HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdmin Order 58-09-07-FADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 58-09-07-F
of the
City Manager of the City of Eugene
ADOPTION OF /WQ WATER QUALITY OVERLAY ZONE RULE R-
9.4770.
The City Manager of the City of Eugene finds that:
A. Section 2.019 of the Eugene Code, 1971 authorizes the City Manager to adopt
rules for implementation of any provisions of that Code. Sections 9.4770 through 9.4790,
establishing the /WQ Water Quality Overlay Zone, its purpose, applicability, siting requirements,
permitted and prohibited uses and a process for map correction or removal of the /WQ Overlay
Zone, were added to the Eugene Code, 1971 (EC) by Ordinance No. 20430, adopted on March 9,
2009, and will become effective on June 10, 2009.
B. Section 25 of Ordinance No. 20430 adopts the electronic Water Quality
Waterways Map, which depicts the location of lot lines, applicable setback measurement points
(centerline or top of high bank) and Water Quality Management Areas. EC 9.4778(1)(d) directs
the City Manager to adopt an administrative rule describing the procedures the City used to map
the /WQ setbacks on the Water Quality Waterways Map. Pursuant to EC 9.4786(2), the City
shall consider the procedures described in the administrative rule when it reviews any future
requests for a Water Quality Waterways Map correction or a request for removal of the /WQ
Overlay Zone.
C. Pursuant to 9.4780(2), 9.4780(3), and 9.8030(25), some uses, activities and
adjustments within the /WQ Overlay Zone can be allowed/approved if the applicant submits a
certification that after the use, activity or adjustment is in place, there will be a water quality
function rating equal to or greater than the subject lot's rating before the use, activity or
adjustment. This certification must be based on a Water Quality Function Rating System that,
pursuant to EC 9.4782, is contained in administrative rules adopted by the City Manager in
accordance with EC 2.019.
D. Pursuant to EC 2.019, on May 11, 2009, I issued Administrative Order No. 58-09-
07 proposing the adoption of /WQ Water Quality Overlay Zone Rule R-9.4770 effective June 10,
2009.
E. Notice of the proposed Rule adoption was published in the Register -Guard
Newspaper on May 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16, 2009. In addition, Notice was provided to the Mayor
and City Council, made available to any person who had requested the notice, and made
available for review at the Public Works Department, 99 E. Broadway, Suite 400, Eugene,
Oregon, 97401. The Notice provided that written comments would be received for a period of
15 days from the date of posting and publication, or at the public hearing to be held on May 27,
2009, at 4 p.m. in the Lyle Conference Room on the fourth floor of the Public Works
Department, 99 E. Broadway, Eugene, Oregon. There were no attendees at the public hearing,
Administrative Order - Page 1 of 12
however, two written comments were received. A summary of the comments and my response
to the comments are as follows:
Comments from William Heady: William Heady submitted comments by letter
dated May 27, 2009. He requested a realignment of the Water Quality Management Area
established by Ordinance No. 20430, and expressed his dissatisfaction that the Water
Quality Management Area cuts off access to a half -acre lot of residentially zoned land
within the Eugene City limits.
Response: Mr. Heady's comments are directed to Ordinance No. 20430 which
was adopted on March 9, 2009. Because his comments do not address concerns
regarding the proposed Water Quality Waterways Administrative Rule, no changes are
being made to the Rule as a result of these comments.
Comments from Barbara Combs: Barbara Combs submitted the following
comments by letter dated May 27, 2009:
Comment 1: She was unable to find a copy of Ordinance No. 20430 so as to
refer to Code references that were cited in the proposed Rule.
Response: Ordinance No. 20430 was adopted on March 9, 2009, with an
effective date of June 10, 2009, and, therefore, had not been incorporated into the City
Code during the time that comments were being accepted. However, the Ordinance was
posted on the Water Quality Waterways web page, and is posted on the City's weblink
for City documents. In addition, an informational postcard with the web address and staff
contact information was sent to all affected property owners and interested persons in
March, 2009. No amendment to the Rule is necessary as a result of this comment.
Comment 2: She felt that Water Quality Overlay Zones for properties that are
not within the city limits should not be established at this time.
Response: This comment is directed to Ordinance No. 20430, which has been
adopted. Because the comment does not address concerns regarding the proposed Water
Quality Waterways Administrative Rule, no changes are being made to the Rule as a
result of this comment.
Comment 3: She believes that requirements for lots of less than one-half acre
along seasonal ditches should be simplified; Rule should not require placement of trees
where they might damage a house.
Response: The requirement to mitigate for impacted water quality function, and
the list of professionals authorized to develop the certification, report or determination of
water quality function mitigation are described in Ordinance Number 20430. The
proposed Rule describes the water quality function mitigation process and provides
options for how impacted function can be mitigated, including enhancing vegetation, but
it is not prescriptive in that it does not specify the exact measures that must be taken.
Administrative Order - Page 2 of 12
With respect to vegetation enhancement as an option for mitigating impacted water
quality function, the proposed Rule gives "credit" for planting trees but does not
specifically require that trees be planted. No change to the Rule is necessary as a result
of these comments.
Comment 4: She opined that those who raised issues about the overlay zone with
respect to their property prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 20430 and whose
concerns have not been addressed, should not be subject to a formal process to change the
overlay zone.
