Ordinance No. 20413 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(B) Reasonable and practicable measures that could be taken to reduce the identified adverse effects; and (C) The probable duration of the mining operation and the proposed post- mining use of the site. The City Council has already found that the expansion site is not a significant Goal 5 resource. Even if it were such a resource, significant conflicts caused by noise and dust have not been minimized. The applicant did not provide an ESEE analysis. Based on relevant evidence in the record, the City provides the following findings weighing the economic, social, environmental, and energy (ESEE) consequences of allowing the proposed mining, particularly as such an allowance would relate to the conflicts created by noise and dust. As an initial note, the record does not contain any proposal for a limited expansion. The proposed minimization measures could arguably be considered a limitation on the expansion, but, as discussed above, those measures are all discussed above and do not adequately minimize the conflict. The record does not include evidence as to how the expansion could be limited. This is a very technical feasibility question in the case of the expansion of a mining operation; the city cannot simply propose its own idea for an alternative smaller expansion area, as the alternative may be geologically unsound. Without some evidence regarding an alternative proposal, the City cannot find that a limitation on the expansion could: - reduce the degree of adverse effect on the existing land uses within the impact area; - make the proposed minimization more effective to reduce the identified adverse effects; - avoid significant adverse effects to the economic viability of the proposed use; or - change the probable duration of the mining operation or the proposed post-mining use of the site. As such, the City's analysis concentrates on the ESEE consequences of allowing or denying the proposal. Allowing proposed expansion The economic consequences of allowing the proposal are associated with continued operations of an existing quarry for an estimated 12-15 years; that is, employment of up to 135 persons annually and (based on 2004 figures) payment of over $4,750,000 in wages, plus taxes and charitable contributions to local endeavors. There is a non-quantified economic benefit to having a local source of aggregate for local construction and roadway projects due to savings in transportation costs, shortened delivery time, and less truck traffic on interstate highways and rural roads. The social and environmental consequences of allowing the proposal are closely tied together. In excavating the expansion area, the applicant would be operating (at first above grade) in areas that lie only about 150' away from existing homes. Wind data in Exhibit 33 suggests that 47 percent of the time in drier months, and at other times throughout the year, prevailing winds will exacerbate dust exposures to existing residents. Particulate matter can trigger asthma attacks, cause wheezing, coughing, and Exhibit A to Ordinance 20413 - 24