My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Resolution No. 5303
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Resolutions
>
2020 No. 5286-5314
>
Resolution No. 5303
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/26/2020 1:42:25 PM
Creation date
6/26/2020 1:35:11 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Recorder
CMO_Document_Type
Resolutions
Document_Date
6/22/2020
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
355
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Eugene -Springfield Area Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan <br />6. Appendices <br />Mitigation Action Item Progress Report Form (From 2014) <br />From Date: 02-2015 <br />To Date: 02-2020 <br />#31: Water Source <br />Eugene Water and Electric Board <br />Jeannine Parisi <br />LAProject <br />❑ Project Completed ❑ Project Restructured <br />❑ Canceled ® Project delayed: <br />❑ Project On Schedule Anticipated Completion Date: 2028 <br />Summary of Project Progress <br />1. What was accomplished for this project during this reporting period (2015 <br />2020)? <br />Significant resources were allocated to this project from 2015-2018. With a <br />conditional water right in hand, property was purchased for both the intake and <br />for siting a 10 — 15 MGD water treatment plant. Water rates were increased by <br />3% per year to start paying for the project, accompanied with considerable <br />public outreach and education on the need for a redundant supply of water. A <br />team of experts were hired to help develop a preliminary design and more <br />accurate costs for the plant. <br />2. What obstacles, problems, or delays did the project encounter? <br />Land use issues for the treatment plant site required all three jurisdictions to <br />concur on updating the Eugene -Springfield Metro Plan. While two of the three <br />jurisdictions were in support, it was clear that one was not convinced that the <br />site was appropriate for a water treatment facility. The project was deferred due <br />to the combination of the high price tag, political risk and an overarching <br />concern that under earthquake scenarios, the distribution system was vulnerable <br />and would not be able to deliver water to the community. Instead, a revised <br />emergency water supply program was adopted focusing on multiple, micro - <br />distribution sites where people could fill containers with water under emergency <br />conditions. <br />3. If uncompleted, is the project still relevant? Should the project be changed or <br />revised? <br />6-98 January 2020 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.