Response: The City Council considered all testimony received, as well as staff s
responses to comments, prior to taking action on the Water Quality Overlay Zone. In
response to testimony that waterway alignments were incorrectly shown on the City's
maps, staff reviewed the 2004 aerial photographs, the City's waterway system data, and
conducted either a drive-by verification or a site visit when necessary and upon property
owner authorization. (See City Council memo dated June 18, 2008, Attachment A: "Staff
Response to Public Testimony and City Council.") The Council memo, public testimony,
and other related information is available on the City's web site: http://www.eugene-
or.gov/wqpw. If the City did err in mapping a Water Quality Waterway, the proposed
amendment of land use application fee schedule includes the following provision for
Water Quality Overlay Zone map correction or removal of overlay zone: "Application fee
to be refunded in full if final decision approves the application pursuant to EC
9.4786(2)(a)." No change to the Rule is necessary as a result of this comment.
Now, therefore, based on the above findings and the findings attached hereto as Exhibit
A, which are adopted in support of this Administrative Order, and pursuant to the authority
contained in Section 2.019 of the Eugene Code, 1971, the /WQ Water Quality Overlay Zone
Administrative Rule R-9.4770 is adopted effective June 10, 2009, to provide as follows:
/WQ WATER QUALITY OVERLAY ZONE
ADMINISTRATIVE RULE R-9.4770
R -9.4770-A Purpose. It is the purpose of this Rule to: (a) describe the procedures
used for mapping the setbacks on the Water Quality Waterways Map, to be considered when
evaluating a request submitted pursuant to EC 9.4786; and (b) establish a Water Quality Rating
System that includes procedures for evaluating a specific Water Quality Management Area's
water quality function based on the presence or frequency of enumerated characteristics.
R -9.4770-B Definitions. For purposes of these rules, the following words and phrases
mean:
1. 303(d) waterway. A waterway identified pursuant to section 303(d) of the
federal Clean Water Act that, on March 9, 2009, was not already protected by the
NR Natural Resource Zone, the /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay
Administrative Order - Page 3 of 12
Zone, /WP Waterside Protection Overlay Zone or /WB Wetland Buffer Overlay
Zone.
2. Headwater stream. A natural or constructed waterway that, on March 9, 2009:
(a) Had all or a portion of their length on slopes greater than 10%;
(b) Was a minimum of 500 feet in length including infrastructure culverts;
(c) Provided stormwater drainage for an upstream area of 10 acres or more;
(d) Had discernable streambed and side banks;
(e) Carried water at least part of the year;
(f) Provided a drainage function for surface runoff from land areas beyond a
roadway;
(g) If ponded, had an inlet and outlet drainage function; and
(h) Was not already protected by the NR Natural Resource Zone, the /WR
Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone, /WP Waterside Protection
Overlay Zone or /WB Wetland Buffer Overlay Zone.
3. Streambank instability. Streambank instability is characterized by the erosion
and eventual sloughing of bank material onto the bed of the waterway. This may
be caused by such things as removal of riparian vegetation or physical disturbance
of the sloped area within a waterway channel, or where the toe of a bank slope is
undermined by bed incision.
4. Streambed downeutting. Also referred to as incision, streambed downcutting is
the vertical erosion of the channel bed leading to increased channel confinement
and deepening of the bed, often characterized by small channels or rills in the
early stages and deep, wide gullies in later stages. This may be caused by such
things as the loss of riparian vegetation or changes in stream flow.
5. Tributary to a 303(d) waterway. A natural or constructed waterway that, on
March 9, 2009:
(a) Directly connected to a 303(d) waterway;
(b) Was in an open condition, except for existing culverts installed to enable
waterway crossings for public and private infrastructure including, but not
limited to, railroads, streets, driveways, parking lots, sanitary sewer mains,
stormwater mains, water mains, gas mains, or electrical conduits and
existing stormwater pipes less than 100 feet in length;
(c) Had discernable streambed and side banks;
(d) Carried water at least part of the year;
(e) Provided a drainage function for surface runoff from land areas beyond a
roadway;
(f) If ponded, had an inlet and outlet drainage function; and
(g) Was not already protected by the NR Natural Resource Zone, the /WR
Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone, /WP Waterside Protection
Overlay Zone or /WB Wetland Buffer Overlay Zone.
6. Water Quality Waterways. The waterways depicted on the City's adopted
Water Quality Waterways Map.
Administrative Order - Page 4 of 12
R -9.4770-C Water Quality Waterways Map — Mapping Procedures. Pursuant to
EC 9.4786(2) and EC 9.4778(1), approval of an application to correct the Water Quality
Waterways Map must be based, in part, on consideration of the procedures the City used for
mapping the setback areas on that Map. This Section sets out those procedures. All mapping
relates to conditions in place on March 9, 2009, the date the City Council approved Ordinance
20430.
1. Waterway Location. The location of each water quality waterway depicted on
the adopted Water Quality Waterways Map ("the Map") was initially determined
based on the City of Eugene's open waterways data file referred to as "DOPEN"
and verified, with any necessary modifications, through aerial photography and
field visits where access was granted by property owners.
2. Map Setback Measurement Point by Waterway Category:
2.1. Tributary to 3 03(d) waterway. As provided at EC 9.4778(1)(b), the
setback for tributaries to 303(d) waterways was measured from the
waterway's top of high bank (THB). THB was identified at the highest
point at which the vertical rise of the waterway bank met the horizontal
grade of the adjoining topography. THB location was identified and
digitized into a Geographic Information System (GIS) shape file using a
combination of the City's DOPEN file, 2004 aerial photography, and 2
foot contour elevations. The location of the setback measurement point
was identified on the adopted Water Quality Waterways Map.
