Laserfiche WebLink
ATTACHMENT C <br /> <br />M I N U T E S <br /> <br /> <br />Eugene City Council <br />Work Session <br />McNutt Room—City Hall <br /> <br /> April 21, 2008 <br /> 5:30 p.m. <br /> <br />COUNCILORS PRESENT: Andrea Ortiz, Chris Pryor, Betty Taylor, Bonny Bettman, Jennifer <br />Solomon, Mike Clark, Alan Zelenka. <br /> <br />COUNCILORS ABSENT: George Poling. <br /> <br /> <br />Her Honor Mayor Kitty Piercy called the meeting of the City Council work session to order. <br /> <br />1. WORK SESSION: Delta Sand and Gravel <br /> <br />Mayor Piercy called attention to three motions prepared by staff for council consideration and the motion <br />Ms. Bettman intended to offer, copies of which were provided to the council and audience. <br /> <br />City Manager Jon Ruiz introduced Senior Planner, Kurt Yeiter, who provided a brief overview of the item <br />before the council. He reminded the council of the applications submitted by Delta Sand and Gravel for an <br />amendment to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan that would add a 72-acre expansion <br />site to the Statewide goal inventory for significant mineral and aggregate sites and change the land use <br />designation from Agricultural to Sand and Gravel. The company also applied for a related zone change and <br />a variance to allow excavation within 150 feet of a waterway. Only the Metro Plan amendment required <br />council action; the other applications were under the purview of Lane County due to the location of the site. <br /> <br />Mr. Yeiter reminded the council of the deliberations it began in February of 2007, and recalled the council’s <br />preliminary decision that the application did not meet the Statewide planning goal test for determining there <br />were sufficient aggregate resources on the site. That was sufficient to deny the application. The Board of <br />County Commissioners had approved the application with conditions, but its approval was not effective <br />without the approval of the City of Eugene. <br /> <br />Mr. Yeiter called the council’s attention to the three ordinances, and associated findings, prepared by staff at <br />the council’s direction. He reviewed the three ordinances, and suggested that Ordinance 1 (Attachment B) <br />had an advantage because it included a more thorough analysis of the application than the other two draft <br />ordinances and included an analysis of the dust issue considered by the Eugene Planning Commission. If the <br />ordinance were appealed to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA), it was more likely that the ordinance <br />would be remanded for further consideration rather than reversed by LUBA. <br /> <br />Mr. Yeiter recommended that the council adopt Ordinance 1. He called attention to an error on pages 12 of <br />Ordinance 1 and page 10 of Ordinance 2, noting that the reference to “cubic tons” should be to “tons.” <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 21, 2008 Page 1 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />