Ordinance No. 20413 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

standards applied by LRAP A. Neither planning commission conducted further ESEE analysis because none had been provided by the applicant. Eugene Planning Commission voted 3-2 that the conflict could not be minimized, and Lane County Planning Commission voted 3-2 with one abstention. For reasons explained in more detail under Goal 5 findings, we find that potential dust conflicts from the proposed mining of the expansion area have not been minimized and, therefore, this application is not consistent with Goal 6 regarding air quality. Statewide Planning Goal 7 To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards. The proposed expansion area is partially located within an un-numbered A zone of the Willamette River flood plain as illustrated on the federal Flood Area Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) (Panel 1126 of 2975, effective June 2, 1999). It is located immediately west of a Flood Insurance Study (FIS) area that has defined floodways and base flood elevations of the Willamette River. Because the floodway for the Willamette River is determined to be substantially east of the expansion area, the FIS has determined through definition of the floodway that the expansion area could be completely obstructed without increasing the water-surface elevation of the 100-year flood more than one foot at any point. All mining activity proposed for the expansion area would occur as excavation taking place below existing ground surfaces. Overburden would be removed and stockpiled in areas with elevation higher than base flood elevations or in areas currently below existing ground elevations. That mining methodology will preclude the need for sound berms or flood containment berms that could impede flood flows across the expansion area. Berms associated with the construction of the aquaclude will be temporary in nature and will be removed by returning the material to the area of the aquaclude as construction occurs or prior to anticipated heavy rain events. Therefore, we find that the proposed use of the expansion area would be consistent with the purpose and intent of Goal 7. Statewide Planning Goal 8 To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state. We find that there has been a legislative determination by the Metro jurisdictions through its comprehensive planning process, as implemented by the Metro Plan diagram, that the subject property is not designated for recreational facilities or opportunities. Identified recreational needs have been provided for on other sites within the Metro urban area. Therefore, we find that the proposed amendments would be consistent with Goal 8. Statewide Planning Goal 9 To diversify and improve the economy of the state. Goal 9 is primarily focused on commercial and industrial development within urban areas. To the extent that the goal is applicable to the application, we find that both the existing agricultural use and the proposed use of the expansion area would contribute to the economy of the Metro area through the employment of persons and by providing the natural resource for construction, both of which contribute to the economic health of the state of Oregon. Therefore, we find that approval of the application would be consistent with the intent and purpose of Goal 9. Exhibit A to Ordinance 20413 - 28