Laserfiche WebLink
Eugene/Springfield UGBs and connecting them would result in a “leap-frogging” effect. Coburg fell under <br />this category. <br /> <br />? <br /> The comparative environmental and public health and safety impacts of various proposals <br /> <br />Mr. Corey surmised that intuitively it would seem to make the most sense to simply expand the treatment <br />capacity to the outlying satellite communities. He felt it called for a comprehensive analysis to consider <br />issues of water quality, operation requirements, regulatory compliance, and system capacity. <br /> <br />? <br /> The impact on the existing collection and treatment facility capacity <br /> <br />Mr. Corey thought further study would result in an optimal connection point and this would allow for an <br />analysis of what upgrades and capacity enhancements would be needed. He noted that the MWMC facilities <br />plan allowed for growth in this area until the year 2025. <br /> <br />? <br /> The cost equity among MWMC customers and new potential customers <br /> <br />Mr. Corey said there were three “ballpark” scenarios ranging from $4 million to $10 million attached to the <br />AIS. <br /> <br />Mr. Corey said moving ahead would require land use amendments, including the Metro Plan, the Public <br />Facilities and Services Plan for wastewater service, the Lane County Rural Comprehensive plan and the <br />Coburg Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the Boundary Commission would have the opportunity to <br />weigh in and ultimately approve the extension of a system beyond the UGB. The Department of Land <br />Conservation and Development (DLCD) would have the opportunity to weigh in as would several other <br />government entities. He listed a “host of technical issues to be considered” in addition to the aforementioned <br />larger processes. He reported that staff estimated that it would cost approximately $500,000 to $1 million <br />in engineering and legal costs to get to the point of movement toward connecting Coburg, and it would take <br />four years. <br /> <br />Mr. Corey acknowledged that the City of Coburg estimated it would cost $168,000 and that all of the land <br />use actions could be completed in less than one year. <br /> <br />Mr. Corey stated that the recommendation in the AIS was to move forward. He added that the council <br />should anticipate more requests in the future such as the one from Coburg. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked if there was a way to find more agreement between the figures suggested by the City of <br />Coburg and Eugene staff. He agreed that if Coburg wanted to become part of the system they should take <br />into account all of the costs to do so including the City of Eugene’s cost for setting up the model. He felt <br />Coburg should be given a good idea of potential costs. <br /> <br />Mr. Corey advised the council to inform Coburg that the cost was closer to $1 million and then refund the <br />remainder at the end of four years. <br /> <br />Mr. Papé asked if there was a difference in the way Coburg viewed the process. Mr. Corey replied that the <br />difference in views was best exemplified by the City of Coburg’s suggestion that all of the land use <br />processes could be completed in eight months. He noted that it takes longer to get through a Metro Plan <br />amendment on simpler issues. He predicted this item would draw a lot of public interest and public debate <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 26, 2005 Page 2 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br />