[{"_1":2,"_97":-5,"_98":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6699518,"mediaKeyId","5456306-4f1b7352a11f507c933b5646e724c4ec","parentId",5456306,"title","Benton County planning commission unanimously denies Coffin Butte landfill expansion permit","audioSeconds",13226,"startMs",6000,"endMs",13232000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5456306-4f1b7352a11f507c933b5646e724c4ec&start=6&end=13232","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5456306-4f1b7352a11f507c933b5646e724c4ec/thumbnail_6000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6699518/Benton-County/Oregon/Benton-County-planning-commission-unanimously-denies-Coffin-Butte-landfill-expansion-permit","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6699518-a61b89a04021adca1751d4673b0fbf9f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770905961&Signature=dEBnRI~POhbxeP3m9eiSnBpkKRP0-ibxpoNIOxdfARZY3Qtgu8g86na~fv5mnTjVZOLkK7wxnNpnIPaxMpTisgw051fJr0KgilH10zKQFxLTZiEEAFQ7ErglwrrdkuLfIlvZvzuGH3Cj5YZ5-vnDw75UCXBgoeAMfiUMeCgGBgwAWB8vlNHkWWo3W~M~jxIr0xH1perISpbfZgnMvZYvFzJ5DsUMHTHaZs~Z4s7lnX7qYYmF0vGPeQgw~kaP5XKTVeW2TpBvHd5hb8pgLN2-aQveN6YhPbU6DiACeVbMFcC88kmN8dktbaXOlXYy68zXcF~ilXdZdPt~p62cuZxkww__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Benton County, OR","date","2025-07-23T15:53:09.19Z","article","The Benton County Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny a conditional use permit to expand the Coffin Butte Landfill, concluding that the application, as presented, did not meet applicable Benton County Development Code criteria and posed undue burdens on nearby residents and county services. The motion to deny was moved by Commissioner Andrew Struthers and seconded by Vice Chair Hayman; the commission announced a unanimous vote and recessed to adopt written findings at a later meeting.

Commissioners said the record — including dozens of written submissions and public testimony taken over six hearing days — left open significant, unresolved risks tied to odor, noise from blasting and construction, groundwater impacts and leachate treatment, wildfire and fire-response capacity, litter and traffic. Chair Nick Fowler, who praised the applicant’s preparation and staff work in earlier remarks, said he had read the entire record and framed the decision around the county code’s land‑use standards. \"The applicant has not only worked with the county in preparation of their application, but has clearly analyzed the feedback from 2021… This really is an example of how the process should work in conditional use permitting,\" Fowler said during deliberations.

But other commissioners stressed different, persistent gaps. Commissioner Evelyn Lee, who gave a lengthy statement summarizing technical and community concerns, said the application failed the applicant’s burden of proof on groundwater and monitoring and on wildfire planning. \"And that is why I cannot and do not support this application under any conditions of approval,\" Lee said during her closing remarks.

Key concerns cited by commissioners in the record
- Odor: Commissioners said the applicant’s odor modeling had not been reconciled with widespread public testimony that odors already limit residents’ outdoor activities and enjoyment of property. Several commissioners said the record did not show the proposed controls would reliably reduce odor to \"nuisance levels or below.\"
- Noise and blasting: Neighbors testified that blasting and extended construction would stress livestock and harm livelihoods. Commissioners noted the proposal calls for multiple years of preparatory blasting and earthmoving on top of existing operations and said no condition in the record clearly mitigated those construction-phase impacts.
- Groundwater and leachate/PFAS: Commissioners raised unresolved technical questions about fractured basalt hydrogeology on the proposed southern expansion area (the record contains detailed consultant material for the north side but less complete data for the south). They warned excavation could cause permanent dewatering of private domestic wells and questioned whether leachate treatment and long‑term management (including PFAS) had been shown to avoid undue burdens on regional treatment facilities and downstream water users.
- Fire risk and emergency response: The Adair rural fire agency and other testimony reported multiple recent incidents and expressed concern about wildland and landfill fire scenarios, especially the risk from wind‑blown embers. Commissioners said the applicant’s fire‑mitigation approach did not meaningfully address those scenarios or the capacity constraints of local volunteer responders.
- Monitoring and enforcement: Much of the record and commissioners’ statements focused on whether the county — and state/federal regulators — have the capacity to monitor and enforce complex conditions over decades. Commissioners said many proposed conditions were vague on thresholds, baselines and timing and would be difficult to enforce.
- Community character, housing and litter: Commissioners noted rapid residential growth near the site (including Adair Village) and said the expansion would change the character of the area; they cited evidence that litter and airborne particles present hazards for livestock and reduce livability.
- Traffic and infrastructure: Commissioners flagged the record’s traffic analysis as incomplete for construction traffic and the expanded transport of leachate or waste, noting possible increased burden on emergency response and road safety.

