07/01/1992 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

believed such a requirement was inappropriate. Mr. Thorpe said he was not an . expert in groundwater issues and declined to comment. He added that he be- lieved a scientifically based study was appropriate, but constituted yet another hurdle in his client's attempt to develop his property. Bruc& Mason, 36725 Oakpoint Road, Springfield, said he lived directly across the river from the North 66th Street site. He supported inclusion of the site in the study for the purpose of protection due to the uniqueness of the site in terms of wildlife habitat and other natural resource qualities. Mr. Mason said the site received the highest natural resource inventory score of any sites considered for inclusion in the study. Mr. Mason maintained that gravel extraction on the site would be a mistake and have an adverse effect on the natural resources at the site. He said that Mr. Thorpe's remarks seemed to indicate that support for inclusion of the site in the study was reflective of a "neighbors' tiff," but Mr. Mason said,that local and state outdoor and recreation organizations have submitted testimony regarding the inappropriateness of gravel extraction on the site. He expressed concern that gravel extraction could result in a change of chan- nelsand obliteration of the entire resource area being considered for addi- tion to the study. Mr. Mason said that the area was heavily used for recrea- tion, noting that at 4:30 p.m. that afternoon he had counted 27 people within 200 yards of the potential gravel extraction area. He said that those recre- ational uses would be lost if gravel extraction was permitted. Mr. Mason noted that the McKenzie River Trust considers the North 66th Street site a prime site for acquisition. Responding to a question from Mr. Morrisette, Mr. Mason said the McKenzie . River Trust does not have the funds to purchase the property at this time. Mr. Rust asked if the McKenzie River Trust believed it would be able to pur- chase the property at a more attractive price if the it could not be used for sand and gravel extraction. Mr. Mason said he did not know. Mr. Cornacchia pointed out that preservation of habitat and recreational uses were uses that should be supported by the government. He said that Mr. Ma- son's request would require that the State remove the potential for all eco- nomic benefit for the property. Mr. Cornacchia maintained that such an ac- tion would require the State to purchase the land under just compensation elements of the State and US Constitution. He asked Mr. Mason how he would propose to fund such a purchase. Mr. Mason said that he did agree that all economic benefits would be removed from the land, pointing out that consider- able economic value had already been derived from the property. Mr. Cornacchia observed that the natural resource designation would preclude farming on the land as well. Mr. Cornacchia asked if Mr. Mason had seen bald eagles at the site recently. Mr. Mason said he had seen bald eagles at the site the day previous. Mr. Cornacchia maintained that the bald eagles seen by Mr. Mason were the same eagles cited by opponents of old-growth timber logging on the north side of the river near the site. Mr. Mason responded that the eagles he had seen MINUTES--Joint Elected Officials July 1, 1992 Page 12 .