounding rural area has a much lower percentage of households with in- comes of $8,000 or more annually -- 33% compared with 55% for Umatilla County and 62% for the state. There are several factors that must be considered when analysing this data. First, the data may be somewhat skewed because of inclusion of rural residents' income. Unfortunately, the City of Ukiah is not an independent enumeration district but is split and is included in two other primarily rural districts. Thus, city residents may have somewhat higher annual incomes than this information indicates. The other factor to consider is that the area is dependent on logging and cattle and sheep ranching which are by nature seasonal and thus low-paying on an annual basis. VIII - 6 I I More current income data for Umatilla County and Oregon is included in Table 8. It is apparent that some shifts have occurred as well as a substantial increase in the number of families earning over $15,000 annually. The same kinds of changes may have occurred in Ukiah though until the 1980 census is completed it is impossible to draw any firm conclusions . ..TABLE B Household Income, Umatilla County and Ore90n 1974 Umatilla County Oregon I of %of , of %of ~ Income Level Households Households Households Households $ 0-$ 2,999 2,26B 13.0 103,2B2 13.0 $ 3,000-$ 4,999 1,848 11.0 77,052 9.0 $ 5,000-$ 7,999 2,654 16.0 109,020 13.0 $ 8,000-$ 9,999 1,966 11.0 82,790 10.0 $10,000-$14,999 4,402 26.0 212,302 26.0 $15,000 + 3,662 22.0 235,254 29.0 TOTALS 16,800 100.0 B19,700 100.0 SOURCE: Sales Management, the Marketing Magazine, IlSurvey of Buying Power", New York, New York, June, 1974. Umatilla County ranked 23 of 36 Oregon counties in median income as computed by the State Housin9 Division in 1978, and tenth of 18 in Eastern Ore90n. (see Table 9) What this ranking means in terms of buying power and·living standard is not clear. The general cost of living in Umatilla County is probably similar to elsewhere in Oregon. with rents and taxes being lower and consumer goods being higher than west of the Cascade Range. To what extent this situation may be mitigated by proximity to recreation, sporting and food production sites is not readily determined. Data are presently unavailable on income adequacy. The number of older people living on fixed incomes in Ukiah would have to be determined by a new survey. In 1977, the number of persons below poverty level in the Ukiah-Meacham Division (Cities of Ukiah and Meacham and southern rural Umatilla County) was 205, some of whom would be expected to live in the cities. This number constitutes about 4.6% of all Umatilla County residents (4,438) under Federally-established poverty level guidelines. VIII - 7 TABLE 9 Eastern Oregon Counties by 1978 Median Family Income Rank In 11ed i an Rank In Oregon Eastern Oregon County Family Income (36 Counties) 1 Klamath 16.122 9 2 Harney 15.910 12 3 Hasco 15.860 13 4 Union 15.821 14 5 Deschutes 15.779 15 6 Lake 15.395 17 7 Sherman 15.066 20 8 Crook 15.012 21 9 Morrow 14.910 22 10 UMATILLA 14.903 23 11 Hood River 14.662 25 12 Jefferson 14.263 27 13 Grant 14.192 28 14 Malheur 13.411 30 15 Gilliam 13.317 32 16 Wallowa 13.203 33 17 Baker 12.893 35 18 Wheeler 12.768 36 STATE 16.768 SOURCE: State of Oregon Housing Division. 1978 When overall median income of Umatilla County families is broken into decile categories (~roupsof ten percentiles) an interesting pattern emerges. (see Table 10) Umatilla .County falls in behind Morrow County but ahead of all other Oregon Administrative District 12 counties in every decile except the lowest two. In these deci1es. Umatilla ranks third while Morrow County drops to fifth of the five counties. Thus Umatilla County has some income disparity but does not experience it to the same extent that Morrow County does. Another striking feature of this table is that the median income of all deciles of families in Umatilla County is less than the comparable deci1es in the state as a whole. To what extent this pattern persists in Ukiah is not known. VII I - 8 TA BL E 10 M ed ian In co m e in D ol la rs Be fo re Ta xe s by O ec ile s fo r Co un tie s in Or eg on A dm in ist ra tiv e D is tr ic t 12 , 19 78 Co un ty St at e UM AT ILL A MO RR OW GR AN T GI LL IA M . WH EE LE R OR EG ON Pe rc en til e Fa m ili es Fa m i1 ie s Fa m ili es Fa m ili es Fa m il ;e s Fa m ili es Fi rs t 10 % 5, 04 9 4, 50 8 5, 73 6 5, 58 6 4, 57 9 5, 66 8 Se co nd 10% 8, 17 4 8, 84 3 7, 65 7 8, 43 2 8, 45 9 9, 09 7 "" - Th ird 10% 10 ,63 1 11 ,06 2 9, 78 6 10 ,2 24 10 ,1 75 12 ,0 92 - - Fo ur th 10% 12 ,88 1 13 ,0 67 12 ,3 29 11 ,7 65 11 ,6 06 14 ,4 98 '" Fi ft h 10% 14 ,9 03 14 ,9 10 14 ,1 92 13 ,3 17 12 ,7 35 16 ,7 68 Si xt h 10% 17 ,0 53 18 ,5 54 16 ,1 08 14 ,3 57 13 ,6 45 19 ,21 1 Se ve nt h 10% 19 ,63 1 21 ,17 1 18 ,4 82 17 ,0 30 16 ,21 1 21 ,98 1 Ei 9h th 10 % 23 ,8 50 26 ,3 03 21 ,7 80 21 ,5 85 18 ,9 52 26 ,5 85 N in th 10% 31 ,0 43 38 ,3 93 26 ,8 15 28 ,7 75 22 ,35 1 36 ,4 70 La st 10 % 39 ,1 77 55 ,4 24 38 ,0 69 35 ,6 87 32 ,1 74 43 ,0 53 St at e Ra nk o f Ov era 11 M ed ia n Fa m; ly In co m e 23 rd 22 nd 28 th 32 nd 36 th SO UR CE : Or eg on St at e H ou sin g D iv is io n, Sa lem , 19 78 . provided by assessed Table 11 shows the fity Financial Base Some indication of current area economic conditions is valuations, tax rates and bonded indebtedness figures. assessed valuation of Ukiah and Umatilla County. The assessed valuation of the City of Ukiah increased about 223% or $750,336 between 1972-73 and 1977-78. This increase is largely the result of a re- appraisal which was completed in 1976. Several new homes and mobile homes have also been sited in the city. In addition to the buildings and improve- ments that are reflected in total city valuation, Ukiah has several Forest Service buildings and homes that are not included in the city valuation. Construction of processing plants, rural housing and the Hinkle Rail facilities in rural Umatilla County has contributed to total county valuation and has sub- stanially reduced the county tax rate in the past few years. TABLE 11 TAX DATA Ukiah Umatilla County Assessed Valuation 1972~73 $ 337,080 $416,830,661 1977-78 $1,087,410 $827,610,111 $ Increase 1972-78 $ 750,330 $410,779,450 %Increase 1972-78 223% 99% SOURCE: Abstract of Taxes, Umatilla County, Oregon, Fiscal Years 1972-73 and 1977-78. A breakdown of Ukiah's tax rate is included in Table 12. The total tax rate has declined since 1969-70 though there have been fluctuations from year to' year. Percentage allocations for school, Intermediate Education District and to some degree county taxing districts have fluctuated widely in recent years. It should also be noted that the City of Ukiah has levied no taxes to date. The total bonded indebtedness for the City of Ukiah totals $255,000 and is the result of water and sewer system construction. The 900,000 water system bond is to be repaid over 40 years (the first payment was made in 1968) with yearly payments of $5,876, while the $155,000 sewer system bond is to be repaid over 40 years with annual payments of $8,525. The first payment was made in 1976. Both bonds are to be repaid through user fees. Total indebtedness is about 23% of the assessed value of Ukiah, a ratio that is substantially higher than for most small cities in Morrow and Umatilla Counties. This is due to the relatively low assessed value and small population. VIII - 10 TABLE 12 TAX RATE BREAKDOWN City of Uk; ah 1972-73 1977-78 Tax % of Total Tax % of Total Rate Tax Rate Rate Tax Rate County 3.39 16 2.30 8 I.E.D. 9.86 45 2.88 II B1. Mt. Ed. Dist. 1.73 8 1.88 7 Port 81 .38 2 .16 I School 880 6.36 29 20.19 73 SUBTOTAL 21 .72 27.41 Less Rate Relief TOTAL 21. 72 100 27.41 100 Total City Taxes Call ected: NONE NONE SOURCE: Abstract of Taxes, Umatilla County, Ore90n, for fiscal years 1972-73 and 1977-78. land Use and Zoning As shown on the land use map and Table 13, existing major land uses include residential, public and vacant. A small number of parcels are in commercial use. A zoning ordinance was adopted in September 1978; there was no ordinance prior to this time. County zoning in the area includes heavy industrial, ex- clusive farm and general farm as shown on the map included in this chapter. TABLE 13 Land Use Within City limits Use Residential Commercial Industrial Public and Semi-Public Vacant TOTAL SOURCE: ECOAC Survey 1977. VIlI-ll Acres 53.8 9.7 0.9 IB.7 71 .3 154.4 ".34.8 6.3 0.6 12.1 46.2 100.0 Housing Based on an ECOAC survey. Ukiah had sixty-two single-family homes and forty- one mobile homes as of May 1978. No data is available for Ukiah from the 1970 Census or from the Oregon State Housing Division. Parks and Recreation Ukiah's park is about one-half acre in size and has a tennis court. picnic and play areas. Sports in the area include hunting. fishing. camping. hik- ing and cross-country skiing. Archeological and Historic Sites and Buildings There are no officially identified archeological or historic sites or build- ings in Ukiah. Several sites and buildings were identified by the Community Attitude Survey. School The Ukiah School District has one school which is located in the City of Ukiah. Capacity is 100 students and current enrollment is 114 students. There are presently no plans for expansion. The district has eleven teachers and seven other personnel. A map of the school district boundary has beell included in this chapter. Police Law enforcement services are provided to Ukiah by the Umatilla County Sheriff's Department. There is no deputy in residence. Fire The Ukiah Rural Fire Protection District has ten volunteers and one fire truck. The fire station is located in the city. Ukiah's Fire Insurance Protection Class is #8. Utilities Water and sewer services are provided by the city. Hookup fees are $100.00. Monthly water service is $9.00; sewer is $12.00. Electricity is provided by the Columbia Power Cooperative. Phone service is provided by the Eastern Oregon Telephone Company. Residential phone rates are $5.95/month; business rates are $9.20/month. Maps of water and sewer line locations have been in- cluded in this chapter. Solid Waste Garbage collection is available from the Stanley Stanhope Sanitary Service. Waste is bured at the landfill north of Pilot Rock. The landfill has capac- ity for another 8-10 years of service. VIII - 12 Corrrnunication Local newspapers include the Pendleton and the Pilot Rock have cable TV or FM. Other Services East News Oregonian published published six once a week. days a week in Ukiah does not County, state and federal offices are located in Pendleton. Health services and facilities are available in Pendleton and LaGrande. Population Projections Population growth or decline in the Ukiah area is primarily dependent on the availability of commercial grade timber and the employment level maintained by the U.S. Forest Service. Any economic development will most likely be based upon the timber resource. The one exception to the above is the pos- sibility of recreational development in the area. Vacation homes or year- round dwellings for retired persons might be attracted to the area to take advantage of hunting. fishing. and winter sports. Although relatively remote. Ukiah is a scenic area and only an houris drive from Pendleton and LaGrande. Based on the above considerations. it is difficult to prepare specific pop- ulation projections for Ukiah. After the U.S. Forest Service land Management Plan for the area is finalized in July 1979. it should be possible to more accurately project future pop- ulation growth. Sewage System The sewer system is an integral part of Ukiahls infrastructure because of its essential role in public health and welfare. An adequate sewage collection and disposal system is necessary to allow future economic and housing develop- ment. A definite plan for sewage collection and treatment should insure the fulfillment· of the following objectives: a. To create a sewage system which is current. flexible, and coordinated with the comprehensive plan of the community; b. Permit orderly and timely expansion of the sewage system on a sound financial basis. without cost1y·llcrash" programs.· c. To insure a safe. efficient means for the transport of sewage from source to treatment. d. To provide adequate and complete treatment of sewage in order to preserve and protect environmental quality. e. To continually improve and maintain the sewage system in a manner that will allow it to carry out its intended functions. VIII - 13 TA BL E 14 PR EL IM IN AR Y PO PU LA TIO N FO RE CA ST 19 95 19 90 19 85 '-. 19 80 . - - - , I 19 70 19 77 A B/C A B C A B C A B C Ec ho 47 9 52 0 60 0 65 0 60 0 70 0 80 0. ' 60 0 75 0 95 0 65 0 75 0 95 0 Pi lo t Ro ck 1, 61 2 1, 70 5 1, 83 0 1, 88 0 1, 95 0 2, 00 0 2, 05 0 2, 07 0 2, 12 0 2, 17 0 2, 15 0 2, 15 0 2, 20 0 St an fi el d 89 1 1, 24 5 1, 45 0 1, 65 0 ' 1, 70 0 1, 90 0 2, 00 0 1, 90 0 2, 10 0 2, 20 0 2, 30 0 2, 45 0 2, 65 0 Uk iah - - - 33 0 35 0 - - - 36 0 - - - - - - 37 0 - - - - - - 38 0 - - - - - - U m at ill a Co un ty 44 ,9 00 52 ,1 00 56 ,5 00 60 ,1 50 61 ,6 00 65 ,2 50 68 ,8 50 64 ,9 50 69 ,0 00 72 ,4 50 67 ,4 50 73 ,1 00 17 6, 05 0 < .