Admin Order 58-12-14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SECTION 3 Flood Control Euaination Total Drywells: 79 72 * In the regulatory context, drywells are referred to as Underground Injection Controls (UICs). The terms drywell and UIC are used interchangeably in this document. 3.5.3 Selected Development Standard Alternatives As part of the Storm Drainage Master Plans that were completed in 2002, detailed analyses were conducted with regards to the potential implementation of development standards to address identified flooding issues (i.e., capacity deficiencies). For each of the basins, the estimated costs to address flooding problems through public capital projects was compared with the estimated costs to address flooding problems through a combination of both capital projects and the implementation of on -site controls required for private development. As a result of these analyses, development standards to address capacity deficiencies (through on -site controls for private development) were not selected for implementation (see Section 3.3 of the Eugene Stormwater Basin Master Plan, Volumes II -VII for more information). The reason for this decision was that most of the identified flooding problems were anticipated to occur as a result of existing developed conditions. While future development would exacerbate some of the problems, a capital project would already be required to address existing condition flooding, and increasing the size of the capital project to address flows from future development was more cost effective than requiring developers to address the issue through on -site storage requirements. For this basin, the conclusions from this previous analysis were assumed to apply. Note: It should be noted that in the City and County, stormwater system improvements are currently designed to meet conveyance design criteria based upon the size of the drainage area and the type of system (closed or open) being improved. Conveyance design criteria will still apply to new development and re- development, to provide the appropriate level of protection from the risk of flooding and a consistent level of service city -wide. See Eugene Stormwater Basin Master Plan, Volume I Sections 3.1.4 and 4.3.2 for more information. 0:\25695978 Eugene RR -SC Final Basin P1an\Master P1anTINAL 2- 2010\Master_Plan 3- 11- 10_FINAL_ Word _Version.doc 3-15 # of # of City County CP/ Cluster Number Drywells Drywells CP Project Option Selected CP/ Cluster Name 'Addressed Addressed b the CP by the CP Flat Creek Major Su basin FC -I -UIC FC -2 -UIC FC -3 -UIC 12 Rain Garden/Infiltration Facility Willowbrook 1, 2, and 3 UIC Cluster FC -4 -UIC 5 Rain Garden/Infiltration Facility Maesner UIC Cluster Total Drywells: 79 72 * In the regulatory context, drywells are referred to as Underground Injection Controls (UICs). The terms drywell and UIC are used interchangeably in this document. 3.5.3 Selected Development Standard Alternatives As part of the Storm Drainage Master Plans that were completed in 2002, detailed analyses were conducted with regards to the potential implementation of development standards to address identified flooding issues (i.e., capacity deficiencies). For each of the basins, the estimated costs to address flooding problems through public capital projects was compared with the estimated costs to address flooding problems through a combination of both capital projects and the implementation of on -site controls required for private development. As a result of these analyses, development standards to address capacity deficiencies (through on -site controls for private development) were not selected for implementation (see Section 3.3 of the Eugene Stormwater Basin Master Plan, Volumes II -VII for more information). The reason for this decision was that most of the identified flooding problems were anticipated to occur as a result of existing developed conditions. While future development would exacerbate some of the problems, a capital project would already be required to address existing condition flooding, and increasing the size of the capital project to address flows from future development was more cost effective than requiring developers to address the issue through on -site storage requirements. For this basin, the conclusions from this previous analysis were assumed to apply. Note: It should be noted that in the City and County, stormwater system improvements are currently designed to meet conveyance design criteria based upon the size of the drainage area and the type of system (closed or open) being improved. Conveyance design criteria will still apply to new development and re- development, to provide the appropriate level of protection from the risk of flooding and a consistent level of service city -wide. See Eugene Stormwater Basin Master Plan, Volume I Sections 3.1.4 and 4.3.2 for more information. 0:\25695978 Eugene RR -SC Final Basin P1an\Master P1anTINAL 2- 2010\Master_Plan 3- 11- 10_FINAL_ Word _Version.doc 3-15