My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item A: Delta Sand and Gravel
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 04/21/08 Work Session
>
Item A: Delta Sand and Gravel
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:00:57 PM
Creation date
4/18/2008 9:50:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
4/21/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
79
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The EGR report estimates that the average thickness of the aggregate layer in that area is 70.5 <br />feet; however, DOGAMI evaluation observed only 51.5 feet depth (see Exhibit 144). The <br />Council also finds that EGR’s Exhibit A (e.g. p. 5- 8 and 11-13, Figures 7, 8, and 9, Appendix E <br />well logs and table), and related materials, establish that there are two contiguous, but distinct, <br />layers of sand and gravel, in the expansion area. These layers consist of an upper layer (“younger <br />alluvium”) and a lower layer (“older alluvium”). The EGR report also acknowledges that layers <br />of mudflow/clay from 4 to 12 fee thick have been experienced on the existing excavation site and <br />are encountered along the pit wall (see also in Exhibit 1, EGR’s Exhibit A (e.g. p. 5- 8 and 11- <br />13, Figures 7, 8, and 9, and Boring Log of pit wall) and Exhibit 216). Based on that information, <br />we also find that neither of these individual layers of aggregate is 60 feet thick. Therefore, OAR <br />660-023-180(3)(d)(B) applies. <br />In summary, even if the proposed expansion site satisfied the significance criteria of OAR 660- <br />023-180(3)(a), because section (3)(d)(B) applies to the site, the site would not be significant. <br /> <br /> <br />Goal 5 Conclusion. The City finds that, for the reasons stated above the application is <br />inconsistent with Statewide Planning Goal 5. As such, there is no need or requirement that the <br />City to provide further analysis. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Ordinance - 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.