My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 1: JEO Meeting: Delta Sand & Gravel
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 01/16/08 JEO
>
Item 1: JEO Meeting: Delta Sand & Gravel
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:16:05 PM
Creation date
1/17/2008 10:48:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/16/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />ECC <br />UGENE ITY OUNCIL <br />AIS <br />GENDA TEM UMMARY <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Joint Elected Officials Meeting: Delta Sand and Gravel <br /> <br /> <br />Meeting Date: January 16, 2007 Agenda Item Number: 1 <br />Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Kurt Yeiter <br />www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-8379 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />ISSUE STATEMENT <br /> <br />Delta Sand and Gravel applied to the County for an expansion of their quarry operations. That <br />application required review and approval by both the County and the City for a Metro Plan <br />diagram amendment. Separate straw votes by the two governing bodies resulted in different <br />tentative conclusions (the County favoring approval of the application; the City favoring <br />rejection). This meeting was scheduled in response to a September 20, 2007 letter from the chair <br />of the Lane County Board of Commissioners. In the letter, the board states that the final City <br />Council decision could be more informed with information about the County Commissioners’ <br />tentative action, including the conditions on the operation that are designed to minimize the <br />impacts of mining on neighboring residents, and the draft findings in support of the board’s <br />action. <br /> <br />This joint meeting allows the County to have further discussion with the Eugene City Council <br />regarding their decision and the additional information. <br /> <br /> <br />BACKGROUND <br /> <br />The state’s planning rules governing natural resource protections (the “Goal 5” rules) provide a <br />process in OAR 660-023for recognizing significant aggregate resources. The rules define when <br /> <br />a site is to be considered a Goal 5 significant resource, and lists areas of potential impact that <br />must be reviewed when a significant aggregate resource is found to exist on a site. The Goal 5 <br />rule evaluation criteria for an amendment to an approved comprehensive plan, such as the Metro <br />Plan, are separated into seven analytical steps: <br />Step 1. Determine if the application information is adequate. <br />Step 2. Determine if the resource site is significant. <br />Step 3. Determine if conflicts from mining can be minimized. <br />Step 4. Weigh the economic, social, environmental, and energy (“ESEE”) <br />consequences of un-minimized conflicts and determine whether to allow <br />mining. <br />Step 5. Determine the ESEE consequences of potential new conflicting uses within the <br />impact area. <br /> <br /> <br />F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080116\S0801161.DOC1 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.