INVENTORY AND EVALUATION

An important component of the planning process was the data collection and use of that data. The quality and reliability of the base data can make or break the success of the planning efforts, as the decision making processes are based on the information at hand. Confidence in that information and process is crucial and necessaryto facilitate good planning efforts.

Wetland Inventory, Classification and Reclassification

The initial inventory of wetlands conducted in 1987-88 was done by a consulting biologist for the 75 square mile Eugene-Springfield UGB. This survey used a botanical definition of wetlands similar to that used by the USFWS. At that time, there was no attempt to identify disturbed wetlands, prior converted wetlands, or farmed wetlands. This study cost about $12,500 and resulted in the identification of 765 acres of wetlands in west Eugene. It evaluated other smaller pockets or strips of wetlands, riparian zones, water features, and some upland habitats elsewhere within the metropolitan region.

As the wetland study began, the EPA provided L-COG with a $50,000 grant to conduct an advanced identification (ADID) of wetlands with a delineation and assessment of wetland functions and values using the Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET), Level II. A consultant conducted the field inventory in 1989.

Concurrently, four federal agencies (the Corps, EPA, SCS and USFWS) adopted a new method for delineating wetlands, published as the Federal Manual for Identifying and Deilneating Jurisdictional Wetlands. In that methodology, special case areas were defined and described under the title "disturbed areas." When implemented, this new criteria identified disturbed agricultural wetlands. This added about 700 additional acres to the west Eugene inventory, and caused a new wave of concern within the community. What had been a 765 acre wetland issue had become a 1,430 acre wetland issue.

Planning Impacts

When determining urban growth boundaries (UGB's), cities in Oregon are required to project future population and employment growth and to translate those projections into demand for residential, commercial and industrial uses. This growth boundary must be able to provide urban public facilities and services in an orderly and economic fashion, while protecting surrounding resource lands (primarily forest, agricultural, mineral and aggregate resources). This must be demonstrated before the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission will acknowledge a local comprehensive plan. Given the requirements, the new wetland information stimulated a need for further investigation into the impacts of the increase in affected acres.

In assessing available land supply in west Eugene, all vacant land was included in the buildable lands inventory. This included unused lands, and agricultural and timbered lands slated for future development within the UGB. Public lands, small parcels and lands with environmental assets, wetlands and riparian areas, and areas with environmental constraints (floodways, steep slopes, etc.) were subtracted. The resulting lands were thought most likely for future urban uses. However, due to the unavailability of wetland information at the time the Metropolitan Plan was originally developed and adopted, the buildable acre supply did not reflect the new state and federal wetlands laws, and therefore did not account for wet, seasonal prairie, or disturbed agricultural wetlands in the inventory.

In Oregon it is not a simple or easy process to expand the UGB to compensate for losses within the UGB due to wetlands or other factors, such as new floodplain data. To address this dilemma, an Industrial Lands Study was conducted, and the impact of wetlands and hydric soils on the "buildable land inventory" was calculated. The study looked at industrial lands in detail to determine both the quantity of the industrial land base, and the quality of that industrial land on a parcel by parcel basis. This report concluded that while the new wetlands classification did affect the industrial lands base, there was enough remaining industrial land to accommodate some losses due to wetlands (see Industrial Lands Special Area Study, 1991).

As a result of these findings, and to adjust for the loss to the industrial land base, the City of Eugene made three land use amendments. One is applicable to the Urban Growth Boundary, effectively adding 200 acres of Special Heavy Industrial use designation to the UGB, and the other two involve industrial re-designations within the UGB.

Evaluation

After the initial inventory, further process was needed to establish the relative value of each of the identified wetlands.The evaluation of west Eugene wetlands involved two primary steps: (1) wetland identification and delineation, and (2) assessment of wetland functions and values.

Wetland Identification and Delineation: The identification and delineation of wetlands for the west Eugene project followed the recommended routine "on-site" and "off-site" approaches outlined in the 1989 "Federal Manual for Identifying and Delineating Jurisdictional Wetlands." An "intermediate" method was used in most cases throughout the study, providing a significant level of detail. The "on-site" method involved the sampling of vegetation, soils, and hydrology to determine the presence and boundaries between wetland and upland areas. The "off-site" method was used for sites where permission to access private property was either denied or was not obtainable. The identification of hydric soils was the primary parameter used in the off-site method. In some cases, visual observation of topography and vegetation from adjacent properties was incorporated into a determination. Twenty-nine of 64 wetland sites were identified using the off-site method. See Exhibit 4 for a map of the identified sites.

