Prineville opens public hearing on comprehensive plan updates and possible UGB expansion tied to proposed biomass site; council leaves record open

City Planning Director Josh Smith opened a public hearing on amendments to the city comprehensive plan (chapters 2 and 5), an Economic Opportunities Analysis (EOA) and a proposed urban growth boundary (UGB) expansion aimed at creating large-lot heavy industrial land along the rail corridor.

Smith said the EOA replaces an out-of-date economic chapter and is intended to identify whether Prineville needs additional industrial land over a 20-year horizon. He said the citys EOA concluded the city needs large-lot industrial sites to serve target industries and that one possible expansion would add about 227 acres along the railroad corridor; Smith emphasized the EOA does not by itself approve any specific industrial facility.

Planning staff described the EOA process: inventorying buildable lands, removing constraints (floodplain, slopes, wetlands), forecasting population (state-provided PSU data) and employment growth, and then estimating commercial and industrial land need. Staff said the EOA concluded the city has more commercial supply than the 20-year need (EOA cited needing about 84 acres and having 113) but that large-lot industrial demand requires additional contiguous sites—specifically the EOA listed a need equivalent to two approximately 251-acre sites for target industries.

Smith and staff said they evaluated a study area along the rail corridor and prioritized candidate parcels by site size, adjacency to the UGB, access to rail and infrastructure, slope and soil, and compatibility with surrounding uses. Staff recommended a corridor site (identified in the staff report) as the preferred alternative to accommodate a potential biomass facility or other large users that require rail.

Central Oregon Land Watch staff attorney Robin Hayakawa testified in opposition and urged the council to separate the EOA, comprehensive-plan text amendments and the UGB expansion so the public has more time to consider each item. Hayakawa said the EOA overestimates large-lot need by relying on an average-site-size method and that more flexible site-size assumptions should be evaluated. She also asked the council to leave the written record open to allow additional comments; Land Watch requested a longer written comment period and suggested alternatives such as evaluating existing industrially zoned county parcels.

Multiple residents raised concerns about procedural notice, impacts to farmland and wells, possible contamination from nearby gravel-mining operations, truck traffic on rural roads and potential air and water impacts if a biomass facility is sited there. Speakers asked why the city would expand onto high-value farmland, requested additional environmental analysis of air and water impacts, questioned whether rail access justifies the site choice and urged consideration of other parcels already zoned industrial.

Council discussion focused on process and next steps rather than a substantive decision tonight. Council members and staff agreed the EOA and the UGB expansion are linked and that testimony on the EOA will be considered in the UGB hearing. Because several council members would be absent later in the meeting, Council President Uffelman and four members present agreed to continue the public hearing and leave the written record open for additional comments until the councils next regular meeting (April 22). The motion to keep the written record open passed by a vote of the members present.

Ending: The council continued the hearings and left the written record open through April 22; staff said written comments could be emailed or dropped off and staff will prepare follow-up materials and responses to questions raised by residents and organizations before the continued hearing.