CC Minutes - 12/12/06 Joint Elected Officials

Home Browse Search

of potential impacts. He said the definition of minimization is if the applicant can demonstrate that it meets the requirements of the applicable regulatory agency, then it has minimized the conflicts. He said in the materials they have, the consultant reports on those potential impacts and the conditions the company would have to meet if they were to approve the matter would mean they would have to meet the requirements of each of the regulatory agencies. He indicated the Eugene Planning Commission agreed with them, wherein they agreed that they could minimize all potential impacts except dust. He said on that issue they didn’t do a good enough job to explain how they create dust and how they could minimize dust impacts. He recalled at the last hearing the elected officials were given an exhibit of the Delta Sand and Gravel sample log. He said it showed a follow-up to issues raised by the Lane County Planning Commission that they did not have a significant resource. He said, based on testimony from people who questioned the consultants report on the manner on which the boring samples were taken and what the analysis was and if it was done right, the Lane County Planning Commission accepted that information from an individual who was not an expert, but someone giving testimony over testimony from their consultant, EGR Associates, who are licensed engineers who do the work continually. He said if their conclusion meets the standards, then they have done the job they should do. He recalled throughout the Lane County Planning Commission discussion, that concept was continually raised. He said the Planning Commission stated they couldn’t accept the testimony of the consultants because they were paid by the applicant and it tainted their testimony. Cornacchia noted the sampling test was a resampling and retesting by ODOT and an analysis by DOGAMI. He explained those are the two agencies that are the regulatory agencies for this issue. He said they were told by planning commissioners that they could rely on the consultants and there was nothing from DOGAMI and ODOT. He said because of that, they had ODOT come down to test and retest. He said they took the borings and did their own sample. He said they issued their opinion (copy in file) that the samples demonstrate the deposit is significant and meets the requisite standards as a sample and the requirements as base rock. He said they sent that conclusion to DOGAMI and asked them to respond. And he noted that based upon what ODOT had done, they believed they had a representative sample, and the sample was appropriate for the requirements of ODOT for base rock and meeting the Goal 5 requirements for establishing a significant resource. He believed they met the burden that the agencies that review these had signed off on the significance issue. Cornacchia commented that their consultant reports were criticized by consultants from opponents. He said following the criticisms, they provided them to their the consultants, who rendered the conclusions in the reports. He asserted their consultants rebutted every one of the issues raised by the opposing consultants. Cornacchia stated they identified the potential impacts of noise, groundwater, flooding, dust, impacts on wetlands and air cultural practices. He noted on all six, the planning commissions had the opportunity to review their testimony and evidence and rendered a decision on each one. He said the Eugene Planning Commission found for the applicant on every issue except for dust. He said they found they had a significant inventory of Page 3 – Joint Elected Officials' Meeting – December 12, 2006 WD bc/m/06121/T