|
5 PROJECT IMPACTS AND ALTERNATIVES
<br />~~~~:~~°~ g~~~~~ Anal sis.
<br />' Describe alternative sites and project designs that were considered to avoid or minimize impacts to the waterway or wetland.
<br />(Include alternative design(s) with less impact and reasons why the alternative(s) were not chosen. Reference OAR 141-085-
<br />(1025 (3(j)) and 141-085-0029 (4through 6f for more information. *)
<br />Alternative sites are not applicable , this property is owned by the City of Eugene and is the site of recent drownings.
<br />Alternative designs were developed that looked at filling the ponds or reducing the depth to 3 feet. Both alternatives are cost
<br />restrictive and provide negative impacts to this Natural resources. Minimizing the amount of excavation was also concidered
<br />but would not create Natural Resource or safety enhancements. These enhancements fit the City of Eugene budget and provide
<br />the best alternative of many. The City of Eugene prides itself on the enhancement work it has performed in West Eugene
<br />Wetlands, Delta Ponds Enhancements with the Corp of Engineers, enhancement projects along the Amazon creek and many
<br />park and natural resource sites. The opportunity here can begin another great legacy for our community and the wildlife
<br />established here.
<br />~~~~k€~;~~ °~~ t€~„~~~~~i~s~~~;~ ~~~~~,~,~;~,=w
<br />Describe what measures you will use (before and after construction) to minimize impacts to the waterway or wetland. These .
<br />may include but are notlimited to the following:
<br />^~:;I',IJ%`r~t~ t r4 ~Iii'F ~,'~t";~Cdr~s:t~'7 t~c 3rtc I??~3~i' LXr'i A`Yf?-r j~7 x faiiT~ii~ ~il t!1._C}I";;~£'4t r r~~Yf£>~? f;r,ls~i.£'- ~7t'4r ~?dFiY.-t.i~f?7atisfZl~`;Y1Xt:FtC';;.3;
<br />: ~3~ ~~ .~~ ,`s> 'st~ ..~jT;'`}Y3Y'~a.dPs, ~.- tti^7,aG~;"i: d.i,i37?:9idFs?TFt Fs 1 Sf£'3.~.F3% < 33.t. ( '~ t~f.;tt<;t_; i ; .~.~,~:{,) .. ~IrA<?i3ft .~,.r,s..3£?i1f ftr> J.~s"FtSftJlt ~;tlrtd. £'i~ :~~it,'"EZdrI~~
<br />,. .......... ....~___._.~ _ _
<br />^ For work in waterways where fish or flowing water are likely to be present, ~t;s~~u,s,s_,~t.~>~a~ the work area :;._.~ii,,.;;~;,,,~;r~3?~xtt~r~from
<br />the flowing water.
<br />^ If native migratory f sh are present (or were historically present) and you are installing, replacing or abandoning a culvert
<br />or other potential obsti-uction to fish passage, complete and attach a statement of how the Fislz P~rssrx~,Te Requir•ernents set
<br />by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife will be met.
<br />See attachment "description and method" (project impacts)
<br />Description of resources in project area
<br />Impact area is: ^ Ocean ^ Estuary ^ River ~ Lake ~ Stream ^ Freshwater Wetland
<br />Describe the existing physical and biological characteristics of the wetland/waterway site by area and type of resource
<br />(Use separate sheets and photos, if necessary). (see Impact Sheets)
<br />For wetlands, include, as applicable:
<br />^ C'owar~cli~a and .Iiydro eorrao~hic(IIG.~LI~ wetland class(s) *
<br />^ Dominant plant species by layer (herb, shrub, tree) *
<br />^ Whether the wetland is freshwater or tidal
<br />C~ Assessment of the functional attributes of the wetland trr ,';c~ ir~r3~cacle ~!*
<br />^ Identify any vernal pools, bogs, fens, mature forested wetland, seasonal mudflats, or native wet prairies in or near
<br />the project area.)
<br />For waterwavs, include a description of, as applicable:
<br />~ - ...,,..., ,., ,.,,....~ :*
<br />CrtcrF.<,~~I ~rt~~ l bank i::>r~.~,:~: {;, :~
<br />_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . .
<br />^ Type and condition of riparian vegetation *
<br />^ Channel morphology (i. e., structure and shape) *
<br />^ Stream substrate*
<br />^ Fish and wildlife (type, abundance, period of use, significance of site)
<br />^ General hydrological conditions (e.g. stream flow, seasonal fluctuations) *
<br />Describe the existing navigation, fishing and recreational use of the waterway or wetland. *
<br />small boats or other floating devices could use this site although vehicle access is restricted from the public. Local neighboors
<br />have been observed fishing and a population of warm water fish have been identified. Other recreational use of the area are
<br />passive uses such as walking, running, bird and wildlife viewing. The A-2 channel flowing through the South Pond has xninimal
<br />use for recreation and most of the time does not provide adequate flows for any type of boating or fishing. No populations of
<br />andronomous fish populate the site as drainage is to the lower Long Tom River which is damed near the City of Monroe.
<br />Page 5
<br />
|