Ordinance No. 20413 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

With regard to energy, evidence in the record suggests that, if the expansion is not allowed, there will come a time when the aggregate used in local construction projects will need to be hauled in from other areas, impacting the use of energy. Analysis (A) Degree of adverse effect on the existing land uses within the impact area The degree of the dust's adverse effects if the expansion is approved is discussed above. The effects are significant. The applicant asserts that, even though its operation will be closer to the existing residential uses, its dust impacts will not worsen. The City does not find this to be a credible assertion and the applicant does not provide reasonable evidence to support its assertion. (see discussion above). As discussed above, the minimization measures proposed by the applicant are insufficient to adequately address those effects. Those previous findings are incorporated here. Arthur Noxon estimates that noise levels would exceed DEQ standards. Exhibit 278. (B) Reasonable and practicable measures that could be taken to reduce the identified adverse effects The City's findings, above, evaluate the effectiveness of the measures the applicant has proposed to reduce dust creation and increases in noise levels, and the adverse effects of the dust and noise. As discussed above, those measures are insufficient to minimize the effects. There is no evidence in the record to suggest that there are other reasonable and practicable measures to reduce the effects. (C) The probable duration of the mining operation and the proposed post-mining use of the site. The applicant estimates that the expansion site will provide 12-15 years of continued mining. (Exhibit 1, Application, Page 1). The applicant provided a conceptual reclamation plan to reflect its proposal to amend its existing reclamation plan, approved by DOGAMI in 1987 and 1995. See File Record No.1, Original Delta application, Exhibit 1. It states that "The mined area will be filled to pre-excavation levels. No slopes will remain (same as main pit). No future use of the reclaimed property is specified. ESEE Conclusion Considering the relative importance of the mining expansion when compared to the dust and noise impacts on the existing and approved uses identified in prior findings (impacts that cannot be minimized), the City concludes the ESEE consequences of allowing mining expansion are so detrimental to the conflicting uses that mining should not be allowed. The City concludes that the existing and approved uses, particularly the residential uses (health effects and noise), are of sufficient importance relative to the proposed mining site expansion that the expansion mining must not be allowed. Goal 5 Conclusion. The City finds that, for the reasons stated above the application is inconsistent with Statewide Planning Goal 5. Statewide Planning Goal 6 Exhibit A to Ordinance 20413 - 26