2.2. Headwater stream. As provided at EC 9.4778(1)(c), the setback for
headwater streams was measured from the stream's centerline. The
location of stream centerline was based on the City of Eugene's DOPEN
file.
3. Map Setback Area by Waterway Catel4ory:
3.1. Tributary to 303(d) waterway. Based on the location of the setback
measurement point and per EC 9.4778(1)(b), 25 foot setback areas were
identified on the Water Quality Waterways Map extending landward from
the THB on each side of the waterway's channel, forming GIS polygons.
These setback area polygons constitute a portion of the overall water
quality management area mapped for tributaries to 303(d) waterways
included on the adopted Water Quality Waterways Map. The other
component of the Water Quality Management Area for tributaries to
303(d) waterways is the waterway's channel which, pursuant to EC
9.4778(1)(a), is that area located between the THB on each side of the
waterway. This channel area was identified by creating a GIS polygon
that connects and encloses the area between the two THBs and was also
depicted on the adopted Water Quality Waterways Map.
Administrative Order - Page 5 of 12
3.2. Headwater stream. Based on the location of the setback measurement
point and per EC 9.4778(1)(c), 40 foot setback areas were identified on the
Water Quality Waterways Map extending landward in both directions
from the stream centerline, forming GIS polygons. This setback area
constitutes the entire water quality management area for Headwater
Streams and was included on the adopted Water Quality Waterways Map.
4. The Water Quality Waterways Map, adopted as Exhibit A-1 to Ordinance No.
20430, is a Portable Document Format (PDF) file created from the geographic
data layers referenced in sections 1-3 above. The City has retained the geographic
data layers from which the Water Quality Waterways Map was produced and they
are available for reference in interpreting the Water Quality Waterways Map.
5. Upon final approval of a change pursuant to EC 9.4780(3)(b)5, 9.4786 or
9.8030(25) necessitating an update to the Water Quality Waterways Map, the
Planning Director or the Planning Director's designee, shall record at Lane
County Deeds and Records a notice of the decision, prepare an updated Map
indicating the date of the update and enter the date of the update with a reference
to the underlying decision document on a log to be maintained by the City.
R -9.4770-D Water Quality Function Rating System. Pursuant to EC 9.4782, when
EC 9.4780(2), 9.4780(3) or 9.8030(25) requires the submittal of a certification, report or
determination based on the city's Water Quality Function Rating System, the following
provisions apply.
1. Preparer. The required certification, report or determination shall be prepared by
one or more of the professionals described at EC 9.4782(2).
2. Content. The required certification, report or determination shall be composed of
the following four components:
2.1. Site Plan I — Pre -Proposal Conditions. The purpose of this site plan is to
illustrate the location and extent of the water quality function features as
they exist on the subject lot prior to the proposed use, activity or
adjustment and mitigation measures. The illustrations on this site plan
must correspond with the pre -proposal rating calculations shown on the
Water Quality Function Rating Table described in Section 2.3 of this rule.
2.1.1. This site plan must be submitted on a sheet of paper that can be
folded to 8.5" x 11" and must be prepared at a scale sufficient for
showing the details described at section 2.1.2., below.
2.1.2. This site plan shall include the following:
Administrative Order - Page 6 of 12
(a) The lot lines, dimensions, and lot area at the locations
shown on the City's Water Quality Waterways Map;
(b) The waterway channel area, applicable setback
measurement point (THB or centerline), and setback area at
the locations shown on the City's Water Quality
Waterways Map;
(c) Existing uses or activities within the lot's Water Quality
Management Area, including the dimensions and area of
those uses or activities (field or aerial photo verified);
(d) Any areas excluded from the lot's Water Quality
Management Area pursuant to EC 9.4778;
(e) Existing uses on the lot located outside, and within 50 feet
of, the Water Quality Management Area (field or aerial
photo verified);
(f) Existing trees, shrubs, and other low-level plantings (e.g.
forbs, grasses, rushes and ferns) within the lot's Water
Quality Management Area, including extent of cover,
species composition, and distribution (verified with site
photo looking up or downstream at the waterway or aerial
photo);
(g) Location of existing indicators of streambank instability
and streambed downcutting (field verified) on the lot, if
applicable.
2.2. Site Plan II - Post -proposal conditions. The purpose of this site plan is to
illustrate the lot's water quality function condition with the proposed use,
activity or adjustment and the completion and maturity of any proposed
mitigation measures. The illustrations on this site plan must correspond
with the post -proposal rating calculations shown on the Water Quality
Function Rating Table described in Section 2.3 of this rule.
2.2.1. This site plan must be submitted on a sheet of paper that can be
folded to 8.5" x 11" and must be prepared at a scale sufficient for
showing the details described at section 2.2.2., below.
