CC Minutes - 12/12/06 Joint Elected Officials

Home Browse Search

Joel Norva, Eugene, stated he lived adjacent to the pit. He said he had lived on his property for the past 18 years He said in the past five or six years, the City of Eugene had approved and allowed development of the Silver Meadows addition that has 70 new homes. He said when that was done, they cleaned up the waterway that had not been running for the past 18 years, but now runs heavily. He indicated it runs through Silver Meadows to the back of Albertson’s Supermarket on Division Avenue. He thought the aquaclude would cause greater saturation of the land that would last longer. He thought the jobs that are there now will be there in the future. He didn’t think 135 jobs would disappear, the jobs would be there ten more years and after that the same number of jobs would be in the community for digging gravel no matter where the pit is at. He commented that they have another 20 years or more to rehabilitate the pit. He stated that the noise of the pit bothers him. He said when they move to 150 feet from him and his neighbors, the noise will be louder. With there being a conflict, the planning commissions voted 11-0 that it is a conflict and whether it could be mitigated was not the case they were concerned about. He noted the proposed pit is located adjacent to a new elementary school. Mark Reed, Mineral Resource Geologist, Eugene, said his interest was helping to ensure the integrity of scientific input in the making of public policy by adherence to the rules established to protect their best farmland. He said his opinions are founded on 30 years of experience as an economic geologist, including 25 years as professor of geology and geochemistry at the University of Oregon, and three years of full-time work for the Anaconda Cooper Company in Butte, Montana where his responsibility was to decide where to drill holes for exploration of mineral resources, logging of the bore hole cuttings, interpreting drilling results and to decide what sample to take and how to mix samples from a drill hole to make composite samples. He said that was a key issue with regard to the significance question in this case. He said the general sampling principles are simple, universal and common sense that non specialists could understand. He commented that gravel resource in the proposed Delta Sand and Gravel expansion area fails to meet the significance test under the Goal 5 Rule because six of the samples submitted for testing of quality are not representative samples. He indicated the rule requires representative samples and these were not representative. He added the fundamental failing of four EGR samples is that EGR mixed concrete grade rock from the upper unit that is high quality rock with poor grade rock thereby diluting the poor grade rock with the higher grade rock to get a composite that passes the ODOT test. He added the bottom 35 feet may fail the test, he didn’t know. He said the gravel deposit is divided into two units, an upper unit of high quality and the lower unit with low quality. He said the mixing of the two parts is contrary to well established standards for taking representative samples from this type of resource. He said it was an essential part of the significance determination for a deposit of that kind that the quality of the rock be adequate to justify sacrificing the Class 1 and 2 farm soils on the surface. He stated the reason for the Goal 5 Rule is to make a fair trade for the farm land. He commented that the test of quality is a fundamental importance under the law. He said that was the key issue that needed to be addressed. He said the basics of representative sampling are outlined in a set of national standards from the American Society of Testing Materials, the Army Corps of Engineers and the American Association of State Highway and Page 8 – Joint Elected Officials' Meeting – December 12, 2006 WD bc/m/06121/T