Laserfiche WebLink
the projects; an estimate of When each Project will be needed; <br /> and a discussion of the possible funding mechanisms for each <br /> project. · <br /> <br /> B, Inventory. <br /> <br /> The PFSP as amended by the proposed amendments includes a <br /> complete inventory of the region's sanitary, sewer system. Again, <br /> Home Builders attempts to restate its "project list" is not a <br /> "project list" argument. ·Clearly, the existing list, which <br /> passed muster prior to the proposed amendments without the <br /> addition of the new projects, satisfied LCDC's definition of <br /> ~project list." It is hard to imagine how the addition of <br /> projects somehow makes an already sufficiently descriptive list <br /> no longer sufficient within the meaning of the rule. <br /> <br /> C. Timing. <br /> <br /> Home Builders argument here is not really about timing, but about <br /> the definition of ~project list:" ~Where, as here, the proposal <br /> is to approve categories of projects, rather than a list of <br /> projects, it is not possible to comply with the rule." (Home <br /> Builders letter, p.5). MWMC has responded to that argument <br /> above. <br /> <br /> D. Rough Cost Estimates. <br /> <br /> As explained above, the cost estimates provided in proposed Table <br /> 16a satisfy the rule's definition of rough cost estimates. <br /> <br /> E. Elements of the co~rehensiveplan. <br /> <br /> Home Builders.again re-state their unsupported ~project list" <br /> argument: ~Again, a project listing is required, not a <br /> description of categories of projects." 'The Metro Plan and PFSP, <br /> as amended,'satisfy OAR 660-011-0045. <br /> <br /> Conclusion. <br /> <br />The proposed amendments comply with state statutes, statewide <br />planning goals, and the administrative rules that implement Goal <br />.11. The proposed amendments to Chapter III, Section G, and <br />Chapter IV of the Metro Plan are necessary additions concerning <br />proposed improvement and capacity to the conveyance and treatment <br />facilities. This information should have been included with the <br />recently adopted amendments to Chapter III that occurred as a <br />requirement of Periodic Review. The amendments to the PFSP are <br />also a compilation of information that should have been included <br />with the adoption of the PFS? in 2001. Such additional <br />information has no effect on policies of the Plan either specific <br /> <br /> 2-4 <br /> <br /> <br />