5 registered statements
February 5, 2017, 9:09 AM
I don't think The City of Lake Oswego is doing an adequate job of street sweeping and to add insult to injury, they dumped tons of nasty tar like "gravel" on the roads this winter and have not cleaned it up in a timely manner. During the Fall the leaves and debris were terrible and a sweeper only came through my the neighborhood once. The two sweepers are often in for repairs it seems or they don't have enough drivers. In other cities the sweepers run regular routes on a much more frequent schedule... also the neighbors are notified what day so they can move their cars ahead of time. The sweepers here are "hit-or-miss" and lots and lots of stuff is getting washed into the sewer system as a result.
john earle inside Forest Highlands
January 23, 2017, 9:36 PM
While my experiences may be anecdotal, there is some relevance to this discussion.
I live next to Nettle Creek which feeds into Tyron Creek/Tyron Park. Over the last ten years there has been a noticeable increase in winter water flow. With the increase has come significant erosion of the banks, scouring of the stream bottom, and a resulting loss of vegetation.
The flow of the creek was altered when Atwater road was constructed, channeling the stream through a culvert under the road. At peak flow during the first few months of the year the water exiting the culvert appears as if it is a "class 5" rapids.
Ideally the creek would flow normally sans culvert. But that would require a traffic bridge and that's not going to happen anytime soon ... or ever!
Underlying this increase in water and subsequent erosion is, I believe, the increased density of the surrounding neighborhood(s).
With each new lot division two homes spring up where once there was one. The accompanying hardscape that comes with each new home results in that much more runoff. Water that was able to filter into open soils now flow into catch basins that fill up our streams ever quicker.
While the proposed stormwater plan outlines what steps the city takes for its own properties and construction (i.e. reducing runoff, etc), I would like to see the same requirements of all new construction - commercial and residential.
The details would need to be decided by those more knowledgeable than me but there are simple things such as the use of permeable driveway materials, the incorporation of bioswales in landscapes, encouraging certain vegetation for absorption and filtration, etc.
As a taxpayer I'm already paying for this existing problem. It would be nice to lift some of these charges and put them on the responsible parties - those at the front end of the process. These should be requirements of the builder. Naturally he'll pass these along to the purchaser of the finished property. That seems appropriate.
Stormwater issues will increase under the current proposal. I do not believe the city leaders and staff are being as proactive as the situation calls.
In exchange for all the new properties being added to our tax roll there needs to be a more inclusive plan and fair division of costs.
Clay Werts inside Bryant
January 22, 2017, 7:09 AM
Leave it as is !!!! Its only a problem in the minds of government bureaucrats ! Let it go, leave it alone.
January 21, 2017, 9:24 PM
The targets of all of this paper work are primarily phosphorus and E.coli bacteria. The phosphorus comes from agricultural and lawn fertilizers, while the E.coli comes from the gut of all sorts of farm animals, cattle, chickens, wild and domesticated ducks and geese, and almost all forms of mammalian wildlife (e.g. raccoons, opossums, deer, coyotes, skunks, etc.) as well as humans. The phosphorus can be eliminated by law or regulation, but what will be the allowed agricultural replacement? You cannot get rid of all wildlife. Some of these proposed benchmarks, I suspect, are therefore not attainable by any amount bureaucratic incrementalism. These proposals are TMI for most people, unless you are an hydrologist. The acronyms cause your eyes to glaze over if your are not in the hydrology, an environmental lobby, or the DEQ businesses. Putting this much flack into the air tells me that an entrenched bureaucracy and various environmentalists are in search more public funding through an increased surface water fee, in the City of Lake Oswego. I am opposed to any surface water fee increase.
January 21, 2017, 8:19 AM
Thanks for the work you do on behalf of all of us.
I see a lot in the Stormwater Management Plan about measuring and recording, but very little about mitigation or compliance enforcement. I understand good intentions are a pre-requisite for action. I just want to make sure the city can do something if, for example, a point source of pollution is identified on private property.
Open City Hall is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The statements in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.