Number: FP-21862

Applicant: City of Corvallis

Location: Wetland, Section 24, T11S R5W, Conser Drive at Jasper and Sorrel.

Activity: Placement of 2,900 cubic yards of material for construction of low to moderate income housing in Seavy Meadows.

Read the law

Your comments DID make a difference. Most permit applications to the DSL receive few or no comments -- so if the DSL hears from you, they will notice. The comment period is over for this application. Read about the citizen response.

On October 17, 2002, the DSL Denied the city of Corvallis' application. The letter stated:

"The Division has completed review of your permit application to place 2,900 cubic yards of material in 1.67 acres of wetland located in Township 11 South, Range 5 West, Section 24, Benton County for construction of a low income housing development.

The Division hereby denies the request for the following reasons. Under ORS 196.835(3), DSL is required to consider many different aspects of proposed projects before granting a permit to place fill in the waters of the state. Reflecting these requirements, the Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) for the Removal Fill Law, OAR 141-085-0050(2), provide:

(1) "The Director shall evaluate the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity and its intended use on the water resources by considering:

(a) The environmental and economic consequences of the proposed fill or removal;"

The anticipated loss in wetland functions was analyzed only for the small fragmented wetlands within the five-acre parcel but did not evaluate the functions of the wetlands on the 25-acre site as a whole. The proposed development would be completely surrounded by wetlands leaving the remaining "avoided" wetlands vulnerable to secondary impacts. The overall function and secondary impacts were not considered in the alternative site plan analysis. With the information provided, the environmental consequences of the proposed fill on the impacted water resources cannot be fully evaluated relative to wetland functions lost and gained.

(b) "Effects of the fill or removal on water quality and aquatic life and habitats; and"

We are unable to determine the possible cumulative impacts or secondary impacts of the project on avoided wetlands. The project will result in a development completely surrounded by wetlands. The potential effect of the project on avoided wetlands, especially the thin portion lying east of the project, was not discussed in your application.

OAR 141-085-0050 (4) provides:
"(4) No permit to fill or remove material shall be issued without a determination that:

(c)There is no practicable alternative to the proposed fill or removal which would have less adverse impact on the water resources of the State of Oregon;"

Seven conceptual designs were presented with varied levels of wetland impacts. It is unclear why Option 7 is preferable to Option 6 when considering impact on wetland functions.

Also, the preferred plan presented in the application is only conceptual. Avoidance through alternative building layouts was not presented within the project area, apparently because there is not a "project" proposed at this time. Since there is not a specific project proposed, justification for filling the wetlands on the proposed five acres was not adequately presented and alternative layouts to avoid wetlands within the five acre parcel was likewise not presented in your application.

Based on the above, we must deny your application for a permit.

ORS 196.825(6) provides that any applicant whose application for a removal/fill permit has been denied by DSL may in writing within 10 days of the denial of the permit request a contested case hearing from the director. "

Home