CC Minutes - 09/13/99 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Kelly acknowledged the importance of the erosion program and thanked staff for bringing the proposal before the council. He urged implementation as soon as possible. Mr. Lee praised staf?s work and wondered if the proposed ordinance was consistent with what was being done at the federal level. Mr. Lyle indicated that the one-acre permit threshold was consistent with expected requirements from EPA for stormwater NPDES permits; however, the City was not proposing further program changes due to the uncertainty of what other changes the EPA might require. Ms. Nathanson noted that the agenda item summary described this as an outcome-based program yet there are no measures identified in the document. She said one of the reasons for the lack of measures was that the information was not collected. She said she hoped the proposed changes are implemented and that staff collects the information necessary to develop those measures. Mr. Lyle explained the difficulty in collecting measurable information, however, staff intended to enhance its database regarding complaints, permit and non-permit violations, etc. Ms. Nathanson asked about the court system's involvement. City Attorney Glenn Klein said the administrative civil penalty process was adopted for its expediency. He explained that the court process was time-consuming and costly because it required that the City file a lawsuit. Ms. Nathanson called attention to the DAC's ideas listed on page 40 of the packet and wondered if staff would be following up on those. Mr. Lyle said staff planned to address those suggestions and report back to the group. Mr. Rayor pointed out areas of concern with the document, specifically with notification prior to wet weather construction and the expense-based method of determining if erosion controls were required. He expressed support for the DAC's ideas. Mr. Meisner said he was most interested in the program's goals and would leave the details to staff. He said he was delighted about the significant education component of the program. Mr. Meisner moved, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, to approve the scope of changes of the summary abatement and civil penalty/permit provisions; and direct staff to return to the council for a public hearing on the proposed code changes; and direct staff to work with the Stormwater DAC subcommittee to finalize refinements to the proposed program changes. Addressing a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Lyle said plots too small to require a permit are nonetheless subject to the program outcomes and penalties. In response to a question from Mr. Pap6, Mr. Klein said violators may appeal a hearings official's decision to the Circuit Court. The motion passed unanimously, 7:0. At Mr. Rayor's request, Mr. Lyle explained the next steps in the process, saying staff would take the council's input to the DAC and refine the program recommendations. He said there would be a separate public hearing for the recommended code changes for enforcement. Staff will return to the council for review and adoption of any code changes necessary for the program recommendations. Mr. Lyle also indicated staff would review section 2.2 of the outcome fact sheet with the DAC. B. Work Session: Bus Rapid Transit Minutes--Eugene City Council September 13, 1999 Page 2 5:30 p.m.