My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2007
>
CC Agenda - 01/22/07 Meeting
>
Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:25:55 PM
Creation date
1/18/2007 10:10:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/22/2007
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
not near the site. She said the complaints are not on the site itself but construction sites <br />separate from the application. <br /> <br /> Bettman asked how many cubic yards of aggregate are estimated to be on the 72 acres. <br /> <br /> Cornacchia responded that DOGAMI assumed an 82 foot thick average depth of the <br />aggregate layer that represents 15 million tons of aggregate. He indicated that was for the <br />entire site. He said that included both the area of the aquaclude and all 74 acres. He <br />noted that was 7 million cubic yards. <br /> <br /> Bettman asked about the traffic impact analysis Lane County waived and the requirement <br />on the assumption that there is no analysis. She asked how the City of Eugene would <br />require a traffic impact analysis. She asked if they had the ability to require a traffic <br />impact analysis and how they would do that. <br /> <br /> Yeider didn’t recall if that section of Division Avenue is within the city or the County. <br />He said the city would be limited in its ability to do a TIA because all the activity would <br />be happening outside of the city. He thought the exception might be for access rights on <br />Division. He said he would get back to Bettman with that information. <br /> <br /> Green asked which agency approved the subdivision. <br /> <br /> Howe indicated that the city approved it. <br /> <br /> Green asked how they approved the subdivision if it had a close proximity to an existing <br />gravel pit. <br /> <br /> Yeider indicated the gravel pit doesn’t exist near the new homes. He noted there were <br />gravel operations near the older homes near Beaver Street. He said the site that is visible <br />impacts the new homes and was zoned for agricultural. He said the Metro Plan offers a <br />little buffer between the urban and gravel interface. He said the Metro Plan stated there <br />would be a buffer. He said in the draft Metro Plan of the 80’s this expansion site was <br />known to have potentially significant aggregate resources. <br /> <br /> Dwyer asked which way the prevailing winds go. <br /> <br /> Ruth indicated there had been two submittals with wind modeling that was done by <br />LRAPA on November 1 and March 17 hearing there was information submitted. He <br />explained there is a summer winter difference. He noted in the summertime when there <br />are dry conditions the winds are from the north. He said there is only 4.37 percent of the <br />time the wind blew from the east, east northeast and the east southeast, that would put it <br />into the Silver Meadows subdivision. He indicated there is limited wind exposure for the <br />people. <br /> <br /> Green asked if there had been any past regulations or complaints by DEQ. <br /> <br />Page 15 – Joint Elected Officials' Meeting – December 12, 2006 <br />WD bc/m/06121/T <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.