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - ' - P> NO TE : Th e c it ie s ar e n o t u sin g th es e fi gu re s fo r pl an ni ng pu rr os es . Up da ted pr oje cti on s sh ou ld be a v a ila bl e by W in te r 19 78 -7 9. Pl ea se se e a dd iti on al m a te ria l in th e ap pe nd ix . SO UR CE : EC OA C, O ct ob er , 19 77 . In 1975. a Wastewater Facilities Plan was completed by a consulting engineer representing the City of Ukiah. The facility plan was the initial phase in a three-step process of establishing a new sewage collection and treatment system in Ukiah. In early 1978 construction on the new sewage system was completed. The system design is based on findings established by the fa- cilities plan. Funding for the new sewage facility was supplied through various sources; an approximate breakdown of funding is as follows: % of SOURCE AMOUNT TOTAL Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) $ 242,000 40% U.S. Forest Service 140,000 23% Farmer's Home Administration (FHA) 63,000 10% City of Ukiah FHA Loan 155,000 27% Total Project Cost $ 600,000 100% c Prior to the installation of the new facility, all sewage processing was accomplished through individual septic tank and drain field systems. This technique of sewage disposal was inadequate due to poor soil conditions and the high water table which is found in the Ukiah area. The treatment facility for the City of Ukiah consists of: a. Two cell facultative lagoon which will have normal depth of three feet. Each has a surface area of approximately 1.8 acres and hold a volume of 5.3 acre-feet. b. A storage pond with a maximum surface area of 8.4 acres and a maximum storage volume of 47.9 acre-feet. The maximum depth of the storage pond is 6.25 feet. c. A thirty-six inch diameter, one hundred sixty foot long chlorination contact pipe. d. Approximately thirty-eight acres of land used for effluent disposal through a wheel line irrigation system with a buried main line. An ultimate design population of 600 people was used for the sewage facility. Currently, the population of Ukiah is 320 people. but the facility is designed to operate effectively at the lower loading. The collection system is also new. The sewer piping consists of mainly eight inch diameter laterals, submains, and trunk lines. There are also a few six inch diameter laterals. These pipes are all made of PVC. VIII - 15 There is also a pump lift station which pumps the sewage collected from the town through a six inch diameter force main which extends approximately 6,000 feet east of Ukiah to the sewage treatment facil ity. With the adoption of the "State-Wide Water Quality Management Plan" in 1977, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has defined water qual, ity standards not to be exceeded and minimum design criteria for treatment and control of wastes pertaining to separate Oregon drainage basins. Ukiah is situated in the John Day Drainage'Basin and all future waste treatment and controls must meet requirements set by DEQ, and must also meet,or exceed any more stringent standards required by any other state'or federal agency. The new treatment facility in Ukiah was designed to accomodate a future pop- ulation of 600 people. Its design life is forty years. This means that additional population'growth beyond the City limits but within the growth boundary can be handled by the new treatment facility;' If additional growth occurs beyond a population of 600 people, the sewage treatment facility will have to be expanded. 'The most economic means of expanding would be that of adding more lagoon and storage space as future growth dictates. The new ,collection system which has been installed in Ukiah is capable of servicing any future growth within the City limits. Growth beyond the City limits but within the growth boundary can be accommodated with only minor extensions of sub-mains and the addition of laterals as development occurs. Water System The water system in a community plays an essential role in economic and pop- ulation growth. A definite plan for provision of water should insure the fulfillment of the following objectives: a. To create a water system which is current, flexible and coordi- nated with the comprehensive plan of the community. b. Permit orderly and timely expansion of the water system on a sound financial basis to accommodate growth. c. To provide potable water of sufficient quantity and quality for domestic, industrial, commercial and institutional use, which conforms to the Federal Safety of Public Water Systems Act of 1974. d. To insure adequate quantities of water at sufficient pressures to accommodate required fire protection. e. To continually improve and maintain the water system in a manner that will allow it to carry out its intended functions. In the years 1967-69, Ukiah's present water system was installed. The fund- ing for the water system was aided through a Farmer's Home Administration loan. Today, the Ukiah water system serves one hundred households and five businesses and industries. The daily average water consumption is 80,000 gallons or approximately 32,000,000 gallons per year. VIII - 16 The City is presently obtaining its water from a well which was drilled in 1968. This well is capable of producing 450 gallons per minute after nine .hours of pumping and 520 gallons per minute after twenty-six hours of pump- ing. The total depth of the well is 580 feet and the static water level be- low the ground surface is at ei"ghteen fe"et. The pump being used for extracting water from the well is approximately eight- years-old. The capacity of the pump is 500 gallons per minute and the pump is in good general condition. The static ground water levels recorded during the existence of the City's well show that no change has occurred in ten years. This indicates favorable ground water conditions in the immediate area. Ukiah's water storage facilities consist of an above ground reservoir 7 con- structed of concrete. The reservoir was installed in 1969. and is capable of holding 60 •.000 gallons of water. The overall condition of the reservoir is good. Presently the existing reservoir holds only enough water to supply seventy-five percent of an average day's demands. The remaining daily watet requirement must be supplied by pumping from the well. Installation of Ukiah's distribution network was completed in 1969. The main components of the system consist of: a. Booster pump to maintain adequate pressures under various flow conditions. b. 1,200 feet of eight-inch diameter asbestos-cement pipe. This is also used in the capacity of the supply main. c. 1,800 feet of six-inch diamter asbestos-cement pipe. This is also used in the capacity of the supply main .. d. 6,500 pipe. linear feet of four-inch diamater asbestos-cement and This pipe serves as auxiliary mains and distribution PVC 1i nes. e. 1,700 feet of tl1 25 ~ =~ W2) (/)~ :::J© C~Zc= - ,!.' 'i i (I'---~-' 1 I I ; ),' I I' I IIII I I I - I I \ , I 1\ I I • I I I --------./1/.. I 1\ II L'-----i !:'[ I [-:~~'\~-r--r:'::::l HILL ~ :: ii II \~ I I II II II ~ I r-- II II i\ I 1--rr1: ID'I ., -'T- J; Ii 11 ~i~ I-I I~ I !?[.TT:fi::r.--::::~ :~--- ~\ ~------j r : _rt_l__ lt ,-___ . / I _ _ J\_ : I 1-' I It'K "C:( \' , 'h '" 'T'--'~' :-jl8 ~I I J.¢-=i} , , McKINLEY AVE. ;T. H S U R C E : U m at ill a C ou nt P la nn ln D a 1 ., 1 9 7 7 IU .4 ~1 6. . ,n ~. 2: " ' [T EI IIS LE G EN D 0 H EA VY IN D U ST R IA L O E X C LU SI VE FA R M G EN ER AL FA R M P A R K M -2 F -1 F -2 F -6 F1 ZO N IN G ruJ ~D~ [}{ ]9 @[ Rl ~@ @~ . ,. " " C O U N TY ©D 'TI' W @ [F - ..<.>:l . " W. . woo(J) ~- U>Qc:o . . . . .. . . . . - '" .. - . " ~ .. " E D ~ 0 .. - - <.> c: 0 .. - c:o -:;; '" E ~ :::> 0 - - <.> - c:o -.!!."c:..Q. (J)w-0Ol....0 Q . . . . 0 ---""", I• • ! cg © ~[!ill] ~ © o• • ., .~ • i , • , • • '8 • I --/ ~ LEGEND I:::E~ 8" AC LINE .w ~ 6" AC LINE • = 4" AC LINE Ito- ~ 21'," PVC LINE ~~ • FIRE HYDRANT .(1)~ OURCES: . I J. Val Toronto & Assoclatal, a: © Pendleton, OR, 1968 Anderson, Perry & W ~ La Grande, ~ rL-., 1977 ~ ~ ------=--- =- ~ ) I I I r - . f<,f<,~ (,'i' - - -- --- --NO. 449 ----- ------ROAD --------- ----------COUNTY I --- 1- ~I I I , :IL_ Ii[ I ~ ,';_~I II ,., .. HIGH ST. t-= oc( I, "'I I' I~I I~I I:CJJ ~ /1 i I ~ z...J <{ I,' II j "I I~I lin;ft~1 /;~, j'~ ~ DESPAIN ST. ~ LLj .'i, ':m_~_i ..:~~,~ L4//: I I I I [ I ·-t~ I' 'f B:( -., />;".... IJ f---J II l //~ • 1 I ~ I II .... /-. - 1'/ II , /~""')"n .. -... , r' \ ...... /"l;; -"--.--.,-.--,,' ~-,\ n n itd!<'50L'1 0 i i II - (I ... "'_'1';' /1////~L..s ," _------' ... __ ~ .'1 j " L- ',', L- "-:.-= ';f .. / Q • ..... ---\ II .' /§ - ""---- . -----_ • I HILL ~ 11.------ \'.P..:::?"" ..~h/, 'l [ I'~\J 0-- , ".-~: ~,;;,r, n~"// I, II ~ 1"»r - - __ , .. " II II 1 • II , ".:' ,.." ' "I' QI_'---~~/,:"',::,::,:~___ i\ \\\ ii J\f-- I- ~R I \ (- s/h o ----, "I lIJJ [8" "I- Laf"- X l)2"'<$hU. S. ...;; 1""QREST SERVICE I I I r I I~,~ ("f:::.-L-.... r" \' _ _ (... ~ # 9 ".... II I \ \ I ~ I, ......."# C:,- __ "" II ': I II I' .. -'\\ "./4 --,1___ 11 _I _ I '---=- --- I \ AN", "", __ :1 . 1,--- -- - ,----, ,- -EJ- [;-?j - 'y. kd'~"':' ',' I "ITIJJJI I II rl liB ~'-_-::' ",,;~ I, II I l_l-'.II II p.o. I ~....~~~ ~ ....I '_____ t I II I II I \ I .. , ... - - '... ' r \ - J - - "'1,.--:-:: ) __ - - - .... " I'GJ"~' L' ,,, ~/t l J t ~ I I I I \ '-.,. 1I J' ~" [: , , I Ii'.! .. , " ~ I :: I, ij'" ! I l II - it ~LAf E ST -- , ' ...... ------",.:0'- ,- \ .... ---.--_'/ -_..... - .... .... _STAT ,. ).... __ , __ ... _ ~ ~ r f" ( -~.----- -- 10"E] ,r I I r1):,STATE HIGHMY ~ I I [IJ, j. ' I -r , -l. II , .... , J ~.1 MAINTENANCE I • I ~ • L~, I'~~"" I .... _ STATION ~ ~~ ; I 1" l I:I,I-,~Jn HARTMAN sr1r-;;-=u;ri'i::: ~--'~a1 i u \ jF '/. 37/1 '[ ---, '[[J---~~ /! - I r~. -~"~_Oy, ' l,.;: ~/ II ~...... I I L_ 5 BRYAN AVE'I" "'8'----<, ..~ / . , [' '-,loJ -r- - ~~;1; \~, I~ I" ./ (i ./ I ~ \~" I I J "I ./~ 4' ". JJlm r- -1'-~;;;;;; l't:---·-l~6 / V n McKINLEY AVE.I --l I . :';:. Vr / l- I ,::11 / I ',V .oo~:=-~ ,-~-, , : ... ~ \.:j-;.:> .... ,. Ii • '. i • • • • 'I ~rtJa ~ © @) ~ 2~ w© t-(/)8' >~(/)= w~C'2) CC[\!b a:© w 3=~W~(/)Q) LEGEND 6" FORCE MAIN 8" SEWER 6" SEWER PUMP STATION• NOTE: Under construction summer 1977 SOURCE: Anderson, Perry & Associates, Inc. LaGrande, 1977 r.,,;~. (,~ 449NO,ROADCOUNTY/)\V r---:'-:'~,01 .... '. ......,. ....~ . - _..... ..... ... - _....... ----, "i,--y I / iii /1 IL- BRYAN AVE. IIi I McKINLEY AVE, I /'=~---r---t-~' 'I I~::::::=====~'T------[J----------I-[===J~[=L'I. ....,: '"' ,',", "'[ I. (,/) en I I~ et I ~. I ...J ---Z HIGH ST, II;;~ ~, ~ J1Ui l i 1;;1 Igi ..L-lJ " :, : I I~I =:J~I I~q't ':~::::--j,L--------,---;~ DESPAIN ST, 1 II ,',' D: .-- _..L..':::I~I L~I./-r ~ Ii ( ;i[J 1-' r '1-0 ' " "'-----i;-~- I Ot-icSOL i :: t:: ,--- r'" " ~ : S : 'HILL ST. ': ,~-T-- - • c~ , ~ \ J ... _ _ _ _ I \ I~: ... ----- -.... --U---) ,'---- ;- - --:'\\ r- --- \: i\ , "[ I I "~ 11 II I,--... ,;/:,' '~, :: :: :1-··-·'" ~ ,i , ' '''' J ... -::::----- II [[]J . _I ( ...... -----> til It, " r :;;OREST SERVICE : ' :: , U.S. // I: _ \ L__ _ _'~.:::;:~~_. WELL Sl: i"LIDIJ------------- \ r-1-1=~1::: r8--mr.~-J : '. ,'.'.. /.- ' '.'- " , , "" I' , / • -_-,-,.~-- / ' ... I I ,I II) - - ~ \ - - - - - ~::-~~~-=-:::::::=-~-/.,L:...7L-'----11--I' , _ ', , •I" '-- " I ,', • ST. HW't:2<4~ __=::::: __ > -I.I-.:,'--~--hJ, :--- --- : :'[fJ 1 i ~"I I l I, -.#- J': I I , II" "."", " " . J I I. \. I / I t - II I _..-.... I 1 -,,\ II ., ! I I ........ 111- 1:: 1 \ '/ --~ I ---_., ~-- .-" .. ; - '-- ~ SEWERAGE SYSTEM ©DtrW @CS [UJ~D&[}{]2J @~~@@[fJJ PUMP STATION, FORCE MAIN, LAGOONS & IRRIGATION AREA ° 503 FEET 1006 2012 2515 NOTE: Under construction, summer 1977 - -- - .1220 SOURCE: Anderson, Perry & Associates, Inc. La Grande, OR 1977 " AREA .. IRRIGATION ') ~0V'0" .(;.~ ., LAGOON '------------1 I . ,~ e .. rQ ~~AY I I 2"+'9-- ~o- 011(& I .~l l ;".'1::--~" I //( r"\ ", .~ \\,, "(lJt~:;'~ 1 :- II.~'" " "( "p'r/ " " " " " ." ., /")AJI // I" ..n . ~!J' . I I i Cl..A~ \. JI/ i r- .....(. ;> {SIT'[ II IRRIGATION _ :;-~I / / IFORCE MAIN- PUMP STATION . / ATION .... "". ~"i ==or Ii ' .,'/' 1d" ~'t~r \ • ••11•••••• 11 .I.-.Ilio. .-11- -II- .... .. tAIlO IOllllo.o II ~(al I " 1~[e===:~D'·~D··~ .fI: I -IU .~. • ~ .~~--I2Tl3 -", ~I -- -- ,. ,.. " ST . AV E. LE AH ST . n PL AN [lJ J~D ~[} {]g " I " )( II " " " ~ " ' 0 0 ' 0 0 c .m : '0 0 "0 - - - - - - - - - - : ' 0 ' 0 0 ~ (J ) 0 > - 0 > - , , " X 1 0 - 1 0 - : '0 0> 0 .. .. . ~ < . . . < . . . ~ " . . . . " . . . . < ' 0 ~ ,. . ;" -< ;" -< (J ) - c : " c: 0> m 0 - - < ~ - < c. z < C ) 10 10 ~ .. . Z " m • • (J ) . . (J ) - 0 » o (J ) .. . .. . m "' . . . - . . . 10 Z - ,. . - . . . - < - < :z: z " : Il ~:I l ~ C ) ~ ,. . :I l 0> ~ C ) 0 c. m 'O m < 0> m 0> m 1lI :I l 'O m ~ m " (J ) . . . - < .. . m :I l 0 :z: ~. ~ o' - t .. . .. . 