What the commission decided and next steps
The commission made an oral decision to deny the conditional use permit and scheduled a reconvened meeting to adopt written findings and formal conclusions of law on July 29, 2025; the notice of that final written decision will be mailed to parties of record. The staff notice read at the end of the session explained that the planning commission’s written findings will be adopted at the July 29 meeting and that any appeal to the Benton County Board of Commissioners must be filed within 14 calendar days after the planning commission adopts those written findings. The staff notice also referenced the county’s board order (D2023-091) governing appeal fees.

Background
The item under deliberation was a continued quasi‑judicial public hearing on land use application LU24027, a conditional use permit request to expand the Coffin Butte Landfill. The hearing record included prior public hearings in April–July, a June 26, 2025 staff report listing applicable Benton County code criteria, and a final written argument from the applicant submitted July 21, 2025. Commissioners repeatedly noted the landfill’s long operating history and previous expansion applications, including a unanimous denial in 2021.

Appeal and public interest
Because the planning commission’s final written decision will not be adopted until the July 29 meeting, the official 14‑day appeal clock begins on adoption of those findings. The decision drew participation from local government officials, state and federal representatives cited in the record, local fire agencies, and scores of residents and organizations who filed testimony or appeared at hearings.

Taper
The commission recessed the meeting to July 29, 2025, for the adoption of written findings and next procedural steps. If adopted as announced, the denial will be followed by the statutory appeal period and possible review by the Benton County Board of Commissioners.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Day 8 Republic Services Conditional Use Permit Application Regarding Coffin Butte Landfill Expansion","oneSentenceSummary","After multiple nights of testimony and six prior hearings, the Benton County Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny Republic Services’ conditional use permit to expand Coffin Butte Landfill, citing unresolved risks on odor, noise, groundwater, fire and county enforcement capacity.","taxTitle","Benton County, Oregon","taxId",8787,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6694860,"Benton County Planning Commission denies Coffin Butte landfill expansion",7948,84000,8032000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5456306-4f1b7352a11f507c933b5646e724c4ec&start=84&end=8032","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5456306-4f1b7352a11f507c933b5646e724c4ec/thumbnail_84000.jpg","/articles/6694860/Benton-County/Oregon/Benton-County-Planning-Commission-denies-Coffin-Butte-landfill-expansion","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6694860-3f6e1f11d427150ce07dfbbfe5f44925/orig.mp4?Expires=1770905961&Signature=HEsd2J65OFT5dJ~da-Nb4wpDXFapShBEztuI7wxn1BA8pTIrOEen3twGPFuLXjlJINGpj9eB7vmVqqTIi8Bq5iaq4~JitkZyFUnq~k8ddeqzx-mHtVvzNe61Xxl8MIVgdQSw0QO3y79GwgsG9S1uMZ7S7TCxu4z9Y51trNL4nYUaZo1lVMoOEe0plhhPB2aHma3GSnSmVTiyuKc7-aOjswQUGp4lSsNzZ4l3T23VYCwrdn548RhgWYqadl81X9m19GiRtblPSCW-qZ4AxijNvXCJWHo9wkrdjujpwWT1C~DtBPOGdelb5CYofTYLMsvRMruYRD8~UJNZyadg-Rnrdg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Benton County Planning Commission on July 29, 2025, voted unanimously to deny Republic Services’ conditional-use permit application (LU 24027) to expand the Coffin Butte Landfill south of Coffin Butte Road. Commissioners said the record contained unresolved, serious risks to nearby residents, farms and county services that conditions of approval did not adequately mitigate.

Commissioners said the decision matters because the expansion would extend landfill life by several years while increasing leachate, truck traffic, dust and emissions in an area that has seen substantial residential growth. Several commissioners said the county lacks the monitoring and enforcement capacity needed to assure long-term mitigation if the expansion were allowed.

In deliberations that followed a multi-day quasi‑judicial hearing, commissioners cited repeated public testimony and technical submissions describing persistent odor events, methane and other fugitive emissions, fire incidents at the site, and uncertainties about groundwater effects on private wells and downstream water users. Chair Fowler told the commission the application and staff record reflected extensive work by the applicant and staff but that unresolved questions remained: “This really is an example of how the process should work in conditional use permitting,” Fowler said, while adding that he could not ignore the remaining concerns on the record.

