Item A: Delta Sand and Gravel - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

To preserve forest lands for forest use. We find that Goal 4 is not applicable to this application. There has previously been a legislative determination by the metropolitan jurisdictions, as embodied in the acknowledged Metro Plan, that the subject property is not forest land. This determination is validated by the fact that are no forest resources existing on the subject property or on any surrounding land and there are no areas within the subject property that fall within the definition of forest land. Also, the soils of the subject property (Chehalis silty clay loam, Newberg loam, Newberg fine sandy loam, Newberg urban land complex and Camas gravelly sandy loam) have no designated Douglas Fir site index according to Lane County’s 1997 Soil Ratings for Forestry and Agriculture. Statewide Planning Goal 5 To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources. There has previously been a legislative determination by the Metro Plan jurisdictions that no Goal 5 resources exist on subject site except wetlands, which are addressed in these findings. The subject property has not been included in any inventory of needed open space or scenic areas defined by Goal 5, nor has it been identified in the Metro Plan as having any historic, cultural or natural resources which need to be preserved and/or protected. With respect to wetlands, EGR & Associates, Inc., in its Evaluation of Aggregate Resources attached to the application, determined that there is a wetland located within the meander scar (aka East Santa Clara Waterway) along the northwest boundary of the subject property. This wetland does not extend beyond the eastern bank of the meander scar and lies within the required 150-foot mining setback from the property boundary. Avoidance of wetlands in areas not covered by existing DOGAMI Mining Permits and will be accomplished by limiting mining operations to areas outside the applicable setbacks from the expansion property boundary, according to draft County-imposed conditions of approval (see staff report for November 1, 2006 public hearing, Attachment 1, Exhibit C: Lane County draft Ordinance No. PA 1238, Conditions Necessary to Minimize Conflicts). All wetland area within the 150’ setback shall be exempted from the administrative variance and the construction of the aquaclude would occur outside of the wetland area. Two excavated ponds are located in the southern portion of the site, which were previously used in aggregate extraction and are currently covered by DOGAMI permits, and thus exempt from wetland regulation. (Exhibit 1, Exhibit E) The Goal 5 Administrative Rule for mineral and aggregate resources specifically addresses other Goal 5 resources and limits considerations of conflict to “Goal 5 Resource Sites” that have been identified in the Metro Plan. The applicant claims that the subject property contains a significant mineral resource site of the quantity and quality that establish the subject property as for aggregate purposes pursuant to Goal 5 and the Oregon Administrative Rules implementing Goal 5. The administrative rules recognize that significant aggregate resources may be mined in areas that contain other Goal 5 resources. The potential of such conflicts has been reviewed according to the Goal 5 rule. The City of Eugene finds that the applicant failed to show that the site’s aggregate resources were significant pursuant to Goal 5 and the Oregon Administrative Rules implementing Goal 5; therefore, the application to list the site as a Goal 5 resource is denied. This action is consistent with Goal 5 and the rules that implement it as shown below. Step 1 Determine if the PAPA information is adequate Ordinance - 6