Item A: Water Quality Waterways - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attachment A Staff Response to Public Testimony and City Council K. Presence of a WQ Waterway would significantly alter the design and Yes, the proposed ordinance will affect the location of a future building unless it is designed to be in the footprint of an existing structure. However, there is flexibility location of a building; lots will be rendered smaller with respect to within the ordinance that would allow certain improvements that would not adversely affect water quality. In addition, adjustments are allowed for uses and activities buildable acres (21) within the WQ Management Area for situations where the WQ Management area affects the parcel by more than 33%, or where the parcel is physically constrained. L. Who maintains the setback? (T, CC) This proposal would not change the current responsibility for maintenance. If the City (or Lane County or ODOT) owns the /WQ Management Area, the City (or Lane GAJS County or ODOT, respectively) would be responsible for maintenance. If it is privately owned, the homeowner would maintain it. If it is a mix of ownership, then each portion is maintained according to ownership. If the City has a stormwater conveyance easement, the City would maintain the conveyance function (make sure the waterway conveys runoff, does not flood, or cause property damage) but the City does not provide vegetation maintenance beyond the conveyance function in this case. In general, the conditions of an easement would determine the responsibility for maintenance. II. Ordinance A. Would the ordinance require existing development located within the No. The proposed ordinance does not require existing non-conforming uses to be removed if they were legally created prior to the adoption of the proposed /WQ regulated area to be removed if the use is not otherwise permitted regulations. These uses include lawns, fences, patios, and decks to name a few. Minor repairs and routine maintenance are permitted, and are subject to standards under the proposed /WQ regulations? (CC) contained in EC 9.1200 through 9.1240. BB B. For existing structures, what if they are damaged or need repairs See response to II.A above. Provided the existing structure meets the definition of and qualifies as a legal non-conforming structure, the proposed /WQ ordinance requiring permits.... would this ordinance affect our ability to get a would not prevent the routine maintenance and minor repair of the structure as outlined in EC.9.1200 through 9.1240. building permit? (15) If a setback would impact what we can do with our property or that requires us to make changes to our property (fences, decks, etc) then we object. (7) C. Existing fences – can they be maintained, repaired, replaced? (T, Yes. Fences located within the regulated area that were legally established prior to the effective date of the ordinance are considered legal nonconforming uses or JM CC) structures and are subject to EC 9.1200 through 9.1240. In general, minor repairs and routine maintenance can be made to legal nonconforming uses and structures. AZ Replacing a nonconforming use or structure is permitted but only if the cause of the replacement was due to catastrophic circumstances outside the control of the owner, such as a fire or storm, and the cost of the replacement is at least 50% of the value of the nonconforming structure. Because the current version of the proposed ordinance is not clear on this issue, staff has prepared edits to subsection 9.4780(2) to ensure clarity. See AIS Attachment D. ? D. For existing development including walls, fences, retaining walls – See responses to II.A, II.B, and II.C above. give reasonable consideration to properties developed prior to proposed regulations, and development that does not adversely affect the functioning of the waterway. (17) E. Can existing lawns be mowed? (CC) Yes. See draft ordinance 9.4780(2)(a)2. JS F. Expansion of existing telecommunication facilities in /WQ This topic is directly related to the COBI property. The existing ordinance classifies telecommunication facilities as areas to be “excluded” if they exist within the /WQ management area should be permitted due to federal requirements to area prior to the adoption of /WQ. Preference expressed by Council to staff at the public hearing was to enable the expansion via “use” and not as an excluded area. expand services. (10) Staff has prepared proposed changes to subsection 9.4780(2) that would enable it as a permitted use within /WQ area. Two alternatives are provided for Council consideration and direction, as described in the AIS (with the only difference between the alternatives being whether or not the impacts water quality function must be mitigated). See AIS Attachment C-1 and C-2. ? G. Clarify terminology related to utility facilities (14) Testimony suggested alternate verbiage to clarify terms related to utility facilities. Staff concurs and proposes modification to the ordinance. See AIS Attachment E. ? H. Clarify the “disturbance within 50 feet of WQ Management Area” The purpose of this provision is to clearly establish the physical location of the outer limits of the /WQ boundary so that any proposed new development located provision. (12) adjacent to but outside the regulated area does not unintentionally encroach into and impact the /WQ area. Once the demarcation has been established and verified by the City, the proposed new development may proceed. WQ Protected Waterways Attachment A to June 18, 2008 AIS (page 4 of 6)