CC Minutes - 12/12/06 Joint Elected Officials

Home Browse Search

the company has been mining for 40 years and the land has been owned by the company for over 100 years. He commented that it was not a multi national corporation; it is not doing anything except what it had been for the past 40 years, and as a family for over 100 years. Cornacchia believed that at the Planning Commission level they had met their burden and could minimize all potential impacts and do what they were doing with the mining previously. Alan Babb, Delta Sand and Gravel, Eugene, stated their application stands on its own merits. He indicated the rules are clear and allow what they are asking for. He said that all goals had been addressed and any conflicts will be mitigated. He said they are asking for only an addition to an existing site. He indicated there would be no change in their operation, no new plants, no additional trucks or truck routes. He said what they are asking for is a longer life for an existing company. He said the land has been owned by various members of the Babb family for over 100 years. He indicated the island they zoned to the north was sand and gravel in 1967. He said the greenway law came in and it took them eight years to solve the issues it brought up. He said as part of their agreement, they gave up 45 acres of mining land to protect the Blue Heron Rookery. He said they have been trustworthy all of their lives. He said they have family wage jobs. He indicated their lowest pay scale is $17.00 per hour and it goes up to $28.00 per hour. He added their benefits are over $700 per month per employee and they are company paid. He stated they are not asking for any public money, but for another 10 to 15 years. Doug DuPriest, Eugene, stated he represented the Narvas. He said by participating tonight, they do not intend to waive the objection they raised at the last meeting. He said there were other issues of concern to the planning commission, including agricultural and wells, groundwater, wetlands, flooding, and the applicants made the point that they supplied another set of the applicant’s documents in the form of a binder. He noted at the Planning Commission hearing, the opponents provided their own rebuttal packet. He said they provided a detailed rebuttal of the evidence before the Planning Commission and legal analysis (letter of March 17). He provided a summary of what the Planning Commissions did. He indicated it lists the steps, the sub issues and the jurisdiction. He noted on Step 2, the Lane County Planning Commission found that the rock was not sufficient. He said in Step 3, with both jurisdictions, the impacts that were of concern were dust, noise, groundwater, wetlands, sensitive habitat and agricultural. He added the Lane County Planning Commission was concerned about flooding. He said neither was concerned about traffic. He said the City of Eugene Planning Commission said no only to dust. He noted the Lane County Planning Commission has concerns as to dust, groundwater, wetlands, sensitive habitat, agricultural and flooding. He said neither had concerns about noise. He thought there were serious concerns about noise that had not been minimized. He noted there was no ESEE analysis related to noise. DuPriest said the question is whether this is the right place. He noted if the elected officials do not agree it is the right place then they must deny it. He said they could try again or try another location. He said the application is based upon a fiction. He said Page 5 – Joint Elected Officials' Meeting – December 12, 2006 WD bc/m/06121/T