Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The Eugene Planning Commission took a straw vote on: Do we believe the wetlands conflict <br />can be minimized through the applicant's proposed conditions? The result of the straw vote <br />was unanimous 5:0. <br /> <br />The Lane County Planning Commission took a straw vote the result of which was 2:4, with <br />Commissioners Becker, Kirkham, Arkin and Siekiel-Zdzienicki voting in opposition. <br /> <br />o Floodinl!: <br /> <br />· Is there a conflict due to flooding? <br /> <br />The Eugene Planning Commission took a straw vote on: Is there a conflictdue to flooding? <br />The result of the straw vote was 2:3, with Commissioners Duncan, Lawless, and Carroll <br />voting in opposition. <br /> <br />The Lane County Planning Commission took a straw vote the result of which was 5: 1, with <br />Commissioner Siekiel-Zdzienicki voting in opposition. <br /> <br />· Do we believe the flooding conflict can be minimized to meet the FEMA standard? <br /> <br />Mr.' Duncan asserted that adherence to FEMA standards would result in minimization of conflicts. <br /> <br />Mr. Cannichaelconcurred with Mr. Duncan. <br /> <br />Mr. Howe stated that FEMA had drawn the line, and the subj~t property was not in the floodway but was in <br />the floodplain. He added that proposal would not raise the floodplain by adding material. Rather, material <br />wQuld be ex~cted, and would not impact the floodplain. <br /> <br />Mr. Belcher stated material would be added by construction of the aquaclude, and could raise the water table. <br />Mr. Howe said the aquaclude would be below groundwater. From the standpoint of this development <br />. ~ontributing to the 100 year floodplain, the concept behind the floodway and floodplain was that all of the <br />floodplain could be completely built and it would not increase the elevation in the floodway by more than <br />one foot. He added the applicant was not proposing any development in the floodway. He said the entire <br />floodplain could be filled, and. it would not 'cause more than one foot of rise in the floodway. These <br />conditions adhered to the FEMA modeling, and would not increase the likelihood of flooding. <br /> <br />Mr. Belcher said the issue was the ability of the subsurface to absorb water and prevent flooding. <br /> <br />Mr. Becker said the question asked if there was a conflict due to flooding, and did not discuss floodplain <br />designations. <br /> <br />Mr. Duncan looked at groundwater or flood potential as something that occurred over a large geographic <br />area, with the aquaclude being relatively small in comparison to where the groundwater and flood water <br />would disperse. Any water that backed up would do so. over se'Yeral miles rather than in a small area; and <br />would not have much impact <br /> <br />Mr. Belcher again expressed his frustration over being asked to take action on an issue in which he was not <br />an expert. He felt. the local effect of placing a dam near housing could be significant if the water was not <br />able to disperse. over a much longer distance. <br /> <br />Ms. Arkin stated the groundwater and surface' water effects could not be separated. She felt strongly the <br />aquaclude could contribute to flooding in residentia1.areas~Additionally, the applicant.had stated.they had <br />