0 » ~ O (J ) : . (J ) :I l C ) 0 ~ m - < - m m ~ . . . .. . .. . til ST RE ET ©D uW @~ II II I "II " " " " " " " " ::\' " " " " " " " " " " " ", ", , , ' , , ", ' " " , , II " ", , " " " " " " 0 " 0 " c " Z " - <, - <, , , :0 ' 0 ' ,. ' 0 ' , , , ~: , ", '"101 I , , I I , I I II II . . LAND USE PLANNING CHAPTER IX Land Use Planning Establishment of tbe Urban Growth Boundary The urban growth boundary is identified based on land required for growth and barrier/incentive analysis. Land requirements may be calculated in two ways. First, forecast population and determine land needed on a 1:1 ratio. Second, estimate need including a mUltiplier to account for land which remains in farm use or vacant by owner decision and which will keep land costs down. require fewer plan amendments and less development time delay .. Barrier/incentive anal- ysis sets boundaries based on natural and man-made features like floodplains, steep slopes, public facilities and so on. The following assumptions were made about growth within the Ukiah urban plan- ning area: (1) Future growth rates are uncertain. (2) Ukiah will be able to provide adequate water and sewer facilities to accommodate growth. (3) The forest resource base will continue to provide the majority ofjobs, (4) There is potential for retirement and leisure related development. and (5) Umatilla County will encourage residential. conrnercial and indus- trial development within urban growth boundaries. Factors considered before the urban growth boundary was established included: ll) Land requirements a) Residential b) Conmercial c) Industrial d) Public and semi-public l2) Natural barriers a) Camas Creek floodplain b) Soil classifications and development limitations c) Slopes greater than or equal to 12 percent d) Topography (3) Public facilities (potential ability to provide) a) Water b) Sewer IX - 1 As shown on the Comprehensive Plan Map in Chapter V, the boundary established includes the existing city limits and an area northwest, north and northeast of the city. The area to the northwest was included to allow expansion of the U.S. Forest Service facility. The area to the north was included to allow the addition of another east-west street. The area to the northeast was included to provide additional residential sites where water, sewer and streets would easily be ex- tended. Two expansion areas were identified. One to the north for residential development. A second to the southwest for industrial development. These ex- pansion areas mayor may not be needed. By designating-these areas now, Ukiah can more easily revise its plan at a later time if required by development pres- sures. Future Land Use Land has been designated for residential, commercial, industrial and public uses -based on technical data, the Community Attitude Survey, current use, and infor- mation obtained at public hearings and city council meetings. Please refer to the Comprehensive Plan Map in Chapter 5 and Table 15 for specific locations and acreages for different uses. TABLE 15 Future Land U~es Within ---- The__ Urban Growth Boundary Type Acres Percentage Residential 70.1 34.7 Resic!ential/ 31.6 15.7Comnietcial Industrial 21.0 10.4 Public and 20.8 10.3Semi-Public Future Residential 58.4 28.9and Public TOTAL 201.9 100.0 NOTE: Expansion areas outside the urban growth boundary equal 107 acres. IX - 2 County Review of the Comprehensive Plan and Technical Report The following reviews are based upon the process adopted in 1977 as given in the Appendix. Planning Commission (7-12-78) Charles Merrill read a brief staff ,report review of the Ukiah Technical Report. See attached Item "A". In reference to item C-1 of th~ staff report Mr. Markus asked for further clarification and noted relative to C-2 that population and economic projections are impossible to measure accurately, but feels a good job has been done. Referring to item C-3 of the staff report, Markus stated he can document existing vacant lands but not existing available vacant lands, as it is nearly impossible to determine owner's wishes. As far as item C-4 is concerned Markus feels no clarification is necessary and he agreed with item C-5, current land use and market value will be used in assessing land in the Urban Growth Boundary. Discussion followed concerning Ukiah's Urban Growth Boundary and the various reasons for the boundaries being as they are. Mr. Markus commented that all city services are in good shape and should be adequate to service the Urban Growth Boundary area. The availability and interest of the real estate market in Ukiah was discussed. Chairman Troedson entertained a motion for disposition of the request. Commis- sioner Harstad moved to recommend approval of the Ukiah Technical Report for the Ukiah Comprehensive Plan. Markus made further comments concerning the items suggested for clarification in the staff report review. Del McNerney commented that the reason a city prefers to have a large urban growth boundary is because once city services have started to become extended in one direction it is much easier to continue it in that same direction. Mr. Merrill stated property owners included within an enlarged urban growth boundary probably would not appreciate being under the influence of the city but not able to take advantage of city services. Mr. Markus disagreed with this assumption, stating that all property owners in the city and urban growth boundary area have received a copy of the comprehensive plan and map and have had ample time to voice their objections. At this point Commissioner Tillman seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously among the Planning ·Commission present. 80ard of Commissioners (8-2-78) Chuck Merrill read the staff report, pointing out the goals and objectives and that some concerns in the staff report need more addressing. Henry Markus, Planner for the City of Ukiah, replied he did not understand some of the concerns addressed by the planning staff - one being a population estimate. In order to estimate a population figure for Ukiah, it would depend on what the Forest Service came up with and that figure would be nothing more than a guess. Chuck Merrill mentioned some of the policy statements have not been considered or addressed. Some effort needs to be made in order to clarify the goals and ob- jectives stated in the staff report. IX - 3 After further discussion between Chuck and Henry, Commissioners Robertson and Lynch agreed there appears to be some confusion and lack of communication be- tween the County planners and the planner for Ukiah. It was suggested Chuck draw up a list of. recommendations pointing out ways the policy statements, and goals and objectives could be clarified to the satisfac- tion of the County Planning Staff. Commissioner Robertson added the Board could approve the Technical Report with the recommendations subject to the Planning Commission's review. Henry questioned the time element involved. Chuck replied perhaps the latter part of next week ~ August 16, 1978. Commissioner Robertson instructed Chuck to write up a1ist of recommendations so that he (Chuck) and Henry can sit down and settle their differences. Commissioner Lynch made the motion to accept the City of Ukiah's Technical Re- port with the forthcoming recommendations subject to the Planning Co~ission's review. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. Two in favor, none opposed; motion carried. Board of Commissioners (8-16-78) Chuck Merrill, Planning Department, reviewed the Technical Report for Ukiah. He said the latest portion of the comprehensive plan was submitted to the County for review July 12, 1978, the Planning Commission recommended approval July 12, 1978. On August 2, 1978, the Board of Commissioners held a public meeting and directed the Planning staff to prepare a detailed staff report for presentation to the Board on August 16, 1978. Board comments made at this time will be con- sidered by the city once more before submission of the finalized comprehensive plan to the County Planning Commission and to the Board of Commissioners for adoption outside city limits and to the urban growth boundary. Henry Markus, ECOAC, handed out the same materials previously given to the County Planning Commission. See attached memo. Chairman Starrett mentioned that these reports will be reviewed later in private. Mr. Markus observed that no one had come down from Ukiah to the hearing so he would answer any questions. He noted three points: 1. The attached memo will be revised before final adoption by the city. Many of the County Staff comments will be very appropriate in terms of things to strengthen the technical reports. 2. The city is already preparing a planning ordinance which is on a whole city format whereas the draft plan is now on a goal objective format. The key 'difference is that one means these are things we want to do, whereas the ordinance will say that these are city pol- icies that we will follow in making decisions in the future. In addition to that, the zoning and subdivision mobile home ordinance has been drafted and the City is working on refining those. In the case of Ukiah, they have just adopted a mobile home ordinance. They are waiting on the zoning ordinance and the joint management agree- ment with the County until this review and Board recommendations are finalized and sent back to the City. A meeting is scheduled for September 5, 1978 to finalize the planning and zoning ordinance. IX - 4 3. It is difficult to get a population projection for Ukiah as it has to rely on the Forest Service for "infonnation and that is just a guess. A population projection is necessary to get sewage and fireprojections. He added, the reason the growth boundary on the north end of town was laid .out the way it was was to allow the street system to be completed. Commissioner Robertson motioned to approve the Technical Report on Ukiah as it is, and the staff recommendations be followed. Commissioner Lynch seconded the motion. All in favor. none opposed; motion carried. Planning Commission (12-20-78) Senior Planner Chuck Merrill stated that basically all three staff reports (Ukiah, Pilot Rock, Echo) are comparable. These are all final comprehensive plans for the Planning Commissionls review. and recommendation to the Board of Commissioners. In all three instances the plans have addressed the concerns expressed in the past. Under VII Roads, (e) (page 4 of Echo Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agree- ment), which states: liThe conditions under which new public streets and roads, other than subdivisions~ will be developed within the city urban growth area"-- Commissioner Wallulis questioned what kind of roads these would be. Mr. Markus said the idea behind this was that is the state or county or city wanted to build any new roads separate from subdivision activity, there should be a joint city-county policy dealing with how this would be done~ who would pay for what, and what standards to follow; this is why this was broken out as a separate item. Also~ under the Environmental section of the plan~ under Air, Water and Land Resource Quality (pg VII-13L paragraph three states: "There are no maj~ sources of noi se in Echo at the present time." Wall u1 i s quest ioned thi s in light of the major railroad line which runs through the community. Markus said this statement is referring to stationary and highway noise such as from plants, etc. but added that he would correct the text of the plan to reflect that the railroad is the major source of noise for the area. Mr. Merrill stated the staff recommends Planning Commission approval of the plans and recommendation to the Board for approval. As to other comments on the plans, Mr. Markus said that on Echo, the soil and natural hazards maps were bei.ng reprinted and he had received them this morning. Stanfieldls plan is to be mailed out for Planning Commission review on Friday along with these maps. Commissioner Gilbert indicated he has reviewed the Pilot Rock Plan and has no questions at this time. Mr. Markus noted there is one change in the text of the Pilot Rock Plan. On page 5 under the Comprehensive Plan and Implementation Measure Review and Amend- ment, Section C, the phrase lI and the Comprehensive Plan for the Urban Growth Areal has been left out. Concerning the Ukiah Plan, Markus said it needs a Section C on page 5 (it pres- ently has a Section A and B). On page 5 of the Joint Management Agreement for IX - 5 Ukiah, Section"B should end with that first sentence; Section C should be added which reads: "Amendments to this agreement and the Comprehensive Plan for the urban growth area shall be adopted," and conti nue wi th the remainder of what was Section B to complete Section C. Markus said this makes it clearer that it takes both the city and county to amend the agreement after it has been signed by both parties. He concluded that these are" the only changes at this time. Commissioner Wallulis then moved to recommend to the Board of Commissioners approval of the Comprehensive Plans and Joint Management Agreements for the cities of Ukiah, Pilot Rock and Echo, with the amendments as discussed by Henry.Markus. