Employment, Parks, Schools Ordinance (City)- Planning Commission Recommendation (3 of 4)

Eugene Ordinance Exhibit J [Lane County Ordinance Exhibit G] within the UGB. The City's previous determination of adequate information carries forward for this corridor, including mapping, site visits, and information on quality and quantity. For the Clear Lake UGB expansion area, in its May 2014 report PHS identified four reaches of the A-2 Channel as riparian areas. In addition to being previously mapped in the City's GIS system, and by PHS as part of their Goal 5 inventory work, on-site inspections of each identified riparian area were conducted by PHS and by City staff to verify location and quality. The methodology used by PHS to assess the condition of the riparian corridors (the Urban Riparian Inventory and Assessment Guide (URIAG) (DSL 1998)) is described in detail on pages 17-19 of their May 2014 report. PHS confirmed via an email on December 6, 2016 that as part of their inventory and assessment, they utilized information from aerial photographs, the National Wetlands Inventory, United States Geological Service maps, Oregon Department of Forestry, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife and federal flood hazard maps. Based on the available information, the City has determined that information about each potential site is adequate, consistent with the above OAR. (C) Determine the Significance of the Resource Sites 660-023-0030(4) - For sites where information is adequate, local governments shall determine whether the site is significant. This determination shall be adequate if based on the criteria in subsections (a) through (c) of this section, unless challenged by the department, objectors, or the commission based upon contradictory information. The determination of significance shall be based on: (a) The quality, quantity, and location information; (b) Supplemental or superseding significance criteria set out in OAR 660-023-0090 through 660-023-0230; and (c) Any additional criteria adopted by the local government, provided these criteria do not conflict with the requirements of OAR 660-023-0090 through 660-023- 0230. For riparian areas, there are no supplemental or superseding significance criteria set out in OAR 660- 023-0090 through 660-023-0230 as referenced in -0030(4)(b). Further, the City did not adopt any additional criteria for this Goal 5 process as referenced in -0030(4)(c). Therefore, the determination of significance was based on the quantity, quality and location information as referenced in -0030(4)(a). For the Santa Clara UGB expansion area, in its October 21, 2014 memo, PHS found that there were no riparian areas. However, as noted above, information taken from the acknowledged Goal 5 work that pertains to adjacent land within the City's current UGB shows that there is a significant riparian corridor with Goal 5 protections that continues from within the UGB into the Santa Clara UGB expansion area (Riparian Corridor identified as E56 in the City / County 2005 Goal 5 work). In a memo from Alissa Hansen dated November 28, 2016, she explains that Eugene staff have recommended that that riparian corridor E56 be assigned the same protections within the expansion area that it currently has in the areas already within the UGB. In this case, they are of the same quality, quantity, and location. For the Clear Lake UGB expansion area, in their May 2014 report, PHS assessed the four identified reaches of the A-2 Channel using the URIAG methodology. All four of the inventoried riparian areas rate "high" for water quality functioning, due to the low slopes within the riparian area, the presence of 13 May 2017