2.2.2. This site plan shall include the following:
(a) The information described in sections 2.1.2.(a) -(c) above;
(b) If an adjustment to the setback area is proposed pursuant to
EC 9.8030(25)(a) or (b), the dimensions and area of the
proposed setback area;
(c) If uses or activities are proposed pursuant to EC
9.4780(2)(f)4, EC 9.4780(2)(h)12; EC 9.4780(3)(b), (c), (e)
or (h), the location, dimensions and area of the proposed
uses or activities to be established or to remain within the
Water Quality Management Area;
Administrative Order - Page 7 of 12
(d) Uses or activities proposed to be established or to remain
outside the lot's Water Quality Management Area;
(e) All mitigation measures proposed, if any (See Section
2.2.3., below);
(f) The dimensions of any areas that will be excluded from the
lot's Water Quality Management Area pursuant to EC
9.4778;
(g) Trees, shrubs, and other low-level plantings (e.g. forbs,
grasses, rushes and ferns) proposed to be established, or to
remain, within the lot's Water Quality Management Area,
including extent of cover, species composition, and
number or quantity of plants.
2.2.3. Mitigation measures. In conjunction with a proposed use, activity
or adjustment, mitigation measures shall be taken to offset negative
water quality impacts of the proposed use, activity or adjustment.
Except as provided in (c) below, such mitigation measures must be
located within the impacted lot's Water Quality Management Area.
The following are suggested, not required, mitigation measures for
increasing a post -proposal Water Quality Function Rating:
(a) Plant vegetation to accomplish greater areas of, and
diversity in, vegetative cover;
(b) Remove structures or impervious areas that are excluded
from the Water Quality Management Area pursuant to EC
9.4778 and replace with vegetation cover.
(c) Submit a recorded use restriction that creates a permanent
area of open space adjacent to the Water Quality
Management Area that is equal to, or greater than the area
to be disturbed by the proposed use or activity.
(d) Plant with native species. (Native plant species thrive
without chemical fertilizers and pesticides, typically require
less water for irrigation than non-native species, and are
low maintenance once established. Deeply rooted native
plants increase the soil's capacity to store water and reduce
water runoff.)
(e) As permitted under EC 9.4780(3)(a), use bio -engineered
Best Management Practices for repairing streambank
instability and streambed downcutting.
2.3. Water Quality Function Rating. As part of a Water Quality Function
Rating System certification, report or determination, the preparer shall
submit a completed Water Quality Function Rating Table. The Table shall
use the following methodology as a scoring and rating system for
quantifying water quality function condition at the parcel -scale and within
the lot's Water Quality Management Area, or any additional area as
provided in 2.2.3.(d), above. The Table shall address the following
conditions: (1) pre-proposal/existing conditions; (2) post -proposal
Administrative Order - Page 8 of 12
conditions without mitigation; and (3) post -proposal conditions after
mitigation, if any. On a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 the highest and 1 the lowest
score, water quality function is measured by the total score from the
following three categories:
2.3.1. Water Quality Management Area. This category requires the
preparer to rate the overall water quality function of the subject lot
based on the open physical area within the Water Quality
Management area shown on the City's Water Quality Waterways
Map, taking into account any areas that are excluded from the
Water Quality Management Area pursuant to EC 9.4778 and
permitted uses pursuant to EC 9.4780(2). This category recognizes
that a larger area dedicated to preserving water quality function is
likely to lower risk to water quality.
• 5 rating: 100% of the Water Quality Management Area is
available for water quality function.
• 4 rating: 90% - 99% of the Water Quality Management
Area is available for water quality function.
• 3 rating: 80% - 89% of the Water Quality Management
Area is available for water quality function.
• 2 rating: 60% to 79% of the Water Quality Management
Area is available for water quality function.
• 1 rating: less than 60% of the Water Quality Management
Area is available for water quality function.
2.3.2. Pollutant Filtration, Erosion Prevention, Channel Shading. This
category requires the preparer to rate the overall water quality
function of the subject lot based on the extent and type of
vegetation in the Water Quality Management Area shown on the
City's Water Quality Waterway Map. This category recognizes
that greater vegetative coverage comprised of multiple layers of
trees, shrubs, and low-level vegetation (e.g. forbs, grasses, rushes
and ferns) lowers risks to water quality by filtering pollutants,
preventing erosion, and shading water for temperature control.
• 5 rating: 90% - 100% of the Water Quality Management
Area is covered by vegetation consisting of a balanced
distribution of trees, shrubs, and low-level plantings that
can be expected to form a multi -layered, closed canopy
upon maturity.
• 4 rating: 80% - 89% of the setback area is covered by
vegetation consisting of a balanced distribution of trees,
shrubs, and low-level plantings that can be expected to
form a multi -layered, closed canopy upon maturity.
• 3 rating: 70% - 79% of the setback area is covered by
vegetation consisting of a balanced distribution of trees,
Administrative Order - Page 9 of 12
shrubs, and low-level plantings that can be expected to
form a multi -layered, closed canopy upon maturity.
• 2 rating: 50% - 69% of the setback area is covered by
vegetation consisting of a balanced distribution of trees,
shrubs, and low-level plantings that can be expected to
form a multi -layered, closed canopy upon maturity.
• 1 rating: less than 50% of the water quality management
area is covered by vegetation consisting of a balanced
distribution of trees, shrubs, and low-level plantings that
can be expected to form a multi -layered, closed canopy
upon maturity.
2.3.3. Streambank and Streambed Stability. This category requires the
preparer to rate the overall water quality function of the subject lot
based on the physical condition of the waterway channel as
potential sources of sediment. This category recognizes that lower
potential for sedimentation decreases the risks to water quality. If
the /WQ Management Area on the subject lot does not include the
waterway channel, the rating for this category is "not applicable."