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Gilbert and carried unanimously. Board of Commissioners (2-14-79) Hearings on the finalized Comprehensive Plans for the cities of Pilot Rock, Ukiah, Echo, and Stanfield for the purposes of formulating decisions regard- ing: (1) The adoption by ordinance of those portions of the Cities Comprehensive Plans which address th2 urban growth areas as amendments to the Umatilla County Comprehensive Plan; and (2) The implementation" of Joint Management Agreements affecting the urban growth areas. Senior Planner Chuck Merrill stated the staff report before the Board for Ukiah is basically the same as the one they received before. In summary, the Final Plan effectively addresses the concerns voiced during previous county review of the Draft Plan. The City proposed Joint Management Agreement implementing measure also appears satisfactory. Thus, the county planning staff believes that as presented, this Final Plan should receive recommendation for adoption to the Board of Commissioners. Henry Markus, Planner for City of Ukiah, stated there has been no change in the Plan since the Board last reviewed it. Mr. Merrill noted that Jeri Cohen (LCDC Coordinator) has made some slight altera- tions to the model Joint Management Agreement which should be considered in the near future. These were reviewed briefly. Mayor Lloyd Waid stated he is in agreement with the changes. No objections to the Final Plan were voiced. Mr. Markus noted that the Joint Management Agreement for the City of Ukiah is different than the model before the Board now. It is based on that model, but specific sections have been changed based on the various comments of the City Council. He proceeded to explain the major changes. However, Chairman Starrett indicated the Board would like to review only that document (urban growth boundary agreement) which they will be approving shortly. Markus stated the agreement was given to the Board for review about two months ago. After briefly conferring with the other Board members, Starrett indicated they have reviewed the document at the last hearing and have no objections. Further discussion followed, after which the hearing was closed. Commissioner Robertson then moved that the Ukiah Comprehensive Plan and Technical Report be approved and forwarded to the State for acknowl edgement. The moti on vias sec- onded by Commissioner Robertson and carried, with Chairman Starrett voting in favor of the motion. IX - 6 Joint Management of the Urban Growth Area The urban growth area is land between the existing city limits and the urban growth boundary. This land is under county jurisdiction and is included in the city's comprehensive plan. The LCDC requires that the city and county co- adopt a joint management agreement before acknowledgment of compliance with, the Statewide Planning Goals is granted by LCDC to the city. The Joint Manage- ment Agreement for Ukiah is included in Chapter V and an analysis of the need for such an agreement has been included in the appendix. The agreement basically states that the county will co-adopt the Comprehensive Plan for the Urban Growth Area and the substantive portions of the city's zoning. subdivision and mobile home park ordinances. Another important feature of the agreement is that land presently zoned for exclusive farm use shall remain so zoned until needed for urban development. Affected Governmental Units Statewide Planning Goal No.2, Land Use Planning, states that: "City. county. state and feder.al agency and special district plans and actions related to land use shall be consistent with the com- prehensive plans of cities and counties ... Each plan and related implementation measure shall be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units ... Opportunities shall be provided for review and comment by citizens and affected governmental units during preparation. review and re- vision of plans and implementation ordinances -... Affected Governmental Units - are those local governments. state and federal agencies and special districts which have programs. land ownership or responsibilities within the area included in the plan ... II The following are definitely affected governmental units: Umatilla County Ukiah School District Ukiah Rural Fire Protection District United States Forest Service - Umatilla National Forest Oregon Department of Forestry Oregon Department of Transportation (Highway Division) The following may be affected governmental units: Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development Oregon Department of Environmental Quality Oregon Department of Commerce (Building Codes Division) Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife Umatilla County Education Service District IX - 7 Blue Mountain Community College Umatilla County Soil and Water Conservation District Port of Umatilla East Central Oregon Association of' Counties United States Farmer's Home Administration United States Department of Housing and Urban Development - Federal Insurance Administration (flood insurance maps) Plus many other state and federal agencies which potentially are affected gov- ernmental units because they have programs which include the Ukiah urban plan- ning area. IX - 8 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Atlas of Oregon, University of Oregon, 1976. "Columbia-Blue Mountain Resource Conservation and Development Project ll , Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Portland, Oregon, June, 1974, and annual updates through 1978. lIeost Effective Site Planning, Single Family Development", National Association of Home Builders, Washington, D.C., 1976. llDesolation Planning" Unit, Draft Environmental Statement and Land Management Plan," USDA, Umatilla National Forest, Pendleton, September, 1978. "M; nera1 and Wa ter Resources of Oregon", U. S. Geo 109 i ca1 Survey, State of Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Bulletin 64, 1969. "Overall Economic Development Program, Phase I", East Central Oregon Associ- ation of Counties, 1974. uOveral1 Economic Development Program Revision". East Central Oregon Associ- ation of Counties. 1977 . 1I0verall Economic Development Program Revision," East Central Oregon Associ- ation of Counties, 1978. II Penni t Coordi na ti on Proj ect ll • East Centra1 Oregon Associ ati on of Counti es. 1977. Planning ~ Rural Environments. W. R. Lassey. McGraw-Hill Book Company. San Francisco, Cal ifornia. 1977. nPopulation Estimates: Oregon Counties and Incorporated Cities. July 1. 1977 11 • Center for Population Research and Census, Portland State University, Portland, Oregon, 1977. "Preliminary Population and Labor Force Projections. Morrow and Umatilla Counties, East Central Oregon Association of Counties, 1977. "Reconnaissance Geologic Map of the Pendleton Quadrangle. Oregon and Washington", G. W. Walker, U.S. Geological Survey, 1973. "Resource Atlas; Natural; Human. Economic, Public". Oregon State University, Extension Community 'Development Project. Corvallis, Oregon. 1973: Umatilla County. "Rock ~laterial Resources of Umatilla County, Oregon, 1976:. Short Paper 26, State of Oregon, Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. Rural Environmental Planning. F. O. Sargent. University of Vermont, 1976. x - 1 "Social Accounting for Oregon 1976, Indicators of Depressed Socio-Economic Conditions", State Community Services Program, Oregon Department of Human Resources, Salem, Oregon, November, 1976. "Soil Survey Interpretati ons for Land Use Pl anni ng for Umati 11 a County Pl an.., ning Commission and City of Ukiah, Oregon", U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Pendleton, December, 1976. "Statewide Inventory of Historic Sites and Buildings", Oregon State Historic Preservation Office, Parks and Recreation Branch, Department of Transportation, Salem, Oregon, 1976: Umatilla County. "Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines", Land Conservation and Development Commission, Salem, 1977. "Umatilla County Economic Element", East Central Oregon Association of Counties, February, 1979. Urban Planning and Design Criteria, Second Edition, J. DeChiara and L. Koppelman, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1975. "Wastewater Facilities Plan", City of Ukiah, Oregon, October, 1975, Anderson, Perry, and Associates, Inc., LaGrande, Oregon. x - 2 APPENDICES All jurisdictions in Morrow and Umatilla Counties are participating in the planning coordination process. These jurisdictions are general purpose units of local government and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. This is to introduce you and your agency to the jurisdictions of Norrow and Umatilla Counties, to inform you of their comprehensive planning programs and of their interest in participating in your agency's planning program, and to "request your cooperation and assistance in the planning coordination process. - .- - - -~~.- ------_.Dear Sir: THE JURISDICTIONS )\ l'hone (503} 276-6732 920 S. W. Frazer, P. O. BOx 339 Pendleton. Oregon 97801 ~j \ Cregon '""- " AS5ociction Ql Counties :Easi (entrol . .' Pilot Rock Stanfield Ukiah Umatilla Heston Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Umatilla County in Morrow and Umatilla Counties/ Umatilla County Adams Athena Echo Hel i x Herm; stan Hi 1ton -Free~"a ter Pendl eton Programs of Jurisdictions Coordinati'on Process Planning Planning Re: Morro\;/ County Boardman Heppner lone Irrigon Lexington -Norrm'l County JAN 101£71 VICE CHAIRMAN" JuJg'e Andrew F. Le<:kie EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR R<>nald R. Hall SECRETARY~REASURER Mayor Lawrence P. Gray --0 . CH:\lR:'tiAN . '" CornmU.!IiOfier B.lrbara Lynchr I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~a;Ol.u,:1tary a;;5ocia~on of the followi~g COUi'TIES and Cities: GlLLIA~l: Arlington, Condon: Lonerock; GnA~T: Canyo~ Cit , _:r:vt1,e, Gramte. ~o.. n Day, Long CreeK, Monument. Mt. Vernon. Prairie City, Se:lec.ORS 197.040. _ .'. " " for the and the . each county through its governing body, shall be responsible' coordinating all planning activities affecting land uses within county, including those of the county, cities, special districts state agencies, to assure an integrated comprehensive plan for entire area of the county." ORS 197.190 Each county governing body is also required by statute to: "... review all comprehensive plans for land conservation and development within the county. both those adopted and those being prepared. The county governing body shall advise the state agency, city, county or special district preparing the comprehensive plans "January, 1977 Page 4 whether or not the comprehensive'plans are in conformity with the statewide planning goals." ORS 197.255 For the purposes of coordination of planning acti~ities (ORS 197.196) and review of comprehensive plans for compliance with Statewide Planning Goals (ORS 197.255), the Nor row County Court and the Uma ti 11 a County Board of Commissioners have retained the East Central Oregon Association of Counties (ECOAC). . I am the lead ECOAC staff person working with the Morrow County Court and the Umatilla' County Board of Commissioners providing staff support for thei.r statutory review and coordination functions. ~ly title is Planning Coordinator. CONTACT PERSONS FOR THE JURISDICTIONS Attached please find a listing of contact persons for each city, county,. and the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (Attach- ment B - List of Contact Persons and Planning Coordinator) .. These contact persons have been designated by each jurisdiction for agency coordination. Your agency or organizatioli will be notified of any change in contact personnel._. It is to be noted that, while the Confederated Trib~s of the Umatilla • 'I~dian Reservation are not obligated to coordinate with state agencies, special districts, and local jurisdictions, the Jribal DevelopmentOffice has expressed an .interest in being involved in the coordination process. Please insure that a copy of all written communication between your agency and a contact person from a local jurisdiction concerning the land use planning program is sent to the Planning Coordinator. REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE AND HIVOLVH1ENT Your organization is receiving this letter because it has been' identified by at least one jurisdiction in 11orro\"1 or Umatilla County either in the jurisdiction's Compliance Schedule which has been adopted by both the jurisdiction's governing body and the Oregon Land Conservation and Develop- ment Commission, or by the jurisdiction's contact person. If your organization is: 1. a FEDERAL or STATE AGENCY, please see ATTACHMEIIT C. 2. a SPECIAL DISTRICT, please see ATTACHMENT D. 3, a LOCAL AGENCY or ORGANIZATION having programs, land ownerships, or responsibilities within ONLY ONE JURISOICTIO~ (e.g. the Athena Police Department, the Irrigon Chamber of Commerce), please see ATTACHI·1ENT E. Janua'ry, 1977 Page 5 A number of governmental units, while not cOQing within the definition of "Affected Governmental Units" in State'.... ide Planning Goal #2 (i .e. "having programs, land ownerships, or responsibilities within the area included in the plan"), may be impacted by land use decisions of some or all of the jurisdictions in !'!orrmol and Uj'j'at1l1a Counties. Your city, county, .dnd/m·. state may be one of those governwental units, examples. of which are contiguous units (e.g. the State of ~·13shington•.Union County, '(lalla Halla County) and neighboring govern~ental units (e.g. Echo, Stanfield, Hermiston Umatilla, Irrigon). Because coordination among these units \%uld prove mutually advantageous, your organization might be interested in beco~ing involved in the planning programs of so;r:e or all of the jurisdictions in ~1orrow and Umatilla Counties, and inviting them. to beco:;:einvolvedinyours. If so, please notify the contact person for the jurisdiction, and please send the Planning Coordinator a copy of your cowmunication with each con- tact person you noti fy. - INVOLVENENT OF JURIS0ICTIONS HI HIlTlATION OF THE PLAIINING COORDHIATlO1I PROCESS. The twenty jurisdictions in Harrow and Umatilla Counties are in varying stages of developing or -revising their comprehensive plans. Some are pre- paring to adopt their plans and are ready to submit them for Acknawled£e- ment of Compliance with Statewide Planning Goals. Some are now starting" to acquire data and their contact persons may have already contacted your agency. All contact persons have been involved in,the preparation of this letter. In addition, all contact persons have been given the opportunity to attach to this letter any explanation. plan schedule, request for information, or other statement. The following attachments"have been submitted: 1. Attachmen t F 2. Attachment G Umatilla County Plann~ng Program Pendleton, Agency Review of Third Draft of Comprehensive Plan. DEVELOP~IErH OF THE PLANNING CDORDHlr,TlO~1 PROCESS. This letter, with appropriate enclosures, is being sent to the below listed individuals. who represeDt jurisdictions. special districts, and local. state. and federal agencies (See AttachQent H -- Distribution list). It will be sent to other affected govern~ental units, as identified. The jurisdictions of HorrO\'1 and Umatilla Counties are looking fan-lard to working with your agency in the developw.ent of their co~prehensive plans. An effective land use planning coordination process will prove mutually beneficial to jurisdictions. special"districts. and local. state and federal agencies. Please fonHrd to rr:e any reco;rJ1iendations you have for the further development and improve~ent of the coordination process. "January, 1977 Page 6 I am anxious to explore l'/ith you the potential benefits and future development of the planning coordination process, and I very much appreciate your cooperation and assistance, , " Si ncerely, ~:j !/};'r ~I;/, ,I, : . I / - ." ! '''. . A(tit L Robert J,f Be1tramo Plan.ning Coordinator RJB: vp Enclosures: Attachment A Attachment B Attachment C Attachment D Attachment E Attachment F Attachment G Attachment H Attachment I Comprehensive Plan Data Requirements List'of Contact Persons and Planning Coordinator for Jurisdictions in Morrow and Umatilla Counties Requests of Federal and State Agencies Requests of Special Districts Requests of Local Agencies and Organizations having Programs, Land Ownerships, and Responsibiltties within only one jurisdiction Umatilla County Planning Program Pendleton, Agency Review of Third Draft of Comprehensive Plan Distribution List Oregon Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines ATTACHMENT A Comprehensive Plan Data Requirements Provision of available data, reports, maps, and/or other infor- mation on each jurisdiction and environs. or notification of surveys or other data acquisition activities in process. Natural Environment Geology Topography Soils Mineral and Aggregate Earthquake Faults Agricuftural, Forest Suitability Energy Resources Unique Scientific, Ecological Areas Archaeological Sites Intrinsic Suitability * Existing land Use Socioeconomic Environment , Housing Characteristics Schools PoliceFire -- -- .. ------ Social and Health Services Parks and Recreation Transportation Facilities and Services Cl imate Hydrology . Flood PlainS and Hetlands Vegetation Fish and Wildlife Landslide/Erosion Potential Septic Tank/Foundation Suitability Scenic Areas Air/Water/Land Quality Conflicts and Constraints Lands Suitable for Urban Uses Historic Preservation Sewer. Water- Storm Drainage Solid Haste Electricity and Natural Gas Communications Economic Activity and Resource Base Employment and Population Characteristics Growth Factors and Constraints * "The basic proposition employed is that any place is the sum of historical, physical and biological processes, that these are dynamic, that they constitute social values, that each area has an intrinsic suitability for certa i n 1and uses and fi na11y, tha t certa in areas 1end themselves to mul ti pl e coexi sting land uses. Arecogni tion of these soci al values, in- herent in natural processes, must precede prescription for the utiliza- ti on of na tura1 resources. Once it has been accepted tha t the place is a sumof natural processes and that these processes constitute social values, inferences can be drawn regarding util ization to ensure optimum use and en- hancement of social values. This ~ its intrinsic suitability." Design \lith Nature. I. L NcHarg. Doubleday and Co~pany. Inc.. 1969. page 104. Prepared by: Don Burns, Henry Markus, Sarah Salazar Local Contact Persons . - _.... _.. __...._- .._..... -----_._---- ------ -_._- -- --,..,--, ATTACHnENT B CONTACT PERSONS FOR AGENCY COORDINATIml ALL JURISDICTIONS IN r·lORROH AND UHATILLA COUNTIES Planning Coordinator Mr. Robert J. Beltramo, Planning Coordinator East Central Oregon Association of Counties Post Office Box 339 Pendleton, Oregon 97801 276-6732 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ~Iorrow County * Morrow County Mr. David R. Moon, Planning Director Morrow County Planning Department Morrow County Court House Heppner, Oregon- 97836 676-5030 * Heppner, lone, Irrigon, Lexington Mr. Donald G. Burns, Associate Planner Morrow County Planning Department Morrm·/ County Court House .. __ . Heppner, Oregon 97836 676-5030 * Boardman' Mr. Jim Thompson, Administrator City of Boardman 206 Main Street, North Boardman, Oregon 97818 481-9252 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Umatilla County * Umatilla County' Mr. Dave Bishop, Planning Director Umatilla County Planning Department Umatilla County Court House Pendleton, Oregon 97801 276-7111 ext. 314 * Echo, Pilot Rock, Stanfield, Ukiah Mr. Henry S. t·1arkus, Comprehensive Planner East Central Oregon Association of Counties Post Office Box 339 Pendleton, Oregon 97801 276-6732 * Pendleton Mr. Edd Rhodes, Planning Director City of Pendleton Post Office Box 190 Pendleton~ Oregon 97801 276-181F " * Umati 11 a Mr. J. K. Palmer, Administrator City 0 f Uma t i 11 a Post Office Box 130 Umatilla, Oregon 97882 922-3226 cc: Mr. Ron Johnson, Consultant DMJt1jHi 1ton 1111 Commonwealth Building 421 S.W. Sixth Avenue Portland, Oregon 97204 222-3621 * Adams, Athena, Helix, Heston Ms. Sarah M. Salazar, Comprehensive . Pl anner Umatilla County Planning Department Umati 11 a Coun ty Court House Pendleton, Oregon 97801 276-7111 ext. 314 * Hermiston Mr. L. T. Harper, City Nanager City of Hermiston 295 East Main Street Hermiston, Oregon 97838 567-5521 * Milton-Freewater t1r. Del Md!erney, City Planner City of Milton-Free~ater Post Dffice Box 108 Milton-Freewater, Oregon 97862 938-5531 .* The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Mr. Tom Hampson, Planner Direct6r Tribal Development Office Post Office Box 638 Pendleton, Oregon 97801 276-3165 . ATTACH:-IE~IT C Requests of Fed~ral and State Agencies Please fon;ard \·lithin thirty (3D) days of receipt of this letter to the contact person for each jurisdiction affected and to the Planning Coordinator the follm'ling information: A. General Information 1. The name of the director and the authorized agency contact person \",ith \>/hom the jurisdiction sho'Jld deal. If different. please indice;te \',hich person will be signing off on the jurisdictions' comprehensive plans .during the LCOC Acknowledgement of Compliance Process. Please include mailing addresses, office locations, and t~lephone nu~b~rs . . 2. The enabling legislation for the agency with current amend~ents. Please include a suwmary. if available. with footnotes to the legislation. 3. Legislation the agency is charged with ad~inistering. Please include a summary. if available. with footnotes to the legislation. 4. Grants and/or loans - under State\'lide Planning Goal #2. "The plan shall be the basis for specific irr.pler:.entation measures". \·/hich include "grants for construction". Each jur·isdiction's CO;:1prehensive plan vlill thus be used as a basis for grant and loan applications. Please send: a. A list of grants and/or loans the agency is charged with administering. b. The criteria by \"hich the agency \'1;11 evaluate grant 2nd/or loan applications from jurisdictions) and the administrative regulations ,and statutes on which the criteria arc based. c. If your agency has already developed grant and/or loan criteria) please indicate hm·/ developed and v/hen officially promulgated. If none have yet been developed,. please specify the process by \'ihich local jurisdictions will review the~ prior to adoption. 5. Pel~mits - under State"'Jide Planning Goal #2. "the plans shall be the basis for specific implementation measures", \'Ihich include "permits t•• Please send: a. A list of permits the agency is charged \·dth ad~inistei'ing~ ....hich r.Jay apply to the jurisdictions or applicants in tile jurisdictions. b. The criterl a wh i ch the agency \'1i11 use to eva 1ua te pen:oit apD1i ca- tions' and the ad8inistrative regulations and statutes on which the criteria are based. c. I f your a~ency has a 1ready deve1ope~ perwi tis s uance cri ted a. please indicate hO':1 develooed and \·..hen officially promulgate1' ..If none have yet been developed, please specify the process by \'Ihich local jurisdictions \·';11 revie\·J their. prior to adoption. 1 I6. The administrative appeals procedures of' the agency. 7. If available, a concise state~ent or pamphlet outlining the ge~era1 activities of the agency. B. Planning Programs of the Jurisdictions. 1. A listing of data inventor'ies the agency has on file for each jurisdic- tion. (Please refer to Attachment A - Comprehensive Plan Sata, Requirements.) - 2. Technical assistance the agency can provide to each jurisdiction. 3. An indi cation of the coordination method preferred by the agency for ·use during the planning process (e.g. telephone calls, letters, in- person visit). 4. Agency evaluation of the comprehensive plans of jurisdictions. b. The criteria the agency will use to evaluate each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan and im~lementing ordinances, and the adcinistra- tive regulations and statutes upon which t~e criteria are based. Please categorize these criteria according to Statewide Planning Goal. . b. If your agency has already developed criteria fOl- plan evaluation, please indicate how developed and when officially prom~lgated. If none have yet been developed, please specify the process by \·;hich local jurisdictions \'1111 reviel'/ them prior to adoption. 5. For fe'deral agencies, please comment on \·/hether your agency \'1111 be willing to work with the Northwest Federal Regional Council to develop a coordinated federal review process. 6. For state agencies and federal agencies !'Iith state\'iide l'epresentaUves in Oregon, please coment on \·:hether your agency \'ii11 be \'li11ing to work through the Oregan Land Conservation and Development CO"-~i5sion office in Salem to develop' a coordinated revie\'/ process. 7. A listing of problems which may hinder your agency invo1ve~ent in the planning programs of the judsdictions (e.g. insufficient agency budget to assist in tasks specified on jurisdiction's comp1i~nce schedule. inadequate agency staffing to provide p21'sonnel necessary to do in- house data compilation, analysis, and rep>"oduction for the j~risdiction to put the data into a usablp. form). C. Plans, Programs, and Activities of the Agency 1. Agency's P1 an a. Current plans the agency has,which may directly impact the juri~­ diction's area. Please include a statement of ho~/ the plan \'las developed and \'Ihen it was officially adopted. 2 b. If no plan nm'l eX1SL.S or ; f the pres~:l:t plan ;s undersoing revision, please specify: 1. The process by '.';hich each jurisdiction can be involved in the development of the agency plan. 2. The.process by v/hich e'ach jUI~isciction \\'i11 reviel'/ the plan prior to adoption. 