Several county officials and property owners expressed discomfort with the off-site delineation method. Guarantees of accurate delineation were felt to be lacking in the methodology. This process needs improvement in order to assure confidence in the technique. In addition to visual detection, thorough background information on the area should be gathered, including soils maps, topographic survey maps, and aerial photos. The present land use activity, such as types of crops or grasses growing on the property, can also help in determining wetlands presence. All data collected must be thoroughly documented and analyzed for an accurate off-site wetlands determination - the determination should not just be via a "windshield survey".

In addition, because the West Eugene Wetland inventory predated the Oregon inventory administrative rules, the inventory conducted by LCOG in 1989 did not comply with Division of State Lands (DSL) administrative rules as to the specificity required of wetland delineations conducted for a "Wetland Conservation Plan." The Eugene inventory was submitted to DSL, but the City will have to go back and do a more refined delineation for the sites to be developed to meet DSL administrative rules. This will be done with combined City funds and a DSL grant.

Despite the controversies around the methods and the need for more refinement, the wetlands delineation process was valuable to landowners in several ways. First, the knowledge that wetlands definitely were or were not identified on their property provided a measure of relief to those contemplating the permit process. Those properties found to have low-value wetlands were more easily recommended for development than before their value was known. Property owners with valuable wetlands found that there were federal funds available for the acquisition of their property.(1) And, once the wetlands inventory was complete, property owners were able to petition the tax assessor for tax relief. Many of these properties were re-appraised from commercial and industrial to agricultural wetland value, which provided property tax relief.

Doing the general inventory first to determine the extent of wetlands was less costly than doing a formal delineation. Once it was determined where wetlands were likely to be impacted by development, more detailed wetland boundaries could be identified. When wetland protection zones are built into the wetlands protection scheme, the exact wetland boundary for wetlands to be protected does not need the same level of delineation needed for wetlands to be developed. Going back to inventory boundaries once the protect/develop question has been settled can provide for a public/private cost share for the more detailed boundary determination. The landowner then has a greater incentive to participate knowing that the likelihood of development has been increased. The boundary determination can be done for the entire region, or nearer the time of impact on a case-by-case basis.

Assessment ot Functions and Values: The delineation and WET analysis provided new information about wetlands. An evaluation process to determine wetland functions was built into the planning process. The following factors were mapped and incorporated into the study and presented to the public.

a. Habitat rating inventory This inventory was conducted in 1987-89; a relative habitat rating was then applied to the wetlands. Both on-site and off-site evaluations were conducted.
b. USFWS National Wetland Inventory (c. 1982), later updated (c. 1987).
c. Flood data Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rating Maps (FIRM) were digitized to identify floodways and floodway fringe. In addition, a consultant's study of the Amazon Creek floodplain was mapped.
d. Soils The U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) S0i1 Survey for Lane County was digitized. EPA grant funds were used to digitize the newest Soil Survey (1987) for west Eugene.
e. Historic wetlands A plant ecologist was hired to review the 1852-53 Governmental Land Survey maps and notes. From these, historic wetlands in the region from a time of early pioneer arrival were mapped.
f. Oregon Natural Heritage Data Base This data base provided information on rare plant and animal species.
g. Waterways and drainages The waterways and drainages were mapped and classified (A- Perennial with floodplain; B- Perennial without a floodplain; and C- Intermittent). Using 1936 aerial photographs and the 1910 USGS survey, historic channel locations were also mapped.
h. Winter Waterdowl and Amphibian and Reptile Survey This study was conducted at the request of the USFWS for a cost of $12,000.
i. The Advanced Identification of wetlands (ADID) and Wellands Evaluation Technique (WET) data (described previously).

From this information, staff prepared preliminary information about the relative values of wetlands and sent letters to owners allowing them to challenge the information for their particular wetland. Scoring systems were devised to allow average ratings of wetlands to be computed and presented to the public. The entire results of WET were also available in reports, handouts, and displays so the public could study the detailed WET results. For example, the public could review the ratings for an individual wetland assessment unit or view the entire range of ratings among wetland units for any particular function or value. Of all the information above, the WET results were hardest to communicate to the average citizen.

(l) It should be pointed out that, while federal funds were available to purchase wetlands in the west Eugene area, this may not hold true for other communities. The west Eugene study area was a model pilot study for several federal agencies. Furthermore, federal budget cuts, economic trends and other factors may influence fund availability.