Commissioner Lee, who spoke at length about geologic and water‑table uncertainties, said the applicant had not met its burden of proof on groundwater impacts. She described a scenario in which excavation and blasting could “dewater” domestic wells because fractured bedrock in the southern expansion area is not uniformly predictable and baseline monitoring was not in place. Lee said the proposed mitigation language requiring property owners to prove a link between operations and well loss would leave neighbors without a practical remedy: “If just one well is destroyed because of this landfill present, we mismanaged by an oversight, mismanagement of oversight, conditions of approval … that is undue burden,” she said.

Commissioners repeatedly raised odor, citing both the applicant’s modeling and substantial public testimony contradicting the model’s conclusions. Several commissioners said models had not been validated with empirical data in the southern expansion area and that reported odor events had limited residents’ outdoor activities and quality of life.

Fire and wildfire risk was a separate, central concern. Commissioners referenced testimony from Adair Rural Fire & Rescue and other witnesses documenting multiple fire responses at or near the landfill and warned that an enlarged working face and years of preparatory blasting and earthmoving could increase the likelihood of fires. Commissioners also said the applicant’s fire plan did not explicitly analyze risk from wind‑blown embers from off‑site wildfires or the consequences of major fires on leachate storage and treatment capacity.

Other issues cited as evidence that the proposal would “seriously interfere” with adjacent uses or impose an undue burden on public facilities included noise from planned long‑term blasting and construction, documented litter along haul routes and adjacent properties, uncertainties about the composition of incoming waste streams (including municipal biosolids and other potentially hazardous material), and traffic and public‑safety impacts from a sustained increase in truck trips.

Several commissioners also questioned whether county, state and federal regulators have the resources needed for long‑term monitoring and enforcement. Commissioners noted the applicant’s offer to fund county monitoring resources but said monitoring alone is not mitigation and that conditions relying primarily on reporting, rather than measurable, enforceable thresholds and funded enforcement, would be insufficient.

Following deliberation, Commissioner Schrothers moved to deny the conditional‑use permit; the motion was seconded and carried on a roll call vote recorded as 7–0 (yes: Chair Fowler; Commissioners Lee, Biscoe, Fulford, Struthers, Wilson and one other commissioner present; no votes 0; absent: Commissioner Cash). The commission scheduled adoption of written findings and conclusions at a noticed meeting on July 29, 2025; the timed notice in the hearing record states the commission’s written decision will be mailed and that any appeal to the Benton County Board of Commissioners must be filed within 14 days of the final written decision.

Next steps: the planning commission will prepare written findings and conclusions reflecting tonight’s oral decision and will hold a meeting to adopt those findings; the record includes staff reports (final staff report dated 06/26/2025) and the applicant’s final written argument (submitted July 21, 2025). The decision is subject to appeal by parties entitled to notice under Benton County code.

Sources for this article are the planning commission’s hearing record and the commission’s deliberations and oral decision recorded in the transcript of the continued quasi‑judicial hearing on LU 24027.","The Benton County Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny Republic Services’ conditional-use permit to expand the Coffin Butte Landfill, citing unresolved risks including odor, groundwater and PFAS concerns, wildfire and fire-response risks, noise from blasting, litter and enforcement capacity.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":79,"_45":91,"_47":92,"_49":82,"_51":93,"_53":94,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":95,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":96,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6694344,"Benton County Planning Commission votes to deny Coffin Butte landfill expansion permit",7951,8035000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5456306-4f1b7352a11f507c933b5646e724c4ec&start=84&end=8035","/articles/6694344/Benton-County/Oregon/Benton-County-Planning-Commission-votes-to-deny-Coffin-Butte-landfill-expansion-permit","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6694344-0852a6ce9b846849388a7f607a32a0f7/orig.mp4?Expires=1770905961&Signature=ZSc5SMMttRpvoOx9SXY~dnVenIsocHH8TYd6wRv6p7kQIon4~tvEp7mOmeIX4YxFHiKyfjMKKggkFYq-vQayTQwzsX345d52SniIAoLmWUeb57BQa1Bwxln7bwV~W9Olm5GzqFLoacBwRZA7RC0DEtafEY05WghEvnlkQdMFtKfsbBoLE9fLgRrAeGKKrLp4wM1ZYUeME8veOUGBRWik7BB7XYftXzyA2Mw9AOsEUW7UmmYehWygwTgObuvV5ioeinH72rH97nPFe22w0Appt7Wc6EOVj8t47vI0wV8nP2VhScn46xPu8noQBGCyOrDVn0kQs5aXj46UmVRo~5V70w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Benton County Planning Commissioners voted unanimously July 22 to deny Republic Services’ conditional use permit application (LU 24027) to expand Coffin Butte Landfill to the area south of Coffin Butte Road. The motion to deny was moved by Commissioner Schrothers and seconded by Vice Chair Hayman; the vote was 6–0 in favor of denial with Commissioner Cash absent.

