Item A: City of Coburg Request for Connection to Regional Wastewater Facilities

Home Browse Search

associated with community growth during that time may or may not be treated cost-effectively in the same location and facilities that exist today. However, in considering the long range future of the Region 2050 communities, the following general findings and considerations have been offered by wastewater TAC staff regarding planning for efficient and cost-effective provision of wastewater services within the study area. ? Development of new wastewater services, no matter how they are provided, will be costly for small satellite communities. ? There is no blanket one-size-fits-all approach to providing wastewater services that will be efficient or cost-effect to all of the communities within the Southern Willamette Valley. ? Communities that have developed sewerage infrastructure and treatment facilities will likely be best served by continued operation of their dedicated facilities. ? For some communities, topographic conditions, such as unfavorable gradients and hills, will make localized wastewater management more efficient and cost-effective than conveyance to the existing Eugene-Springfield wastewater treatment facilities. The Crow-Loraine and Alvadore areas are examples of this type of area. ? Extensions of existing regional wastewater services beyond the current UGB would, in general, be most cost-effective and efficient overall where they would result from incremental growth with corresponding incremental extension of sewers from the Eugene-Springfield UGB outward toward existing satellite communities. The cost- effectiveness and system efficiencies would be achieved in this type of development/service pattern through the addition of small increments of public conveyance over time with users able to tap into the system (where elevations and geographic conditions are favorable to conveyance by gravity), paying for public improvements as development occurs. Examples of areas where projected development patterns may result in these efficiencies include Goshen and Pleasant Hill. ? Extensions of existing regional wastewater services beyond the current UGB would, in general, be expected to be less cost-effective and efficient overall where the satellite community to be served is significantly removed from the existing service. These types of extensions would cause a “leap-frogging” of public conveyance infrastructure over rural areas that would not participate in funding or be provided with wastewater services. Assuming an increment of wastewater treatment capacity built to current environmental requirements would cost roughly the same at the Eugene-Springfield regional facilities as it would within the satellite community’s UGB, then the services provided through the leap-frog service extension would be more costly based on the costs of added conveyance system and pumping facilities that would otherwise be avoided. ? Coburg and, perhaps to a lesser degree, Junction City are examples of where this pattern would occur. In these examples, for extension of existing regional wastewater services to prove cost-effective and efficient for both the Eugene-Springfield area and the satellite community, the local costs of constructing the length of force main required to connect to the MWMC system would need to be offset by operational cost-savings in the satellite community, without increasing costs to Eugene-Springfield customers. While these general findings may serve as “rules of thumb,” it should be emphasized that they are generalized conclusions. There may be other factors elected officials may wish to consider Page 4