CC Minutes - 06/23/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Bj0rklund reported that a safe harbor inventory would be based on data provided by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) regarding fish bearing streams. Regarding the data provided by the ODFW, Mr. Bj0rklund clarified that most of the identified fish-bearing waterways had not been surveyed for the presence of fish. Under the safe harbor approach, upland sites included on the inventory would be only those sites that contained a listed, threatened, or endangered species, or that contained threatened habitat. He said that Eugene's upland sites contain no such features, and under the safe harbor approach none would be on the inventory. Mayor Torrey called for council questions. Ms. Solomon determined from Mr. Bj0rklund that the areas outlined in red on the map were known to have fish. Responding to a question from Mr. Kelly, Mr. Bj0rklund said that if the City chose the safe harbor approach to the uplands sites, those sites would be removed from the inventory and would no longer be considered significant. Mr. Kelly determined from Mr. Radabaugh that if the safe harbor approach was taken, the City would have to do a complete survey of the community's riparian areas and waterways to determine if a stream was fish bearing. Mayor Torrey called for a first round of comments. Ms. Nathanson suggested that one could argue that the community found the uplands significant and acknowledged that through its stream corridor acquisitions and protections, ridegeline acquisitions, erosion control and tree cutting ordinances. She suggested that the difference was one of significance with a capital "S" and significance with a lower-case "s." Mr. Bj0rklund agreed. He said that the word "significant" had a specific legal meaning and purpose in Goal 5. The council could determine it was assigning significance to certain sites, but that did not mean they did not have value or wildlife habitat functions. The community had the option to determine what it wanted to assign the significance status to and carry through the process. Mr. Bj0rklund noted that the DLCD did not recommend using the safe harbor approach to waterways containing listed species. That included the Willamette River and some of its side tributaries. Ms. Bettman reminded the council that the inventory was a legal issue. The City had a remand from LUBA regarding the code that awaited the outcome of the inventory. If the council followed through with the staff recommendation to apply the safe harbor approach to the uplands, it would be inventorying 994 acres, half of which was the Willamette River. There would be no protections for the south hills. She noted that 1,000 acres of the uplands sites were public lands and some were near the ridgeline trail. She did not believe the safe harbor approach would protect anything. She believed that the City had already rolled back code provisions for trees and other natural resources and she did not think the City Council should pretend the uplands sites would be protected in another way. Ms. Bettman asked how many sites in the inventory would be taken off because of testimony that they were not significant or had already been developed. Mr. Bj0rklund said that no sites would be dropped in their entirety, only portions of sites. Ann Siegenthaler of the Planning Division estimated that 50 parcels were reviewed following the latest round of testimony, and 30 to 40 of those sites warranted an adjustment to the inventory. Responding to a question from Ms. MINUTES - Eugene City Council June 23, 2003 Page 7 Work Session