2,. Areas of interest the ag~ncy has \·/itilin the jurisdiction, to include any current programs. land o':merships, or planning or manage::;ent responsibilities impacting upon the jurisdiction or its surrounding area. 3. Current cr potential land use problen;s or cO;'lflicts the agency ·recognizes. D; Continuing Requests 1. Please insure that a copy of all 'tlritten cO;:>ffiunications beb:een your agency and a contact person from any jurisdiction, cOlKerning the land use planning program. is sent to the Plar~ning Coordinator. ,2. For materials (e.g. agency plans, proposed regulations) .the agen.cy is submito.:ing to jurisdictions fOi~ revie\·/ and corr....ent, please send a copy to the Planning Coordinator. vlith a distribution list of jurisdictions receiving the material for information p~rposes. '3. Please inform both the contact person fl'o;n each jurisdiction· and the Pl~nning Coordinator of: a. Any change in agency contact perSOil in. the future (your agency will be informed of any changes in jurisdiction contact personnel or Planning Coordinator). b. Any changes in the enabling legislation for the agency, or in the legislation the agency is charged Hi th administering. c. Any modifications in the criteria for evaluation of grant applica- tions, loan applications, -and perfilit applications. d. Any additional information relevant to the Comprehensive Planning Program of the jurisdictions or planr;ing program of the agency. 4. Please recommend to the Planning Coordir.a:·Jr any i:::pi'Q'/eir,ents that can be made in the planning cOQrdination process \';e are developing pursuant to DRS Chapter 197. 3 ATTACHi·1ENT D Requests of Special Districts Please respond \'Iithin thil'ty (30) days of receipt of this letter to the contact person for each jurisdiction within which YJ0r district has programs, land ownerships, or responsibilities. The contact person will be ·interested in the activities of your dis- trict, the planning program of your district, and the develop- ment. of a coordination process between the district and the jurisdiction where one does not presently exist. Pl ease send the Pl anni ng Coordi na tor a copy of your' comrr.uni cati on \'i~ th each contact person to \'Ihom you respond. ATTACHI·IENT E Reg·..~st of Lo,:al Agencies and Organizations ·Ba'il11<;1 P'rOqrilms. Land C"';ershi ps. or Responsi bi 1 i ti es Within Only' One Jurisdiction .' ,. Please respond to the contact person for your jurisdiction. Your juris- c!iction's contact per50n ~.,rill perf,)ril coordination ','IOyl< '..lith you;· cg2ncy or organization. Because such coordination will be intra-jurisdictional, there is no need to notify the Planning Coordinator. CO ..... ",y COvt Ihou:.~ Pet'ldir:ron. Ot~U. 9lB P~v;mo: 276 - 7111 EAt 314 U}! AT ILL A COUc-TTY Through AUe"USt 1977, L'2atilla CounLy's pla.'""L'1ing efforts are directed tm"ard updati..'g the existing counc/-Hide co;rprehensive p~-"n the counr/--the "I-Test End." Basically, the plan ,-lill identify fo'.X land use categories, 'Ylith policies to 17'.2.tch, inclucli~ LrrOal1., l;:''':Ja.-:i:.:i.ng, 'rural-.reside,.,t:Lal and natural resource areas. ',- Tne cities i.., t:.'1e oldlllu...,z . ~. ","'--'-Ui:Ut either have a specific city plan or are b t..'1e process o~ 0e,,-eloDing one in coordin.ctian ,-lith county planning prograrrs. Attached is a treeting schedule of our advisory grQL':J. Agencies are invited to atteIld the rreetb_gs a.'1d tray be asked to prm:ice i,tfor,;-atiori on subjects dis- cussed. Phone 276:'7111, extensio~ 314, the Pl21u.,ing Departrent,. :';r specific t~e cu,d place of reetings. NovEITber 11 -. ·-23 " DeCe;ber 9 -,>,,2:,3,: -; tM\TTI.IA COUNlY - 1-:ES12,,-'1 PIA\~rrNG ill.'1T"< '\olliS! END CITIW~S ADVISORY CCl:->'-IITTEE PIA"lNlliG l'!t.i:.I'H\G TOPICS Discussion of ,-;ork schedule and overall county planniP~ program. Electibn of officers, orgcu:ization co. ...~tt~e rePO~"""-'· ~ ~"- ~ . .. .!.. L. ULL SUDC\'...:~[~Q.LLee SL.L.Ucture, reVl.e:.] existing Cc;.;.-:-,::'"eh2...t.lSi,,-c Pl.:m ar.d l·!ap. Discussim of ho;.; to survey cc:rr:~c.fDeeds 2'.,d p:roble::.s, discussion of SO'-':£ I'.aQ;ral [;::>za.-j inventory pre?ared by staff, possibly hold a tm-m rreeti.n~ to id2..,tLfy (survey) '-lest end proble:rs. DiscussiOi1 of criteria for ident.if-,fL."1g c:gri.cclb.!ral lands, review ;::l'.:blic facilities inVe:!ltcr.:y n:::-eoared ,by staff. . - • * Includes greater Umatilla, Hermiston, Stanfield, and Echo areas of the county. UrliJtillcJ COl.ln~./: coot'd .page 2 J:~.-,;zrJ 13 27 FCO!"U2.>:)' iO 24 Discussit7.1 of l.I:"~a'1 gt"Ct-r::h lx:H,~b, f. re-:Jiz.; of interlit botiI'.Caries of c::"t:ics, revie·, Zr-.c. C5C'...sS O~:1 sp.:;>.c~ irl.ve.ntory; c~:i.r.:.Ie S'.J::::",;ey of c::::r:-~cy -needs and prob!.es, Discuss recreation needs, re'Jie'"..l state pa..:=t's pl~ ~d i.r.vE:~1to:ry of recreatiOi."'l. areas. evalt:Z.te,re~ts of cc:m..ni.ty n::eC..s ·su:vey. Re0.e·; E±-o-St2n£ieli eCO!".!I"ic da.t.a, re-..-=- 0=;'; CO'...!:1t::'... po?,ula!:icn-ELployi!lEnt: p~oj ect'~o:l, CllSCl!35 eCcr-.;.;:.:.l..c Ce\....el0F="=...,t. identL.7'- er.:plo}'r.'S:'1t CE:'!.te=s. P-.cvi.e'iI and Cise:t;.Ss viest enc. l.a.:.:.d i.l5e :i.I~~"E!1.~oq, }ay 12 25 Ju:r'!e 9 23 July l!~ At-.gu.st A;>ri1 10 24 14 28 Re:vie...r t:ransport:2tion invencory, discussio:1 0:: CCl!r!.ty road ccnditio'-.S. revie:-l ·25L':'cul'tU:'21 lc:..:.'"1ds i...l.ventory. Ret,..:,- ~-l City of Vcatilla dra.£~ pl~, ru..S:::.:35 all :L""!-·-~""'_::o:..":es r.eeced to ic.e.."1,:i fy frce~""Ork lene. uses, di-:;':·.Js housi.f.-6 data, Di",{"-,,',ssiG:! 2.:.,d revie-..l·air~~vat:er-1z:ld cr""lity prob~ur>s a..'ld inventories, rev"ie.,! ;.·t"oject::i..c2s .of . land use need3-ar:ployrrenc-po~}Ula::~-";"'5i-eci. densit}~fi~~cialability ~.sa~·~. Re,·~.~..l rrap !):,ojecting future fr~~12-:-": k""!.::! ~:-22..S, dis(.'1..!SS cop....c1.icts ~..n.th prese...""!.t nice...: :': .. o.sc:'::.';5 energy canser~Cl.tioo. conSideratiOns.· Continue discussion of corLflic~ areas. discuss alteTIl_'::.tive 1a....'1d uses a..'"1d policies, beg;~ fOr::"'.:J.!.ation of alti:~::"'C1<.1.th...e pla."1s, Contin'..:e. discussion of cor.n:t-"1.i.ty gOllS. FOrrr:ul2t.ion of p1ar.s to achieve goals ar-.d policies; Discussion of plan ro~~ draft. O::ntinued ....iOrk on pIa..., draft; ae.....-ie.·J Ech() 2:1d Sc-:;liield Draft PlCi.:l.3 prep.:..r-1d by city ?l.?..r....!e~. Co ?"1 ' r'_' ,unt;y _ .:..Cl1P.J....""!3 UJu~.U.SSl.on. .' P. O. BOX 150 PENDLSON. O~EGO~ S7S01 Janu"ry 5, 1977 Dear Coordinati~g Agency: Copies of the City of Pendleton's Third Draft of its Co~rehensive Pla~ are available for review and co~ent by you at the offices of the Land Conservation and Develop~ent Co=ission; Salem, Orego71, the East Central Oregon P.ssocia-· tion of Counties, Pendleco:1, Oregon, or City Hall in Pendleton. Sincerely, / : I'l .:..... ,\ ..;:<. _. L.c- '..!.-, Edtv"rd A. Rh:>des .. ~ , ..:/ Director of Planning & B~ilding • A t IACAMf.r; i A RECIPIENTS OF PLAl1ilHiGCOOROHlATlO'1 LETTER Federal Agencies E.l. Certified r'~3;l Hs. Mary Hunde11 Nr. D. Craig Ahlberg Rural Development Service U.S. Department of Agricul ture Mr. Louis Baxter Hr. Kenneth K. Keudell Hr. Ken Durrell Farmers How.e Administration U.S. Department of Agriculture Mr. jack Sainsbury Hr. Da vi d 1,lcLeod Hr. George Potter Agriculture Stabilization and Conservation Service Ms. laura Jean White Federal Crop Insurance Corporation _U.S. Department of Agriculture Mr. Thomas IL Thompson Mr. Jim Pease Hr. Gerald Brog r'lr. Darre11 1,1a xI"e11 11r ..Byron L. Ounning Hr. Harold Kerr Oregon State Extension Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Hr. Al Oard Mr. H. B. Rudol ph Hr. Ha rren Pas t Hr. Gordon George Forest Servi ce U.S. Departlnent of Agriculture Hr. Hilliam L. Dugan Hr. Guy H. Nutt Hr. Robert Adelman Hr. Dale Boner Soil Conservation Service U.S. Department of Agriculture ',11'. Tom Current Mr. Ronald R. Hall rk. ~1a rk Hus ton :-jr. C. ;':3 r~ S~i th Economic Develop~o~t Acministration U.S. Department of Commerce Umatilla Army Depot D?-partment of the Ar~y Mr. Dave Geiger Hr. Ron Barrett tk. Frank Parsons fir. Gordon D. Richardson r·:r. Larry Bogas Planning Branch~ Portlend Army Corps of Engineers Department of the Amy Hr. Stan Du"'as 13th Naval District Western Naval Facilities Lt. Brian Quendeck !laval l!eapons Syster.1s Training Facil~ties j·;l'. Gary Gillespy Nr. Cliff Safranski . U.S. Department of Housing and Ur~an Deve1opmen t f.\r. Charles Polityca nr. Chuck Hoyt Office of Land Use and Hater Planning U.S. Department of Interior Hr. Don Rogers Hr. John Kincheloe Mr. larry Rasmussen U.S, Fish and \/ildl ife Service U.S. Department of Interior ~lr. Ernest J. BOl"'gi1ian Hr. Ed",; n L. Arnold National Park Service U.s. Department of Interior I·k. lIa1 ter Le.·/ i s Burellu of Iii nes U.S. Depar~ent of Interior Hr. A. R. Leonard Geological Survey U.S. Departwent of Interior ~·r. Roy S::,,;;psel Bureau of Indian Affairs U.S. Department of In terior Seattle O-:'fice U.S. Er.ergy Research and Development Admini s tr-a ti cn Mr. George'Van Santan Mr.' Donel J. Lane Mr. Larry Vinton' Pacific North\"iCstRiver Basin Corrmission Federal Agencies (continued) Mr. Tom Hampson Mr. John Hughes Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation Bureau bf Indian ~ffairs U.S. Department of Interior Mr. Bob Coffman Baker Office Bureau of Land Management U.S. Department of Interior Mr. James Norris Mr. James Habermehl 'Bureau of Outdoor Recreation U.S. Department of Interior Mr. Dale Gooch Bureau of Reclamation U.S. Department of Interior Mr. Emmett Willard Mr. Harold M. Cantrell Bonneville Power Administration U.S. Department of Interior land and Natural Resources Division Hashington, D.C. U.S. D2partmcnt of Justice Mr. Richard Arnold U.S. Department of fra'lsportatiGn Mr. Hans Sperber Federal Aviation Administration U.S. Department of Transportation Region 10 Federal High~/ay Administration U.S. ·Department of Tl'ansportation Portl and Offi ce Federal Railroad Administration U.S. Department of Transportation Mr. Cecil Quellette Mr. John Vlastelica U.S. Environmental Pt'otection Agency ~lash'ington', D.C. . (Office of Public Infor8ation) ~lr. FI'ank Tho:i:as Federal Po·,.:er Co:;:;;;issi.on Mr. J. Don Chapman Small Business Administration Mr. Andy Ekman Federal Energy Administration Mr. Jim Hanchett Hi'. Robert Rj'an Mr. Robert Engelken Nuclear Reg~latory Commission Pendl eto.n Offi ce Heppner Offi ce . lone Office U.S. Postal Service Salt Lake City Office U.S. Weather Bureau . . State Agencies (continued) Mr. Keith Stubblefield Hr. Buck Costar Oregon LaN Enforcement Council State Planning Agency Mr. James A.· Hadl ey Oregon State f'larine Board Mr. Robert R. Fisher District No.4 Headquarters, Baker Oregon State Police Department . 11r. Paul Bettiol Hr. Leonard Skinner Board on Police Standards and Training Nr. James E. Heiss Center for Population Research and Census Nr. Dave Astle Nr. Gale Spinning Public Uti 1ity Corrrnission Hr. Charles Liles State Soil and Water Conservation ," COrMIission Hr. Robert A. Burco Nr. Robert Bensley Nr. Robert Schroeder Mr. George Stral-ln Department of Transportation Mr. Fred Klaboe Hr. Bill Beckner Highway Division Department of Transportation ·Nr. David G. Talbot Nr. Ted Dethlefs Hr. Ted Long Parks and Recl·eation Branch Highway Division Department of Tra~SpDrtation Salem Office Department of Veterans' Affai rs ,Nr..Darrell Learn Nr: Hilliam Porfily Ik. Douglas Bennett Mr. Joseph Szra~ek Department of' Hater Resources Mr. Jeffrey Kleinman Hr. Stephen Kafoury Joint Legislative Co~mittee on Land Use Mr. Henry R. Richmond 1000 Friends of Oregon Nr. David Cole Huseum of Natural History University ~f Oregon Mr. Kenneth C. Tol1enaar Bureau of Govern~ental Research University of Oregon· Mr. Glen Juday .Natural Area Presel~ves Advisory Committee Hr. l1en Nouchctt 20B Hater Quality Project 'II " State Aqencies ~ Certified Mail Mr. Don McKinnis Agricultural Development Department, of Agriculture Ms. Lois Bohlender Mr. Trever'Jacobson Mr. Dave Bassett Building Codes Division Department of Commerce Mr. Douglas Stevie Housing Division Department of Commerce Mr. Gene' Osborne Real Estate Division Department of Commerce Mr. Daniel Goldy Department of Economic Development 'Mr. Floyd Shelton Ports 'Department of Economic Development Mr. John Groupe Eastern Oregon Regional Office Department of Economic Development Mr. William G. Wilmot" Jr. Department of Education Mr. David E, Piper Department of Energy Mr. r'li ke Downs Mr. Steve Gardels Mr. Robert Jackman Mr. Bill Young Department of Environmental Quality Mr. Mi~hael Burton Mr. David Hupp Ms. Leslie Lehmann Intergovernmental Relations Division Executive Department Mr. James Lauman Mr. Jack E. :·~~ll~nd Hr. Glen F. ('lard Mr. William C. Hal'] Mr. James V. Phelps Department of Jish and ~lildlife M~. Phillip Brogan 'r-lr. Bi 11 Ho1stc1 a....' Division Management, Plans and Programming Oregon State Department of Forestry Mr. John D. Beaulieu Department of Geology and r·lineral Industries Mr. Standley L. Ausmus Mined Land 'Reclamation Divisjon Department of Geology and ;·lineral Indus tri es Mr. Jack I. Hinderup Office of Facilities Planning Ol'egon State Board of Higher Education Mr. Richard A. Davis ~lr. Darrel Buttice Department of Human Resources Mr. Don Stevla rd , Employment Division Department of Human Resources Mr. [Jert HOl'ley l'Ir., Laverne Hi 11 er Mr. Jack l-Jright Mr. Willard S. Titus Oregon State Health Division Department of Human Resources J. D. Bray, M.D. ' Mr. J. E. Murray E. C. Brunette, Ph.D. Mental Health Division Department of Human Resources Mr. HarQld [Jrauner Hr. Ronald Eber roh-. Bob Bailey Mr. Mike Fleschner I-lr. He rb Ri ley Department of Land Conservation and Development ' }ir. Stan1ey Hami 1ton M}~. leonard ~ilk~rscn ~Ir. Bufton P. Lewis Division of State Lands Other Agencies (County, City, Local, etc.) ~ Certified :':ail fir. Glen Thorne Umatilla'County Road Advisory Commission league of Oregon_ Ci ties, Salem Association of Oregon Counties Salem Nr. Hayne Rifer The Nature Conservancy Umatilla County Board of Commissioners MarrOl'I Caun ty COl1'Ulli s s i oners Nr. Jim Ellis Blue Mountain Economic Development Counei 1 Nr. Ed Hoeft Hr. Dale Boner Columbia Blue Hountain Resou.rce, Conservation, and Development Nr. Ronald R. Hall East Central Oregon Association of Counties r·lr. Carlos Van Elsberg Umatilla County Road Department I~r. Henry Kopacz Umatilla County Hater and Soi.1 Conservation District' Morrow County Assessor fls. Ruth l'IcCabe Morrow County Historical Society 'Norrmv County Road Depe.rtrr:ent !1r. Hilliam Penney Port of Umatilla I'lr. Rupert Kennedy Port of Horro\'{ Heppn~r Chamber of Comrr,erce • • Umatilla County Assessor Umatilla County Fair Board Hermiston Umatilla County Housing Authority Henni stan Nr. Tom !1unck Umatilla County Intergovernmental Council Ns. Julia !1urray Umatilla County League of I-loman Voters fir. Bruce Barnes, I1SH, ACSH Umatill a-l'lorroH Coun ty r'len ta1 Hea1th Program Reverend Dil'k Rinehart Umatilla-I·!orrO\·/ County rlental Heal th Program Advisory 8oar~ :·jr. Al"t BarTo',':s Umatilla County'Parks Commission Umatilla County Pl'anning Commission City Councils Adams Athena Boardman Echo Helix Heppner Hermi stan lone Ir'ri gall Lexington ~li 1ton-FreEMa ter Pend'l eton P-ilot Rock Stanfi e1d Ukiah Umatil1a ****** ['\r _ Pu t Gordon t':r. Dick Gl'ant Eas tem Oregoil l'iea 1~h Sys t"err:5 Agency, Inc. Other Agencies (continued) Schools Blue Mountain Community College Pendleton Athena School District No. 29 Athena Echo School District No. 5 Echo Heston School District No. 19 Weston "* * * * * * Irrigori ?ark District Hermiston Irrigation District .' • Ferndale School District No. 1 Milton-Freewater Helix School District No.1, Helix Hermiston School District "No. 8 Hermiston . Ncloughl in Union High District No.3 Milton-Freewater Milton-Freewater School District No. 31 Milton Freewater t1orrow County School District No. 1 Lexington Pendleton School District No. 16 Pendleton Pilot Rock School District No. 2 "Pilot Rock Stanfield School District No. 61 Stanfield Tum~A-Lum School District No. 4 Milton-Freewater Ukiah School District No. 80 Ukiah Umapine School District No. 13 Milton-Freewater Umatilla School District No.6 Umati 11a" Umatilla County Intermediate Education Distri~t Pendleton Stanfield-Westland Irrigation District Heppner Flood Control District Lex·ington-Ione Cemetary District "Heppner Cemeta )'Y Di str-ict Irrigon Cemetary District Athena Poli<;:e DepartIr.ent "Boardman Fire District Echo Fire Department Helix Fire Department Heppner Rural Fire District Hermiston Fire Departrroent Irrigon Rural Fire Protection Pendleton Fire DeparD~ent #1 Pendleton Fire Department #2 Pilot Rock Fire Departsent Stanfield Fire Department Umatilla Fire DepartIr.ent Pioneer t·:emorial Hospital St. Anthony" Hospital .. Other Agencies (continued) Morrow County Grain Growers lone Heppner lexington Grairi Growers~ Inc. Athena Echo Hel ix . Henniston Pendleton Pilot Rock Greyhound Bus Lines Pendleton Burlington Northern s Inc. Helix Pendleton Portland (Regional Office) Union Pacific Railroad Heppner lone· Pendleton lIes ton Mr. Don Nielson Union Pacific Land Resources Corporation Pacific Northwest Bell Pendleton Eastern Oregon Telephone Company Pilot Rock Columbia Cable Television Henniston Heppner Television. Inc. Heppner Lexington City Television lexingcon . Pendleton Community Television System Pendleton ~:eston/Athena Corrmunity Television Company . Athena . . Pacific Power and Light Pendleton Portland General Electric Company Portland Umatilla Electric Cooperative Association Herod s ton Columbia Basin Electric Co-op Heppner Cascade Natural Gas Berm; ston . . Cascade Natur~l Gas Pendleton Heppner Nor-Gas Company Heppner l-icCa11 Gas Company Stanneld . Pacifi"c Gas Transmission Company San Franc; sea I I Contact" Persons Mr. Jim Thompson City Administrator City of Boa rdman Mr. David R. Moon Planning Director Morrow County Planning Department Mr. Donald G. Burns Associate Planner Morrow County Planning Department Mr. Cecil Thompson ·Chairman West-End Citizens Advisory Committee Mr~ L. T. Harper City Administrator City of Hermiston Mr. Del r·1cNerney City Planner City of Milton-Freewater ..Nei ghbori n~ Juri sdi cti ons Benton County Court House Prosser. Washington Gilliam County Board of Commissioners Condon; Orego!'! Grant County Board of Commissioners Canyon City. Oregon Klickitat County Court House Goldendale, Washington Mr. Edd Rhodes Planning Director 'City of Pendleton . , Mr. Henry r·iarkus Comprehensive Planner East Central Oregon Association of Counties Mr. Dave Bishop Planning Director Umatilla County Planning Department .-. Ms. Sarah M. Salazar . Comprehensive Planner Umatilla County Planning Department Mr. J. ·K. Palmer . City Administrator City of ,Umatilla Mr, Ron Johnson, Consultant m·1JfVHil ton, Portland Union County Board of Cor.:inissioners La Grande, Oregon vlalla Vialla County Court House Walla Walla, Viashington Wallowa.County Board of Co~missioners - Enterprise. Oregon Wheeler County Board of Commissioners Fossil, Oregon -' Federal Agencies ~ Certified l-Iai1 Cabinet Level Hr. James Schlesinger Assistant to the President Energy Affairs Mr. Robert Berge1and Secretary of Agriculture Hs. -Juanita- I-I. Kreps Secretary of Commerce Hr. Harold Brown Secretary of Defense I-Ir. Joseph A. Califano, Jr. Secretary of Health, Education, al)d He1fa re Ms. Patricia R. Harris Secretary of Uousing and Urban Deve1opmen t .Mr. Cecil Andrus Secretary of Interior Attorney General Griffin Bell Department of Justice 14r. Ray Ihrshall Secretary of Labor Hr. Thomas B. Lance- Director, Office of fmnagement and Budget Nr. Cyrus Vance Secretal'y of State Nr. Brockrnan Adar.ls Secyoetary of Transpartat'ion I-lr. II. l-lichee1 B1 uH:entah1 Secretary of Treasury . . Recipients of Informational Copies President Jimmj Carter Mr. Jack H. Watson Governor Robert Straub State of Oregon _,U.S. Senator Mark O. Hatfie1d U.S. Senator Bob Packwood U.S. Representative Al Ullman Senator Mike Thorne . Senator· Kenneth Jernstedt Senator Robert Smith Representative Max Simpson Representative Jack Sumner Representative Ed Patterson Representative Jack Duff Governor Dixie Lee Ray State of Washinpton U.S. Senator -\ AL UM AX -A SS OC IA TE O EM PL OY ME NT ' Ty pe o f 19 78 19 79 19 80 19 85 19 90 19 95 Em p' oy m en t* * To ta l Um a+ M ar To ta l Um a+ M ar To ta 1 Ur na+ M ar o ta 1 Ur na+ M ar To ta l Um a+ M ar To ta l Um a+ M ar C on st ru ct io n 82 0 68 0 90 12 30 10 00 15 0 11 30 90 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O pe ra tio na l 0 0 0 80 70 10 . 62 0 55 0 40 80 0 68 0 10 0 80 0 68 0 10 0 80 0 68 0 10 0 Se co nd ar y ++ 24 0 17 0 30 48 0 37 0 60 59 0 47 0 60 40 0 25 0 80 60 0 43 0 90 10 00 78 0 12 0 . TO TA LS 12 60 85 0 12 0' 18 70 14 40 . 22 0 23 40 19 20 24 0 12 00 93 0 18 0 i4 00 11 10 19 0 18 00 14 60 22 0 * C on str uc tio n as su m ed to be gi n in se co n d qu ar te r o f 19 78 . * * C on st ru ct io n an d o pe ra tio na l em pl oy ee s w er e co m pu ted by ta ki ng th e ye ar ly av er ag e o f qu ar te rl y la bo r pr oj ec tio ns . ta bu la te d by CH 2M H ill fro m Al um ax in fo rm at io n an d re po rt ed in Po rt la nd G en er al E le ct ri c· s H ou sin g an d Co mm un ity F ac il it y R eq ui re m en ts by Sk id mo re ~ O wi ng s, an d M er ri ll, M ay , 19 75 . + D is tr ib ut io n to co u n tie s ba se d on gr av ity flo w m od el an d jud gem en to f CH 2M H ill st af f in Al um ax En vir on m en ta l Im pa ct St at em en t, M ay , 19 76 , ++ Se co nd ar y em pl oy m en t w as co m pu ted by a pp ly in g m u lti ,p lie rs to to ta l ba si c em pl oy m en t o f 2. 0 fo r c o n st ru ct io n w or ke rs an d 2. 25 fo r o pe ra tio na l. Th is n~ an s 1 su pp or t job pe r co n st ru ct io n an d 1. 25 pe r o pe ra tio na l job . W ith tim e la gs , as di sc us se d in th e te xt o f th is re po rt . an d in th e Al um ax EI S fro m w hi ch th es e m u lt ip lie rs w er e de ri ve d, th is m ea ns . 3 se co n da ry pe r co n st ru ct io n w or ke r an d . 4 pe r o pe ra tio na l w or ke r in ' 98 0. Fi gu re s u se d fo r 19 85 , 19 90 , an d 19 95 re sp ec ti ve ly w er e . 5, . 75 , an d 1. 25 a dd iti on al em pl oy ee fo r ea ch ba si c o pe ra tio na l w or ke r. Nu mb ers o f se co n da ry w or ke rs th us de ri ve d w er e di 5t ri bu te d to co u n tie s on th e ba si s o f th e CH 2M H il' gr av ity flo w m od el an d lo ca l jud gem en ta s to th e pa tte rn o f fu tu re gr ow th in co m m er cia l an d se r v ic e es ta bl is hm en ts . IAPPENDIX C Portland General Electric, Alumax Pacific Corporation, and Federal Construction Projects Morrow,·Gilliam, and Umatilla Counties 1975 - 1995 Yearly Average Employment Project 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 Portland General Electric 20 1,350 1,600 1 ,700 1,870 Carty 20 330 100 100 100 Construction (20) (230) -- -- -- Operational -- (laO) . (100) (100 ) (100) Pebble Springs I * a 1,020 240 170 170 Construction -- (1,020) (90) -- -- Operati ona1 -- -- (150 ) (170) (170) Pebble Springs II + 0 0 1,260 170 170 Construction -- -- (1 ,260) -- -- Operati ona1 -- -- -- (170) (170) Other (post '85) ++ 0 0 0 1 ,550 1,720 Construction -- -- -- (1,400) (l ,400) Operational -- -- -- (150) (320) Alumax * 0 1,750 800 800 800 Construction -- (1 ,130) -- -- -- Operational -- (620) (800) (800) (800) . Federal a 500 40 40 40 1-82 ** 0 250 20 20 20 Construction -- (250) -- -- -- maintenance & patrol -- -- (20) (20) (20) McNary Powerhouse ** 0 250 20 20 20 Construction -- (250 ) -- -- -- Operational -- -- (20) (20) (20 ) * Assuming construction to begin, second quarter, 1978. ** Assuming construction to begin, second quarter, 1980. + Assuming construction to begin, second quarter, 1982. ++ Assumi ng constructi on to begi n on thi rd and fourth nucl ear pl ants in area, second quarters of 1986 apd 1990. Morrow and Umatilla Counties URBAN GROWTH AREA JOINT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS Introduction The concept of an "Urban Growth Boundary" is a planning solution to a complex problem. In an attempt to provide for orderly development of land adjacent to urban areas, implementation of the urban growth boundary concept has been re- quired of local governments in advance of political and legal solutions. Within an urban growth boundary, both the city and the county have an interest. The county's interest lies in statutes requiring the county to be responsible for all land use decisions in areas outside of incorporated boundaries. The city's interest lies in the potential costs future annexatton can have if development does not follow plans for facilities and services extension. There is no existing legal or political framework within which cities and counties can work through this ambiguity. The most reasonable approach is for the parties involved to establish a process which incorporates, as peers. the interest of each within the existing legal constraints. In this process. the county will retain final jurisdiction as required by law, but the city's interest would be represented by utilizing their plans and implementing measures for area within the urgan growth boundary. The property owners would have their interests represented through hear-ings by the county to insure that· their needs are ad-- dressed as a part of the final decision. This process should be viewed as an interim solution. Statutory changes developed through the political process will be necessary to finally resolve the ambiguity. It is indeed unfortunate that the situation gives rise to a cumbersome process with additional paperwork. But until a cleaner process is developed. it is vastly important to protect the rights of all parties with an interest. and that the process be defensible so that the parties are not unnecessarily en- cumbered by lengthy and costly appeals. The Model Urban Growth Area Joint Management Agreement provides such a process for land use decisions with an urban growth boundary. It should be viewed as a short-tenm agreement that will, with certain flexibility, meet the complex needs of a number of individual cities working with a county for a logical and responsible development of the area. , I URBAN GROWTH AREA JOINT MANAGEMENT ANALYSIS Morrow and Umatilla Counties ORS 197.015(7) defines "Goals" as "... mandator-y statewide planning standards ... " (emphasis added). Statewide Planning Goal #14 (Urbanization) requires that "[u]rban growth boundaries ... be established to identify and separate urbanizable land from rural land". The goal also states that "[e]stablishment and change of the boundaries shall be a cooperative process between the city and the county or counties that surround it" (emphasis added). In the process of developing a comprehensive plan, most cities will identify some land outside existing city limits as necessary