Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

changed and they couldn’t count any of the gravel below that. He said that turned out neither the way LCDC or the County Commissioners determined at that time it was determined to be done, it was to count all the rock in the mass from the top to the bottom. He noted that all of the standards that are being referred to all start with that the geologist is to use their professional judgment for the materials to be used to do the sampling programming. He added it goes on to discuss distinguishable layers. He agreed if they moved from the gravel above to the bedrock to sample it if they are going to mining the bedrock. He indicated that they weren’t intending on doing that, they were going to mine the gravel. He commented as a professional geologist he would be remiss if he didn’t recognize they are operating and using the gravel from top to bottom. He said it is common to mix the rock for sampling. He said in the standards for the rock itself, not the pre processed rock sampling, it is best if they actually sample the processed rock they are going to use instead of the raw material. He said they sampled the raw material and it still meets standards. Cornacchia recalled there was a statement made that the elected officials were placed in position to decide between experts on the issue of significance. He said in this case they have Christenson, who is. He didn’t believe that Mr. Reed was an expert under Oregon law. He understood that geologists in Oregon had to be licensed and to give expert testimony, someone needs to be licensed. He thought it was possible that Reed could have become licensed since the Eugene Sand and Gravel application, but at that point that issue was raised. He noted in the appeal of the Eugene Sand and Gravel application, there was a variety of assignments of error and one was that the Board of Commissioners did not accept Dr. Reed’s position. He said that LUBA found that was not an appealable error. He understood when Dr. Reed was questioned by his licensing agency, he said he was not given expert testimony, that his testimony consisted of a political speech. He commented that the impression has been given that at no time was any sampling done in a manner which sampled the different layers. He said they went to ODOT and DOGAMI was for their independent testing. He noted in the packet of November 1, were the first three ODOT reports are the different tests. He stated each of them had the following conclusions: “Samples submitted is representative of native aggregate material. Test results meet base aggregate specification. “ Section 02630.10(c ) 2002 Oregon Standards Specification for Construction. He said those were the rules from the regulating agency. He indicated the sampling was done in three layers: from 3 to 30 feet, from 61 to 67 feet and from 76 to 85 feet. Cornacchia commented they were seeing false arguments. He asked the elected officials to read the ODOT report. With regard to the traffic analysis, he said they did one. He indicated they were not going to create any new traffic, as there will be no new trucks. He said they are not asking to create a new operation, they are asking for a continuation of their existing operation. He recalled that LRAPA has a production level on them and they cannot produce more rock than the permit allows. He said that Lane County transportation looked at the analysis and agreed with him that with no added trucks, there is no impact. He added that both planning commissions agreed with them. Page 20 – Joint Elected Officials' Meeting – December 12, 2006 WD bc/m/06121/T