Item 1: JEO Meeting: Delta Sand & Gravel

Home Browse Search

Step 6. Determine if the County’s rezoning requirements (LC16.252) are met, and if the variance setback request should be granted under LC 16.271(7). [Only the County board will consider and make the decision on the rezoning and variance.] Step 7. Develop a program to allow mining if all the above steps are positive. Delta Sand and Gravel requested that the Lane County Goal 5 Inventory for Significant Mineral and Aggregate Sites be amended to include the subject property. Their request would allow mining of the expansion site, and includes two administrative variances to the setback provisions in the Lane County code. In conjunction with the amendment to the Lane County Goal 5 Inventory, the site’s Metro Plan land use designation is proposed to be changed from “Agriculture” to “Sand and Gravel” and the zoning changed from “Exclusive Farm Use Zone (E- 30)” to “Sand, Gravel & Rock Products Zone (SG-RCP).” The applicants chose not to prepare an ESEE analysis. They contend that the potential impacts of their operation as conditioned by the County permit process are satisfactorily mitigated to satisfy the Goal 5 criteria. The subject site is located outside the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary, but because the site is located within the Metro Plan boundary, the Metro Plan amendment requires approval from both the City and County to become effective. If the Metro Plan amendment is approved, then approval of the subsequent zone change, variances, and conditions of approval falls solely to the County. After a joint public hearing was held in late 2006 and additional testimony was gathered in early 2007, the City Council began its deliberations. The council stopped at an early stage (Step 2 in the list, above) because, in a straw vote, the majority of the council could not find that there were significant aggregate resources, as defined by the state’s Goal 5 rules, located on the expansion site. This determination would result in the City’s denial of the application. The City Council chose not to continue the discussion of the other applicable criteria, but left that possibility open, depending upon the decision reached by the County. The County board, in a straw vote, found favorably on all aspects of the application. The County board’s discussions also refined the draft conditions of approval that would be imposed by the County if the application were approved (see the second attachment to Attachment A for the revised conditions). To become effective, the final decisions of both the City of Eugene and Lane County must be identical. If the final decisions are not identical, the proposed Metro Plan amendment will be referred to the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) for additional study, conflict resolution, and recommendation back to the governing bodies. Since the City and County seem headed towards different decisions, City staff recommends that the council’s final decision contain findings on all the applicable criteria to expedite MPC review and any appeals that may follow. Final action and review of findings would occur at a later date. Attached to Commissioner Stewart’s letter (Attachment A) are the topical criteria that State Goal 5 rules require for aggregate resource sites, a summary of the County board’s and the City Council’s straw decisions on these criteria, the County’s draft conditions of approval, the County’s draft findings in support of the application, and minutes of the County board’s deliberations on this application. F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080116\S0801161.DOC