Laserfiche WebLink
BjOrklund clarified that, when the transition zone was added to the setback, the total distance <br />equaled the height of the typical black cottonwood, or potential tree height. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked if the City could partially protect the salmon habitat in the year before it adopted <br />the regulatory strategy. Mr. BjOrklund said that the City owned more than half the land that would <br />be affected by the strategy, so through its own measures it could provide some protections. He <br />pointed out that the greenway permit process provided for some additional interim protections. In <br />addition, any project in the area that would require a federal permit or federal funding would have <br />to go through review with NOAA Fisheries. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor confirmed with Mr. BjOrklund that if the City could speed its stream corridor acquisition, <br />that would help. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly endorsed the staff-proposed motion as consistent with the council's unanimously <br />adopted resolution. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly applauded the attention given by staff to the integrated pesticide management strategy. <br />He said that the City should do what it can in that area to educate the public about the proper <br />practices to use in pesticide management as there was only so much it could do alone. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said that it appeared that some of the implementation actions related to water quality <br />management from the City's Comprehensive Stormwater Master Plan (CSWMP) had slipped and <br />hoped that those were picked up on. <br /> <br />Regarding the salmon overlay zone, Mr. Kelly wanted the City to do what it could to protect its own <br />land before the zone was officially in place. Mr. BjOrklund indicated that staff would do that <br />through examination of its management plans (strategies D,H). <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said it appeared the design of the overlay zone was a compromise that had flexibility for <br />application on a site-specific basis. He appreciated that flexibility. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 commended the staff work. He noted that the fifth action item related to Strategy A <br />discussed not deepening or widening channels, but such work was proposed at Delta Ponds. Mr. <br />BjOrklund clarified that the text referred to the formal maintenance program the City had, not a <br />restoration scenario. He said that when staff got to the point of drafting text, he would keep that in <br />mind. <br /> <br />Referring to page 14, Mr. Pap8 asked why planning and designing activities for public projects <br />were not evaluated. Mr. BjOrklund said that was because they were not ongoing activities, but <br />one-time activities, such as planning for a street or nodal development. They were more of a <br />"ground-up" design approach, and staff believed that those activities' outcome was more <br />important that the activity itself. If the City had evaluated those activities, it would have <br />considered such things as use of paper and electricity, as opposed to the outcome of the work <br />itself. He confirmed that staff had circulated a draft document that would guide a project manager <br />in evaluating a project at its inception in terms of potential impacts, both positive and negative, on <br />salmon habitat. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap8 questioned how the City could afford to monitor open space for invasive species given <br />other service demands. Mr. Carlson responded that the City was using all available resources to <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 10, 2003 Page 5 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />