Ordinance No. 20413 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

dust. The DVD showed that the mining of the existing (wet) wall produces virtually no visible dust; however the amount and location of naturally occurring wetness along the exaction wall may be modified by the proposed aquaclude. The DVD also showed that the haul roads, although watered as required by the LRAP A ACDP, were also naturally wet, but that condition may also change because of the aquaclude. Therefore, the visual display of existing conditions is not a convincing indicator of future conditions after the aquaclude is installed. We note that the applicant has testified that the processing facility (the rock crusher and associated facilities) will remain at its current LRAP A-regulated location and will not produce finished aggregate material in excess of its current LRAP A ACDP-mandated levels. The location of the processing facility and its production level is regulated by the ACDP. The applicant has testified that the location of that facility and its production levels will not change as a result of approval of this application, yet, in answer to questions at a public hearing, the applicants also indicated that the production was somewhat flexible and reacted to demand (Exhibit 1, application, and Exhibit 33b, Concerned Santa Clara Citizens, including reports by Camille Marie Sears and Stephen Kimberley, MD.; Exhibit 51, Lane Regional Air Pollution Agency; Exhibit 53, Dick Ruth; Exhibit 61, peer review; Exhibit 63, Knepler; Exhibit 223, SAIF; Exhibit 224, Sarah Hendrickson, MD; and Exhibit263 and 263a, S. Kimberley, MD). Questions about LRAP A's ability to adequately regulate in a consistent and timely manner (Exhibit 65, DuPriest) and the long term viability ofLRAP A were raised during the joint elected officials' hearing, (see Nepler, DuPriest, Bettman, and Taylor testimonies at the 12/12/06 joint public hearing). In case ofLRAPA's dissolution, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) would be responsible for enforcing local air quality standards. The Council finds that conditions of approval dependent on LRAP A's enforcement are not satisfactory for long term mitigation of a potentially hazardous source of dust proximate to an urban residential area. On February 20, 2008 the Lane County Board of Commissioners approved a variance that would allow construction of berms and an aquaclude within the standard 150 foot setback from property lines. This variance would allow excavation and dumping of dirt and aggregate materials up to 150 feet closer to existing residences. There is evidence in the record that dust and airborne pollutants drop off over distance; therefore the variance would worsen the conflict due to dust by allowing mining/construction activity closer to residents. Both Planning Commissions found unanimously that there is a conflict due to dust, and that the conflict due to dust could not be minimized to a level that meets the DEQ emission standards applied by LRAP A. Neither planning commission conducted further ESEE analysis because none had been provided by the applicant. The Eugene Planning Commission voted 3-2 that the conflict could not be minimized, and Lane County Planning Commission voted 3-2 with one abstention. We concur, and find that potential dust conflicts from the proposed mining of the expansion area cannot been minimized as required by Goal 5. Floodine EGR has concluded that the Delta Sand and Gravel Company method of mining will create no obstructions or other physical features that could impede flood flows across the proposed expansion area or (thereby) cause flooding on neighboring properties. Essentially that conclusion means that flood flows should not be impeded across the proposed expansion area if no fill within the floodway occurs. All mining activity proposed for the expansion area will Exhibit A to Ordinance 20413 - 21