If the /WQ Management Area on the subject lot includes only a
portion of the waterway channel, the rating applies to the physical
condition of that portion only.
• 5 rating: No evidence of streambed downcutting or
streambank instability.
• 4 rating: 1%-5% of length of streambed or streambank
on the lot shows evidence of streambed downcutting or
streambank instability.
• 3 rating: 6%-10% of length of streambed or streambank
on the lot shows evidence of streambed downcutting or
streambank instability.
• 2 rating: 11 %-20% of length of streambed or streambank
on the lot shows evidence of streambed downcutting or
streambank instability.
• 1 rating: More than 20% of length of streambed or
streambank on the lot shows evidence of streambed
downcutting or streambank instability.
2.3.4. Table. The following Water Quality Function Rating Table shall
be completed by the preparer consistent with the category
descriptions in 2.3.1., 2.3.2. and 2.3.3., above and submitted as part
of the Water Quality Function Rating System certification, report
or determination. (a) The "Pre -Proposal" column shall be used to
quantify the water quality function of the subject lot under pre-
proposal/existing conditions. (b) The "Post -Proposal Without
Mitigation" column shall be used to quantify water quality
function of the subject lot under those conditions that would exist
Administrative Order - Page 10 of 12
after the proposed use, activity or adjustment and without any
mitigation measures. (c) The "Post -Proposal With Mitigation"
column shall be used to quantify those conditions expected to exist
under the proposal, including any mitigation . measures being
proposed.
Water Quality Function
Rating Table
Water Quality Function
(a) -
(b)
(c)
Net Change
Pre -Proposal
Post -Proposal
Post -Proposal
from Pre -
Points
Without
With
Proposal to
(1-5)
Mitigation
Mitigation
Post -Proposal
Points (1-5)
Points (1-5)
Points
Water Quality Management
Area
Pollutant Filtration,
Erosion Prevention,
Channel Shading*
Streambed and Streambank
Stability
Total
*Incentive for Planting with Native Species: Increase "net change" score for "Pollutant
Filtration, Erosion Prevention, Channel Shading" by 150% if mitigation measures for this
function involve the removal of non-native species and replanting with native species within the
Water Quality Management Area or an adjacent area as described at Section 2.2.3(c).
2.4. Written Report. As part of a Water Quality Function Rating System
certification, report or determination, the preparer shall submit a written
report based on the site plans and Water Quality Function Rating Table
certifying that after the proposed use, activity or adjustment is in place,
there will be a water quality function rating equal to or greater than that
which existed before the use, activity or adjustment.
3. For illustrative purposes, two sets of example certification documents (each
including a Site Plan I, Site Plan II, Water Quality Function Rating Table and
Written Report) are attached to this Rule.
Dated this 6i-7'Aday of June, 2009.
Jon R. Ruiz
City Manager
00162681.DOC-9
Administrative Order - Page 11 of 12
Example Site #1
Water Quality Function Rating System
. Pre-Proposal/Existing Condition
Map lot: 1705173101111
Lot Size: 13,700 square feet (0.31 acres)
Lot Area Within /WQ Management Area: 4,850 sf (35.4% of lot area)
Existing Land Use or Activity: Vacant
Preparer pursuant to EG 9.4782
Name and QualificationStamp or
s
other identification
of qualification
Legend:
Parcel Lot Lines (applicant lot)
Adjacent Parcel Lot Lines
Waterway
— — Setback Measurement Point (top of high bank)
/WQ Management Area
Extent of Existing Canopy and Location of Trees
0 10 20 Feet
N
W+ E Scale
5 May 2009
Aerial Photo Base: March 2008
Example Site #1
Water Quality Function Rating System
Post Proposal
M a p I ot: 1705173101111
Lot Size: 13,725 square feet (0.32 acres)
Lot Area Within /WQ Management Area: 4,850 sf (35.4% of lot area)
Existing Land Use or Activity: Vacant
Proposed Land Use or Activity: Single Family Residential
Extent of /WQ Management Area Impacted: 329 sf
Preparer pursuant to EG 9.4782
Stamp or
Name and Qualifications
other identification
of qualification
Legend:
Parcel Lot Lines (applicant lot)
Adjacent Parcel Lot Lines
Waterway
Setback Measurement Point (top of high bank)
/WQ Management Area Setback
Extent of Existing Canopy and Location of Trees
Proposed Use Within /WQ Management Area
"o1 Proposed Vegetation Enhancement Area
0 10 20 Feet
N
WE Scale
S May 2009
Aerial Photo Base: March 2008
WRITTEN REPORT
FOR DOCUMENTING COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF EUGENE
WATER QUALITY FUNCTION RATING SYSTEM
"EXAMPLE SITE #1"
Applicant: Example Site #1
Maplot: 1705173101111
Site Address: 1234 Example Site #1
In accordance with R -9.4770-D, 2.4, the following written report is provided:
1. Preparer of Site Plans:
Name: Example, Site Plan # 1
Qualifications: Oregon Licensed Landscape Architect
2. Content
2.1 Site Plan I - Pre -Proposal Conditions
a) Lot dimensions and area: 110' x 125'; 13,700 square feet (0.31 acres).
b) The upper portion of the east bank of the waterway channel is located on the lot; the lower portion
of the bank and the waterway itself is not located on the lot. The waterway affecting this lot is a
tributary to a 303(d) Waterway; the setback Measurement Point is the Top -of -High -Bank; the
setback is 25 feet; extent of lot affected by the Water Quality Management Area is 4,850 square
feet (35.4% of lot area).
c) There are no existing uses or activities within Water Quality Management Area
d) There are no exclusions within the Water Quality Management Area and received a rating of 5.
e) There are no existing uses/activities located on the lot and outside Water Quality Management
Area.
f) Vegetation within Water Quality Management Area consist of. 65% multi -layered with trees, shrubs
and other similar vegetation with a mixture of native and non-native vegetation; and 35% single
layer mostly non-native grasses and scattered rushes and received a rating of 2.
g) There is no evidence of streambank instability and received a rating of 5.
