CCMinutes - 06/22/04 JEO(ws) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

distributed another letter from the home builders association to the planning commissions addressing the same issues. He stated that the Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene planning commissions were unanimous in forwarding recommendations to adopt the ordinances to amend the Metro Plan and the PFSP. He commented that while the ordinances were packaged separately, it was acceptable to amend both plans with a single ordinance. Councilor Ballew asked if the fact that two of the three jurisdictions had not adopted the PFSP would impact the ordinances. Mr. Mott replied that it would not present a problem as the rule did not obligate communities to adopt the PFSP to have a project for a facilities treatment plant improvement identified in it. MWMC Manager Susie Smith added that the information being incorporated was very basic and on a large scale; as MWMC refined its Capital Improvement Program (CIP) each year changes would occur in the CIP that would not require amendments to the Metro Plan or PFSP. Commissioner Green asked what the intended outcome of the work session and public hearing was. Mr. Mott said the purpose was to identify all of the issues and questions related to the amendments in order to take action at a later date. Commissioner Green asked what would happen if, after the public hearing, jurisdictions agreed to the amendments to the plans but had issues with the funding mechanism. Ms. Smith replied that the amendments did not address the financing mechanism or fees; it only provided rough cost estimates for the project sites. She said the issue of how projects were funded would be addressed through the normal procedures that jurisdictions used for user rates and budget adoption. Councilor Kelly asked when the Eugene City Council was scheduled to take action on the amendments. Assistance City Manager Jim Carlson replied that action was tentatively scheduled for July 26, 2004. Mayor Leiken asked how much more staff time would be required to address changes to federal rules. Ms. Smith said the PFSP was part of ongoing planning work and would minimize the need for additional staff time and maintenance costs by determining how existing facilities could be retrofitted and improved, instead of building new facilities that would add staff, operation, and maintenance costs. She said there would be some increase in staff over time, but those would be offset by the efficiencies gained in plant operations. Mayor Torrey asked if the PSFP would need to be amended if the jurisdictions agreed to extend sanitary sewer services to Coburg. Mr. Mott replied that the PSFP and Metro Plan would require amendments. Ms. Smith said that currently service extensions outside of the urban growth boundary (UGB) were limited to the airport and areas that had been declared a public health hazard and that Metro Plan policy would have to be amended to include an additional community. Commissioner Morrison asked what the timeline would be for amendments to include Coburg. Mr. Mott said the process would be same as for the current amendments and that process was initiated in February 2004. Ms. Smith said that there would likely be additional steps required to evaluate issues such as cost and benefit, engineering, environmental factors, and governance that could take somewhat longer than the typical amendment process. She said that Mayor Leiken had recently directed staff to begin framing what an evaluation of the issue of including Coburg would entail. Mr. Mott added that another component was the fact that the Metro Plan did not include the City of Coburg and how that would affect the fundamental principles of the plan. MINUTES--Joint Elected Officials - Work Session June 22, 2004 Page 2 Lane County, Eugene, and Springfield