Item 2A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Amazon Creek as well as the Willamette River, but no new monitoring stations were planned within all of the waterways. Ms. Bettman asked if the cost of implementing the ordinance would be paid from the stormwater fund. Ms. Walch said implementing the Water Quality Protected Waterways could be accomplished within existing resources in Planning and Development and Public Works. Ms. Bettman asked what share of existing resources would be used to implement the ordinance. She wanted a specific number. Ms. Walch said additional resource impact had not been quantified because implementa- tion would use existing resources. Ms. Bettman asked who had appealed the original ordinance to the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). Ms. Jerome said that it may have been multiple parties, one of which was Rest Haven Cemetery. She said the current proposal had not attracted the same level of controversy. Mr. Poling asked how mitigation could be accomplished by a property owner, such as a telecommunications company which needed to increase the size of a satellite dish base, if the property was already fully developed. Ms. Walch said the details of mitigation were not yet developed, but there could be options such as using adjoining property or property owned by a public agency, or payment in lieu of. Ms. Taylor felt the ordinance did not do enough and preferred something similar to the ordinance remanded by LUBA or purchasing buffer zones. She asked what would happen if the ordinance was not adopted. Ms. Walch said staff would meet with the Department of Environmental Quality to consider what other options might be available to the City. Ms. Taylor said she could understand not requiring a property owner to tear down a house, but was very disturbed about exempting landscaped areas, which she felt could be easily returned to a natural state to avoid the use of chemicals. She said there was nothing to prevent people from planting more landscaping. Ms. Walch said the ordinance was written to exempt landscaped areas in response to testimony received from the public. Ms. Ortiz said residents of River Road and Santa Clara were interested in natural bioswales under the minor code amendments process and asked how that related to the proposed ordinance. Ms. Jerome said it would depend on whether or not waterways in that area were included on the map, but she would need to research the matter. Ms. Walch clarified that the ordinance would apply to waterways that were within the City limits and to specific properties outside the City limits but within the urban growth boundary upon annexation. Ms. Solomon appreciated Mr. Clark’s discussion of purchasing conservation easements as an ordinance. She was concerned about decisions that would be made in the administrative rules process and hoped for more time to consider that. She asked if a property owner could rebuild a house as it was if it burned down. Ms. Walch said the house could be rebuilt. Ms. Solomon said she was still not convinced the ordinance was good policy. Mr. Clark said there was restoration work being done along Spring Creek currently. He said the ordinance would affect what property owners would be able to do with their property in the future. Ms. Walch clarified that Spring Creek and Flat Creek were covered by Goal 5 and not included in the ordinance. MINUTES—Eugene City Council June 18, 2008 Page 4 Work Session