CC Minutes - 06/21/00 Work Session

Home Browse Search

concludes that an interim approach is appropriate, adopt the Waterside Protection provisions now applicable in the West Eugene Wetlands Plan area as the interim approach, and that the City rely on the Metropolitan Area Natural Resources Study as the appropriate planning process for evaluating and deciding on a long-term setback provision. As an alternative approach, the Land Use Code update could also be amended to protect open waterways and providing setbacks in the long-term. Mr. Lyle recommended that the interim provisions be focused on restricting structures from being built in the setback areas, and that the provisions be applied to vacant and partially developed sites. Mr. Lyle reported that staff sought input from the Stormwater Management Department Advisory Committee and the Planning Commission on the recommendation; that input was summarized in the agenda item summary. The committee supported the scope of work with some concerns expressed by committee members about the resource impacts of the effort. The commission favored a phased approach, and subsequently recommended that staff map all vacant and partially developed sites and overlay the map with the stream corridors of concern and the buffer dimensions required by the Waterside Protection code provisions, and use that information to determine the buildable lands impact. The commission also asked staff to examine the Land Use Code as another venue for addressing the problem. Mr. Lyle said that staff supported the commission recommendations, which were reflected in Option 2 in the meeting packet. Ms. Childs briefly reviewed the discussion of the Planning Commission regarding the issue of interim provisions, which was also reflected in draft Planning Commission minutes distributed to the council. She said the commission recognized that the imposition of buffers was a land use decision. Because of that and the process implications, the commission wanted more information about how extensive the approach would be, and the impacts of the longer term work program before directing staff to proceed. Ms. Childs said that the commission had some concern about the potential of duplication of effort and public confusion because the Metropolitan Area Natural Resources Study was also in process. Mr. Johnson said that there were many ongoing related efforts with similar time frames. He thought the commission's recommendations were very good. Responding to a question from Ms. Taylor, City Attorney Glenn Klein said the issue of interim buffers must be processed by the commission because it involved a land use regulation. Ms. Taylor was concerned that development would occur that affected streams by the time the commission finished its work. She thought 20 feet was inadequate for a stream buffer. Mr. Lyle responded that there was considerable discussion at the DAC and commission about the size of the buffer and a variety of different opinions were expressed. One commissioner recognized that most intermittent streams were located in the headwaters of the south hills, and believed the planned unit development (PUD) process offered the City an opportunity to protect those waterways to a greater degree than interim buffers. The analysis requested by the commission would give members a sense of the scope of the issue. Ms. Childs pointed out that such analysis was typically done at the start of a project, and it would not unduly delay what would be needed to complete the work on interim buffers. Mr. Lee supported the commission's recommendations. He said that the Waterside Protection provisions had precedent and now would be applied citywide rather than only in west Eugene. MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 21, 2000 Page 10 Work Session