Item B: Delta Sand and Gravel Metro Plan Amendment

Home Browse Search

would look at the plan to ensure that it was adequate, and ensured that no off site impacts \vould affect either the floodplain or ground\vater. The letter had been entered into the record. · Other conflicts \vould be miniInized by the. applicant and those copflicts \\'ould be monitored and authorized by DEQ through LRAP A and LCDC. For those reasons, Mr. Sullivan was strongly in support of fonvarding this to the elected officials v>lho \vould approve or disapprove, and if they disapproved, vvould get the ESEE undenvay. Mr. Belc,her, although conflicted, \vas encouraged by the fact that issues had been raised for consideration by the elected officials. Ms. Arkin said aggregate and fann land is Goal 5 resources. There was 110t convincing evidel1ce in the record that the resource site was significant She \vas concerned about health impacts StIch as dust leading to asthn1u and lung disease on school children and the children who lived in the nearby residences. The applicant had not provided sufficient n10deling to del110nstrate noise could be. mitigated. She felt strongly that the neighbors' fear of flooding was a real fear. Ms. Arkin said that none of the agencies responsible for providing oversight had the fun.ding and staffil1g to do so. She asserted the application did not meet the criteria to allow nlining. Ms. Kirkham said it "vas her responsibility as a Planning Commissioner to decide if the application convinced her 100 percent that they had met the criteria. l\lthough there \\'ere ulany places \vhere this application did convince her, she had concerns about dust and "'later. She wanted the county cOll1missioners to look at dust, groundwater, vvetlands and flooding. Mr. La\vless said the Plamling Conunissions \\Tere in the position ofpretel1di11g to know about things they kne\v nothing about. He expressed conflicted feelings due to the social, econolnicand civic nature of our land use, and goals and rules that required compact gro\Yth and reduction of travel. He agreed this was a matter of balance. He hoped that the responsible nlonitoring agencies \vould be able to fulfilltheir responsibilities. He was convinced the applicant would comply ","ith applicable regulations. He said he \vollld support nloving this for\vard to the elected officials. (;oncluding the discussion,. Mr. Canllichael thanked the applicant for their patience; the citizens involved in the opposition who offered articulate, polite, and compelling comnlents; the Lane County and Eugene Planning COll11llissions for "llangingin there" for a long period oftinle,and doing tlleir hOllle\Vork to reach reasonable conclusions to fonvard to the elected officials. He stated Mr..Sul1ivan articulated 11is feelings, wlaile Ms. Arkin offered thoughtful opposing points. Mr~ Cannichael opined there \vas a satisfactory solution to be found. He hoped the. mining operation could continue, because it was a long term, good citizen of our community' that was willing to participate in \vhatever mitigating fonns to ensure the safety and well. being of the people \vho moved close to that nuning operation. He expressed. optimism that as the elected officials proceeded they \vould take the cOlnnlissioners' comnlents and thoughts to heart. Ms. Colbath pointed out that on page 2 of the August 8, 2006 agenda packet, the vote recorded for the' Eugene Planning Comtnission on the question Do lve believe the dust conflict can be minl1nized to a le~Jel that lneets DEQ and LRAPA standards through the conditions shovvn in attachlnent 2? "vas sho\vn as 3 yes 2 no., while the infonnation in the packet for today's meeting \vas corrected to 2 yes 3 no. Ms. Colbath called for the motion. Mr. Duncan, seconded by Mr. Lavvless, 1110ved to recomn1end to the Eugene City Council that the Planning Commission felt the PAPA information \vas adequate and that the resource "vas significant. All conflicts \vere able to be ntinitnized by.the applicant except the dust conflict, \vhich the PI aIming MINUTES---- August 30, 2006 Joint Lane County and Eugene Planning Commission Page 10