Final arguments made on zone change
Saturday, March 17, 2007 11:46 PM PDT
Larry Meyer Argus Observer
VALE
Attorney Tom Okai, representing Concerned Citizens of Malheur County, made a final attempt Wednesday to convince the Malheur County Court to deny a zone change on property south of Ontario that would allow the siting of proposed bio-refinery.
Okai’s comments came during a continuation of a public hearing conducted by the court on the issue from last week.
Following Okai’s comments, the court closed the hearing. However, the court decided earlier to allow Robert Van Brocklin, attorney for the proponents for the zone change and the bio-refinery, Treasure Valley Renewable Resources, an opportunity of rebuttal to Okai’s comments. Van Brocklin’s comments will be submitted in writing as the court will be not meeting this week. Van Brocklin will have until Jan. 7 to submit any additional arguments, as provided by Oregon law.
In his arguments before the court, Wednesday, Okai said the county planning commission failed to consider all of the factors relevant to a determination as to whether the proposed zone change and bio-refinery are urban development or rural development.
Okai said the primary factor considered was the proposed bio-refinery will not require an urban sewer service and the commission limited its consideration to the proposed bio-refinery.
“The county should consider any permissible use, which be located on the property in determining whether a Goal 14 exception is needed,” Okai said.
Goal 14 of the statewide planning goals addresses urban issues.
“The express purpose of the M3 zones is to provide for agricultural processing activities which are large enough to be industrial in nature,” Okai continued. “There is nothing in the ordinance that would prevent an intense industrial processing, such as Ore-Ida from locating on the property.”
Okai asserted again the number of employees year around, amount of traffic, because TVRR plans to use city water and, according to Okai, will need a wastewater treatment plant, make the bio-refinery an urban use, requiring an exception to goal 14. Since the recommendations do not contain such an exception, the TVRR’s application must be rejected. Also, he said exception to Goal 11 is also needed. Goal 11 deals with extending urban services outside urban growth boundaries.
His second objection centers on the proposed zone change. In his view, the zone change does not contain sufficient findings that the development in other locations has reached a point where additional land is needed for the proposed use.
“The applicant, which is trying to show that development of industrial land is so advanced in Malheur County that the proposed parcel must be taken for the proposed use, has failed,” Okai said. “The test is not whether a site is preferable, but whether or not development has reached the level that the use cannot be accommodated.”
Additionally, Okai charged TVRR has failed to show that rural services will not be overburdened.
Okai again asserted there are other sites available for the bio-refinery, questioned TVRR’s positions the bio-refinery needs be situated by a shortline railroad and that the applicants raised concerns about the impact on Nyssa residential neighborhoods, while failing to give evidence on the impact on residential development along Alameda Drive.
Van Brocklin, who sat in on the hearing via conference call, has until Wednesday to submit his reply.