over time to accommodate anticipated urban expansion. Thus, the city will propose an urban growth boundary which subsumes unincorporated territory and include those lands in its planning process. The county has t1e responsibility of reviewing the city comprehensive plan, including the proposed urban growth boundary, for confor- mity with the Statewide Planning Goals (ORS 197.225). If the plan is found to be satisfactory, the city and county must then cooperatively establishe the urban growth boundary [Statewide Planning Goal #14 (Urbanization); ORS 197.015 (7)] . The Morrow County Court and the Umatilla County Board of· Commissioners have each adopted a Resolution and Order entitled, "In the Matter of the Development and Adoption of Procedures and Standards for County Review of City Comprehensive Plans". The process involves two sets of hearings, one at the final draft plan· stage and one at the adopted (by the city) plan stage. Each set of hearings begins with the county planning commission which reviews the plan in accordance with the standards contained in the Resolution and Order. At.the draft plan stage, the planning commission is required to make findings and may make recommendations on: 1. The plan's compliance with the Statewide Planning Goals; 2. The identification of city/county issues; 3. The urban growth boundary and plan for the urban growth area; and, 4. Coordination with affected governmental units. The county governing body then conducts a similar review and makes its own findings and recommendations. At the adopted plan stage, the county planning commission is required to make findings with respect to the four factors men- tioned above. The planning commission must also make recommendations with respect to: 1. The need for further negotiation; and/or, 2. The adoption/concurrence of the plan with exceptions as necessary. The governing body makes its own findings and takes appropriate action as follows: •Urban Growth Area Joint Management Analysis Page 2 1. Enters into further negotiation with the city; and/or, 2. a. If the urban growth boundary subsumes unincorporated territory, adopts the plan for the urban growth area (i.e., that area of land extending from corporate limits to the urban growth boundary) and concurs with the plan within city limits with exceptions as necessary; or, b. If the urban growth boundary does not subsume unincorporated territory concurs with the plan with exceptions as necessary. ORS 215.503(2)(a) requires that "[a]ll legislative acts relating to comprehen- sive plans, land use planning or zoning adopted by the governing body of a county sha11 be by ord i nance" . Therefore, coopera ti vely estab1i shed urban growth boundaries must be adopted by ordinance. If, in addition, a county approves a city comprehensive plan for an urban growth area which subsumes unincorporated terriroty, the county enters into an implied contract with the city to comply with the city's plan for that area. Adoption of the urban growth area plan as an amendment to a pre-existing county comprehensive plan or incorporation of the urban growth area plan into a developing county comprehen- sive plan are the only ways to implement this contract. In either case, the action must be taken by ordinance. Both Morrow. and Umatilla Counties have pre-existing comprehensive plans, so the previously mentioned Resolution and Order only addresses adoption of city urban growth area plans and concurrence with city plans inside corporate limits. Adoption is executed as an interim measure through ordinances which amend the county comprehensive plans. It is anticipated that both counties will incor- porate city urban growth area plans into the developing county compreh~nsive plans which, when adopted by ordinance, will supersede the existing county plans and the interim ordinances amending them. A cooperatively established urban growth boundary which subsumes unincorporated territory identifies such land as uavailable over time for urban uses" [State- wide Planning Goal #14 (Urbanization)]. The presumption is that this land will be annexed as needed to accommodate urban expansion. Thus the city has a valid interest in its development. The city could logically argue that the urban growth area should be within its jurisidction and under its direct control. This point of view cannot, however, be accommodated under current Oregon land use statutes (ORS Chapters 92, 215, and 227). Although various provisions of ORS Chapter 227 refer to a city's powers over an area within six miles of the city (i.e., ORS 227.090(g) permits a city planning commission to "[s]tudy and propose measures IIdeemed advisable to promote" the public interest, health, morals, safety, comfort, convenience, and welfare of both the city and the area within six miles thereof"; ORS 227.110(1) requires city approval of subdivision plats and plats or deeds dedicating land within six miles of the city prior to recordation; ORS 227.120 allows a city "to rename any existing street, highway, or road other than a county road or state highway" within six miles of the city if such renaming is found to be "in the best in- terest of the city and the six mile area"), it appears that provisions of ORS Chapters 92 and 215 nullify these powers. For example, ORS 92.042(1) grants , . , Urban Growth Area Joint Management Analysis Page 3 to cities the power to approve plans, maps, and plats to subdivisions and major partitions within six miles outside corporate limits only until such time as the county governing body adopts ordinances or regulations for the control of sub~ divisions and major partitions (emphasis added). County governing bodies must adopt; and may from time to time revise, comprehensive plans which are in con- formity with the Statewide Planning Goals and zoning, subdivision, and other ordinances which are designed to implement adopted county comprehensive plans and which are applicable to all land in the county (emphasis added; ORS 215.050). ORS 215.170 states that "[t]he powers of an incorporated city to control sub- division and other partitioning of land and to rename thoroughfares in adjacent unincorporated areas shall continue unimpaired until the county governing body having jurisdiction over the area adopts regulations for controlling subdivisions there" (emphasis added). . Various rules of statutory interpretation also demonstrate the legislature's ·intent to withhold control over unincorporated land from a city. ORS 92.110 specifically requires that all plans, plats, or replats of subdivisir.ns located within the boundaries of an irrigation, drainage, or water control district or district improvement company be submitted to the appropriate board of directors for approval prior to approval by the county governing body. No prior approval provisions exist with respect to such actions within unincorporated areas adjacent to city limits. Therefore, the Legislature is presumed to have pur- posefully withheld prior approval power from cities. In addition, ORS 215.130(2) (a) provides that a county comprehensive plan dnd implementing ordinances will apply when city boundaries are extended or a new. city is created unless or until the city provides otherwise ~mphasis added). Subsection (2)(b) provides that a county comprehensive plan and implementing ordinances shall apply to "[t]he area within the county and also within the boundaries of a city if the city governing body adopts an ordinances declaring the area within its boundaries subject to the county's land use planning and regulatory. ordinances, officers, and procedures and the county governing body consents to the conferral of jurisdiction" (emphnsis added). Subsection (3) states that "[a]n area within the jurisidiction of city land use planning and regulatory provisions that is withdrawn from the city or an area within a city that disincorporates shall remain subject to such plans and regulations which shall be administered by the county untiZ the county provides otherwise" (emphasis added). The fact that the Legislature did not include a provision permitting a county to confer jurisdiction to a city, particularly when Subsection (2)(b) is considered, once more indicates an intention to confer juris- diction over unincorporated areas only to counties. Cities and counties are faced with a significant dilemma with respect to the management of urban growth areas. Cities would like to control land use decisions in such areas to insure that development is orderly and consistent with city com- prehensive plans so future annexation costs are minimal. Counties might like to confer jurisdiction over such areas to cities, but they cannot, at present, le- gally delegate their land use decision-making responsibilities. How can both interests be accommodated? One obvious solution is to amend the Oregon Revised Statutes. Until such time as the Legislature deems such action appropriate, another mechanism must be utilized. Urban Growth Area Joint Management Analysis Page 4 Several alternative approaches to urban growth area management within current legal constraints can be identified. They can be separated into three generic categories based on county planning commission designation (DRS 215.020 permits a county governing body to create one or more county planning commissions or to utilize a joint planning commission). The first set of alternatives involves retaining a county planning commission as the land use decision-making body for all unincorporated land. The second set of alternatives involves naming the city planning commission as the county planning commission for land use deci- sions within the city's urban growth area. The third set of alternatives involves a combination of the first two sets of alternatives. The county governing body would retain final decision-making authority in each set of alternatives. Within each set. there are five approaches to implementing comprehensive plans. The first approach would utilize one group of county ordinances for all unincorporated areas. The second approach would utilize one group of county ordinances for unincorporated land outside urban growth boundaries with county procedures and each city1s substantive ordinance pro- visions being applicable to each city's respective urban growth area. The third approach would utilize one group of county ordinances for unincorporated land outside urban growth boundaries with a different group of county ordi- . nances uniformly applicable to all urban growth areas. The fourth" approach would utiliz~ one group of county ordinances for unincorporated land outside urban growth boundaries with different groups of county ordinances applicable to each city (one group per city)~ The fifth approach involves considering each type 1f land u~e ordinance (e.g .• zoning, subdivision, mobile home park, etc.) separately and utilizing any of the preceding approaches for each type of ordinance. The concept of joint city/county urban growth area management in Morrow and Umatilla Counties originated with agreements between the City of Boardman and Morrow County and between the City of Umatilla and Umatilla County. A Model Agreement was formulated on the basis of these existing agreements which utilizes existing county planning commissions. The county planning commissions apply one group of county ordinances to unincorporated land outside urban growth boundaries while adhering to county procedures and applying each city's sub- stantive land use ordinances to each city's respective urban growth area. This may burden the county with some additional administrative requirements~ but after familiarization with city ordinances is achieved the effort necessary to apply them would be reduced. The applicant may have to wait a little longer for a decision due to the fact that city comment is required prior to county approval or denial, but this approach protects the city's interests and provides the applicant with an additional forum in which to present his request. Finally, this approach preserves the peer relationship between elected officials which could be jeopardized if the city planning commission was designated as the county planning commission for land use decisions within the urban growth area (i.e., the Model Agreement permits a city council to review city planning commission recommendations prior to county consideration; the alternative approach could put the city qua county planning commission in a conflict of interest situation while removing the right to review from the city council). In conclusion, until the Legislature specifically provides for city jurisdiction and control over urban growth areas, the Morrow and Umatilla County approach is -_.~----I Urban Growth Area Joint Management Analysis Page 5 ---- perhaps the most efficient mechanism within these counties for accommodating both city and county interests in urban growth areas. It is far from perfect, and as joint management agreements are implemented deficiencies are expected' to become evident. For this reason, an ar,;endment process was included in the Model and shoul d be util i zed when necessary.