2.2 Site Plan II — Post -Proposal Conditions
a) In addition to the information contained in Site Plan I (a) — (c), the following required information
is provided on b) through g).
b) The request includes an adjustment to EC 9.8030(25)(a)(5) as the parcel is greater than 13,500
square feet and the Water Quality Management Area affects more than 33% of the lot (ie, 35.4%).
The proposed adjustment will reduce the Water Quality Management Area to 4,521 square feet
(33% of total lot area).
c) Not applicable.
d) The proposed use within the Water Quality Management Area is a portion (329 square feet) of a
new single family residence (2,000 square feet). The proposed encroachment impacts the water
quality function rating system of the pre -proposal conditions by reducing the water quality
management area from a rating of "5" to a "4." Refer to the Water Quality Function Rating Table.
e) Measures proposed to mitigate the adjustment impact are shown on Site Plan II and are applied to
the "Pollutant Filtration, Erosion Prevention, Shading" function where 30% of the remaining
setback area will be enhanced to include a multi -layered vegetation condition. In addition, the
applicant proposes to replant with native species where 150% credit is given in accordance with
the administrative rule. With this credit, the rating for this function was increased to 5.
2.3 Water Quality Function Rating Table. The following table documents the individual and overall
water quality function conditions under pre -proposal (total score 12), post -proposal without mitigation
(total score 9), and post -proposal with mitigation conditions (total score 12).
Water Qua
ity Function Rating Table
Pre -Proposal
Post -Proposal
Post -Proposal
Net Change
Water Quality
Points
without
with Mitigation
from Pre -
Function.
(1-5)
Mitigation
Points
Proposal to
Points
(1-5)
Post -Proposal
(1-5)
Points
Water Quality
5
4
4
-1
Management Area
Pollutant Filtration,
2
2
5*
+3
Erosion Prevention,
(includes native
Shading*plant
bonus
I eambed and
5
5
5
0
Streambank Stability
Total
12
11
14
+2
As shown in the table above and reflected on Site Plan II, it is hereby certified that the water quality
function rating under post -proposal conditions with mitigation measures will be equal to or greater than
the pre -proposal conditions and, in this case, post conditions will be greater than pre -conditions.
(signature, date, and stamp of certified preparer)
Example Site #2
Water Quality Function Rating System
Pre-Proposal/Existing Condition
M a p I ot: 1705173101112
Parcel Size: 14,156 square feet (0.32 acres)
Parcel Area Within MQ Management Area: 5,930 sf (42%)
Existing Land Use or Activity: Single Family Residential
Preparer pursuant to EC 9.4782
Name and Qualifications Stamp or
other identification
of qualification
Legend:
Parcel Lot Lines (applicant lot)
Adjacent Parcel Lot Lines
Setback Measurement Point (Waterway Centerline)
/WQ Management Area
o Approximate Location of Significant Trees (6"+ dbh)
Bank Instability Area (one or both sides)
0 20 40 Feet
N
W+E Scale
g May 2009
Aerial Photo Base: March 2008
Note: Thio example i5 for illuotra-
doeo
'
tive purpooeo only and motf
represent a Specific property.
4
Multi -Layered Vegetation
(100% of total setback area or 5,970 sf)
• Major Trees: 3 Douglas fir, 12 bigleaf
F.
maple, 5 Oregon ash, and 4 red alder
• Shrubs: Mixture of snowberry, Oregon
grape, Douglas' spiraea, English holly,
RL
Armenian blackberry
• Other vegetation: mixture of native and
non-native forbs, English ivy, sword fern,
and deer fern
�w_ 4
•
Example Site #2
Water Quality Function Rating System
Pre-Proposal/Existing Condition
M a p I ot: 1705173101112
Parcel Size: 14,156 square feet (0.32 acres)
Parcel Area Within MQ Management Area: 5,930 sf (42%)
Existing Land Use or Activity: Single Family Residential
Preparer pursuant to EC 9.4782
Name and Qualifications Stamp or
other identification
of qualification
Legend:
Parcel Lot Lines (applicant lot)
Adjacent Parcel Lot Lines
Setback Measurement Point (Waterway Centerline)
/WQ Management Area
o Approximate Location of Significant Trees (6"+ dbh)
Bank Instability Area (one or both sides)
0 20 40 Feet
N
W+E Scale
g May 2009
Aerial Photo Base: March 2008
Example Site #2
Water Quality Function Rating System
Post Proposal Condition
M a p I ot: 1705173101112
Parcel Size: 14,156 square feet (0.32 acres)
Parcel Area Within IWQ Management Area: 5,930 sf (42%)
Existing Land Use or Activity: Single Family Residential
Proposed Impact within /WQ Management Area: 525 sf
1'reparer pursuant to EC 9.4782
Name and Qualifications stamp or
other identification
of qualification
WRITTEN REPORT
FOR DOCUMENTING COMPLIANCE WITH CITY OF EUGENE
WATER QUALITY FUNCTION RATING SYSTEM
"EXAMPLE SITE #2"
Applicant: Example Site #2
Maplot: 1705173101112
Site Address: 1234 Example Site #2
In accordance with R -9.4770-D, 2.4, the following written report is provided:
1. Preparer of Site Plans:
Name: Example, Site Plan #2
Qualifications: Oregon Licensed Architect
2. Content
2.1 Site Plan I - Pre -Proposal Conditions
a) Lot dimensions (see Site Plan) and area: 14,156 square feet (0.32 acres).
b) The site contains the entire waterway channel including both streambanks. The waterway affecting
this lot is a Headwater Stream; the setback Measurement Point is the centerline of the stream; the
setback is 40 feet; extent of lot affected by the Water Quality Management Area is 5,930 square
feet (42% of lot area).
c) Existing uses on the site includes a single family residence.
d) A portion of the residence, approximately 150 square feet, is located in the Water Quality
Management Area and is determined to be an exclusion per EC 9.4778(3)1. This exclusion reduces
the overall Water Quality Management Area on the site to 5,930 square feet, resulting in a Water
Quality Management Area rating of 4.
e) The remaining portion of the residence is located outside the Water Quality Management Area.
f) Existing vegetation within Water Quality Management Area is 100% multi -layered with trees,
shrubs and other similar vegetation with a mixture of native and non-native vegetation, resulting in
a Pollutant Filtration, Erosion Prevention, Shading rating of 5.
g) There is evidence of bed downcutting and streambank instability along approximately 21 feet of the
streambed and streambank, resulting in a rating of 2.
2.2 Site Plan II — Post -Proposal Conditions
a) In addition to the information contained in Site Plan I (a) — (c), the following required information
is provided on b) through g).
b) The request includes an adjustment to EC 9.8030(25)(a)(5) as the parcel is greater than 13,500
square feet and the Water Quality Management Area affects more than 33% of the lot (i.e., 42%).
The proposed use would reduce the Water Quality Management Area by 525 square feet (to 38%
of total lot area).
c) Not applicable.
d) The proposed use within the Water Quality Management Area is a portion (525 square feet) of an
existing single family residence. The proposed encroachment impacts the water quality function
rating system of the pre -proposal conditions by reducing the water quality management area from
a rating of "5" to a "3." Refer to the Water Quality Function Rating Table.
e) The proposed use will impact the Pollutant Filtration, Erosion Prevention, Channel Shading
function by eliminating 525 square feet of vegetation within the Water Quality Management Area
resulting in a reduced rating from 5 to 4.
f) Measures proposed to mitigate the adjustment impact are shown on Site Plan II and are applied to
the "Bed and Bank Stability" function where 20% of the channel bed and banks will be repaired
including 3 grade control features and bioengineering measures including willow fascines along
toe of bank and willow stakes on the bank spaced t feet on center (96 stakes total). These
measures will improve Bed and Bank Stability rating from 2 to 5.
2.3 Water Quality Function Rating Table. The following table documents the individual and overall
water quality function conditions under pre -proposal (total score 12), post -proposal without mitigation
(total score 9), and post -proposal with mitigation conditions (total score 12).
Water Qua
ity Function Rating Table
Pre -Proposal
Post -Proposal
Post -Proposal
Net Change
Water Quality
Points
without
with Mitigation
from Pre -
Function
(1-5)
Mitigation
Points
Proposal to
Points
(1-5)
Post -Proposal
(1-5)
Points
Water Quality
5
3
3
-2
Management Area
Pollutant Filtration,
5
4
4
-1
Erosion Prevention,
Shading*
Streambed and
2
2
5
+3
Streambank Stability
Total
12
9
12
0
As shown in the table above and reflected on Site Plan II, it is hereby certified that the water quality
function rating under post -proposal conditions with mitigation measures will be equal to pre -proposal
conditions.
(signature, date, and stamp of certified preparer)
Exhibit A
Findings in Support of Adoption
Administrative Rule R-9.4770
/WQ Water Quality Overlay Zone
With its recent passage of Ordinance No. 20430, the City of Eugene adopted provisions in its
land use code to regulate activities in areas that impact the water quality of important waterways
within the City. The administrative rule carries out two directives in the implements two
directives in Ordinance No. 20430.
Section 25 of Ordinance No. 20430 adopts the electronic Water Quality Waterways Map, which
depicts the location of lot lines, applicable setback measurement points (centerline or top of high
bank) and /WQ Management Areas. EC 9.4778(d) directs the City Manager to adopt an
administrative rule describing the procedures the City used to map the /WQ setbacks on the
Water Quality Waterways Map. Pursuant to EC 9.4786(2), the City is to consider those
procedures described in the administrative rule when it reviews future requests for a Water
Quality Waterways Map correction or a request for removal of the /WQ Overlay Zone.