The commission’s decision followed a multi-hour deliberation that reviewed a multi‑year, multi‑thousand‑page record and testimony from dozens of residents, agencies and experts. Chair Nick Fowler, who participated remotely, praised the process and the quality of the record while stressing that the commission’s role is to apply the Benton County code: “this really is an example of how the process should work in conditional use permitting.”

Commissioners identified several areas where they concluded the applicant had not met the county’s burden of proof under Benton County Code (BCC) 53.215 — namely that the proposed use must not (1) seriously interfere with uses on adjacent properties, (2) alter the character of the area, or (3) impose an undue burden on public improvements, facilities, utilities or services. Commissioners detailed unresolved concerns about groundwater impacts from blasting and expanded leachate, ongoing and episodic odor and methane emissions, multi‑year construction noise (including blasting), increased fire risk, and the county’s and regional partners’ ability to monitor and enforce mitigation conditions effectively.

Commissioner Evelyn Lee summarized groundwater worries as a central reason for her opposition, saying the applicant’s groundwater analysis relied on extrapolations from data north of Coffin Butte Road and untested assumptions about fractured basalt south of the road; she added that potential dewatering during excavation could permanently damage domestic wells and that monitoring provisions in the record did not establish a credible baseline or clear attribution method. Commissioner Lee concluded, “I cannot and do not support this application under any conditions of approval.”

Other commissioners cited the record’s testimony and agency findings on odors and air emissions (including EPA and Department of Environmental Quality involvement), multiple reports of fires and flare events, and evidence that current conditions and historic approvals have not been consistently enforced. Several commissioners said the applicant’s proposed reliance on monitoring, third‑party reporting and post‑event mitigation was insufficient to prevent the harms alleged in testimony.

The commission also highlighted community impacts beyond immediate neighbors. Commissioners referenced growth at nearby Adair Village and other residential areas, and said expanding landfill operations would worsen conflicts between large industrial disposal operations and nearby residential, farming and forest resource uses. Commissioners raised the prospect that increases in leachate, traffic and emissions would strain local emergency services, stormwater and wastewater treatment capacity, and road safety along freight routes to the site.

The motion to deny cited the evidence in the record and commissioners’ findings; the Planning Commission scheduled a follow‑up meeting for July 29, 2025, to adopt written findings of fact and conclusions of law reflecting the oral decision. The decision will not be final until those written findings are adopted; the staff notice of decision and appeal procedures will then follow. The commission’s oral vote was recorded in the meeting and will be included in the formal written decision. Under county procedure an appeal to the Benton County Board of Commissioners must be filed within 14 calendar days of the commission’s final written decision; the staff report cites an appeal fee and a deposit requirement.

Votes at a glance: The Planning Commission voted 6–0 to approve the motion to deny the conditional use permit application (LU 24027). The motion to deny was moved by Commissioner Schrothers and seconded by Vice Chair Hayman. Votes recorded: Nick Fowler (Chair) — yes; Vice Chair Hayman — yes; Commissioner Lee — yes; Commissioner Biscoe — yes; Commissioner Fulford — yes; Commissioner Struthers — yes; Commissioner Wilson — yes. Commissioner Cash was absent.

What happens next: The Planning Commission will adopt written findings and conclusions at a noticed meeting on July 29, 2025. That written decision will be the basis for any appeal to the Benton County Board of Commissioners; the record compiled during the public hearing — including testimony, staff reports and technical exhibits — will remain available on the county’s record platform.

Why it matters: The subject site—Coffin Butte Landfill—serves as a regional disposal facility with operations and environmental impacts that extend beyond Benton County. Commissioners framed the decision not as a commentary on waste policy at large but as an application of the county’s land‑use standards: because several approval criteria were not satisfied to the commission’s satisfaction, the permit was denied. The decision preserves the record for further review if the applicant or other parties appeal.","After hours of deliberation, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny Republic Services' conditional use permit (LU 24027) to expand Coffin Butte Landfill, citing unresolved risks to groundwater, odor, noise, wildfire response and county services.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Benton County planning commission unanimously denies Coffin Butte landfill expansion permit

Benton County Planning Commission denies Coffin Butte landfill expansion

Benton County Planning Commission votes to deny Coffin Butte landfill expansion permit