Pursuant to 9.4780(2), 9.4780(3), and 9.8030(25), some uses, activities and adjustments within
the /WQ Overlay Zone can be allowed/approved if the applicant submits a certification that after
the use, activity or adjustment is in place, there will be a water quality function rating equal to or
greater than that which existed before the use, activity or adjustment. This certification must be
based on the City's Water Quality Function Rating System that, pursuant to EC 9.4782, is
contained in an administrative order to be adopted by the City Manager in accordance with EC
9.2019. EC 9.4782 directs the City Manager to set out in the administrative rule a process for
evaluating a specific /WQ Management Area's water quality function based on the presence or
frequency of enumerated characteristics.
The administrative rule is not a land use regulation. However, since it implements provisions in
the City's land use code, the City manager's adoption of the order is arguably a "land use
decision." The City recognizes that state law does not require a local government to show
consistency with the Statewide Planning Goals when making an administrative land use decision.
However, because the administrative rule implements a land use regulation, the findings set forth
below are intended to demonstrate such consistency.
Goal I - Citizen Involvement. To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the
opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.
The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement that ensure the opportunity for
citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process and set out requirements for such
involvement. The proposed administrative rule will not amend the citizen involvement program.
The process for adopting these amendments complies with Goal 1 since it complies with, and
Page 1 of 4
surpasses Eugene's requirements for the adoption of an administrative rule. Specifically, the
City provided notice of, and held, a public hearing and considered all testimony received.
Goal 2 -Land Use Planning. To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as
a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual
basis for such decisions and actions.
The record shows that there is an adequate factual base for the adoption of the rule. EC
9.4778(d) directs the City Manager to adopt an administrative rule describing the procedures the
City used to map the /WQ setbacks on the Water Quality Waterways Map. EC 9.4782 directs
the City Manager to adopt an administrative rule setting out the City's Water Quality Function
Rating System. The rule does not affect any other governmental units. There are no Goal 2
Exceptions required. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 2.
Goal 3 - Agricultural Lands. To preserve agricultural lands.
The amendments do not affect any land designated for agricultural use. Therefore, Goal 3 does
not apply.
Goal 4 - Forest Lands. To conserve forest lands.
The amendments do not affect any land designated for forest use. Therefore, Goal 4 does not
apply.
Goal 5 -Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources. To conserve open
space and protect natural and scenic resources.
These amendments do not create or amend the city*s list of Goal 5 resources, do not amend a
code provision adopted in order to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific
requirements of Goal 5, do not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses -with a significant
Goal 5 resource site and do not amend the acknowledged UGB. Therefore, Goal 5 does not
apply.
Goal 6 - Air, Water and land Resource Quality. To maintain and improve the quality of the air,
water and land resources of the state.
Goal 6 addresses waste and process discharges from development, and is aimed at protecting air,
water and land from impacts from those discharges. The City's /WQ regulations implement Goal,
as a a key aspect of the City's response to federal Clean Water Act regulations, specifically the
Upper Willamette Basin Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). Several waterways in Eugene do
not state water quality standards for certain pollutants. For these waterways, the state of Oregon
Department of Environmental Quality, the state agency charge with implementing TMDL
regulations, has developed the Upper Willamette TMDL to bring these waterways back into
compliance with state standards. The Upper Willamette TMDL allocates pollutant loads to
designated management agencies, including the City of Eugene that have the authority to
implement water quality improvements within their jurisdictional boundaries. One management
Page 2 of 4
strategy identified in the Upper Willamette TMDL for addressing multiple pollutants is the
. application of streamside buffers. The administrative rule implements the /WQ regulations and is
therefore, also consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 6.
Goal 7 - Areas Subiect to Natural Disasters and Hazards. To Protect life and property from
natural disasters and hazards.
The administrative rule does not effect the City*s restrictions on development in areas subject to
natural disasters and hazards. Further, the amendments do not allow for new development that
could result in a natural hazard. Therefore, Goal 7 does not apply.
Goal 8 - Recreational Needs. To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and
visitors, and where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities
including destination resorts.
The administrative rule does not effect the city,&s provisions for recreation areas, facilities or
recreational opportunities. Therefore, Goal 8 does not apply.
Goal 9 - Economic Development. To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a
variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon -v citizens.
The administrative rule does not impact the supply of industrial or commercial lands. Therefore,
it is consistent with Goal 9.
Goal 10 - Housing. To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
The administrative rule does not impact the supply of residential lands. Therefore, it is
consistent with Goal 10.
Goal H- Public Facilities and Services. To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient
arrangement of public facilities and services. to serve as a framework for urban and rural
development.
The administrative rule does not effect the Cityas provision of public facilities and services.
Therefore, Goal 11 does not apply.
Goal 12- Transportation. To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic
transportation system.
The administrative rule does not implicate the requirements of Goal 12.
Goal 13 - Energy Conservation. To conserve energy.
The administrative rule does not concern energy conservation. Therefore, Goal 13 does not
apply.
Page 3 of 4
Goal 14 - Urbanization. To provide . for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban
land use.
The administrative rule does not. affect the City,&s provisions regarding the transition of land from
rural to urban uses. Therefore, Goal 14 does not apply.
Goal 15 - Willamette River Greenway. To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural,
scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the
Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway.
The administrative rule does not contain any changes that affect the regulation of areas within
the Willamette River Greenway. Therefore, Goal 15 does not apply.
Goals 16 - 19. Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes,, and Ocaen
resources.
These Statewide Planning Goals do not apply to the administrative rule.
00226047.DOC;1
Page 4 of 4