Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/20/1985 Meeting (2) e - e M I NUT E S Eugene City Council City Council Chamber May 20, 1985 7:30 p.m. COUNCILORS PRESENT: Richard Hansen, Emily Schue, Freeman Holmer, Ruth Bascom, Debra Ehrman, Roger Rutan, Jeff Miller. COUNCILOR ABSENT: Cynthia Wooten. The adjourned meeting of May 15, 1985, of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to order by His Honor Brian B. Obie. I. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Proposed FY86 and FY87 Sewer User Rates (memo attached) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Bill Guenzler of the Public Works Department presented the staff report. Referring to the May 16, 1985, memo to the Mayor and City Council titled "Sewer User Rates FY86-87," Mr. Guenzler said the regional rates for single-family dwellings and general customers beginning on July 1, 1985, should be $4.50 instead of $4.80 as indi- cated in the memo. Using slides, he discussed the sewer user rates. He said the regional rates will be reduced beginning July 1,1985, because some reserve funds from the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) will be used. The MWMC recommendation would convert the regional rates from a flat monthly rate to a small monthly charge and a flow-dependent charge on July 1, 1986. Discussing the local sewer/storm sewer rates, Mr. Guenzler said the staff recommendation would change the flat monthly rate for single-family dwellings from $4.20 to $5.70 on July 1,1985, and change the charge to a flow-dependent rate on July 1,1986. Rates for other customers are currently a flow- dependent rate. The method of charging would remain the same, but the rates would go up on July 1,1985, if the staff recommendation is approved. Mr. Guenzler said the recommendations continued the practice of charging for both the storm sewer and sanitary sewer on the basis of sewer flows. The staff had not found a superior method of charging, but it will continue to seek a more equitable method. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 20, 1985 Page 1 - Robert Coller, PO Box 1187, is Laboratory Services Manager for Chef Francisco. He submitted written testimony to the council. He said the change in the method of charging for sewers is significant, but very little information about it had been available to the public. The new method of calculating sewer charges will result in a decrease in the charge to Chef Francisco, but the sewer charge to Chef Francisco has increased 400 percent in the last few years. The company has spent money monitoring costs and realigning sewers, but the sewer and extra strength charges have increased. Some of the com- pany's capital investments are negated by the new method of charging. e Mr. Coller urged the council to evaluate the effect of the proposed changes on industries. He said the new system assigns costs arbitrarily. There are 45,000 customers in the system. Of those, 53 are industrial customers who account for 3 percent of the flow and 3 percent of the waste. Comparing pro- posed charges, Mr. Coller said Chef Francisco's parking lot is roughly equiva- lent to a Safeway Store, but Chef Francisco would be charged $550 a month for storm sewers and Safeway would be charged $41 for storm sewers. The Hilton Hotel has underground parking and would be charged $385 for storm sewers. Mr. Coller said that street sweeping is not a function of water usage. The new system would charge Chef Francisco $172 a month for street sweeping. Safeway would be charged $12 a month, and the Hilton Hotel would be charged $108 for street sweeping. He said the indirect charges are not based on actual incurred costs. They seem to be based on the size of systems. Mr. Coller's analysis of the charges indicated that most of a customer's charge was for fixed costs. Although residential and commercial customers may decrease the amount of water they use, they usually do not decrease the amount of solids in the waste. Mr. Coller said that industrial charges are figured differently from the charges to other customers, although the impact of industrial customers is minimal. The strength charges to industrial customers are high if water usage is low. If water usage is increased to reduce the strength of waste, the water charges go up. He made three recommendations. They were: 1) The industrial classification should be deleted. Mr. Coller noted that the admin- istrative costs for waste treatment and water usage would be reduced if there is no need to monitor industrial usage; 2) The indirect charges should be incorporated into the flow costs; 3) Street sweeping and storm sewer charges should be based on the square footage of a lot. Steve Thornock, 4410 Hilyard, represented the Steiner Corporation, which oper- ates an industrial laundry. He said the cost of treating wastewater should be based on flow, but only 30 percent of the industrial charges are for the treatment of wastewater. Comparing costs, Mr. Thornock said the charge for processing 100 pounds of linen is 39~ in Portland, l2~ in Medford, l7~ in Spokane, and 5~ in Eugene. The Steiner Corporation recently made capital investments to reduce water usage, Mr. Thornock said, but the company's efforts to maximize the use of water have not produced the desired results. He noted that extra strength charges had contributed to the MWMC revenue surplus. He said that industrial e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 20, 1985 Page 2 - - e customers are paying more than their share. He would be glad to pay the cost of water treatment and an appropriate share of the other costs. He urged the council to adopt a more equitable system. Steve Duffy, 695 West 40th Avenue, is President of Eugene Linen Supply. He objected to the proposed sewer rates because they are higher than rates in similar cities and put Eugene businesses at a competitive disadvantage. He said the charges are not fair because many of them are not flow-related, and the recommended changes indicate that the present surplus-yielding system can- not be cut back or administered more efficiently. Mr. Duffy said that his sewage charges have increased substantially since 1983, but only about 30 percent of the charges are for the transportation and treatment of sanitary sewage. Eugene employees had given him appropriate information. Mr. Duffy was concerned about what will happen when the MWMC surplus is used up. He said the parameters for rate-setting are constantly being changed, especially the extra strength formula. Businesses do not have clear direction for capital improvements. His company is considering the purchase of a water re-use system, but the proposed charges will promote the use of water. He sai d the sewer user charges shoul d not be a "catch-all" for items that shoul d be in the City's general fund. He encouraged "belt-tightening" in the Public Works Department. Ed Anderson, 485 Spyglass, had submitted written testimony to the council and declined to give oral testimony. Bob Trickett, 2457 Agate, represented the Revenue and Taxation Subcommittee of the Eugene Area Chamber of Commerce. He said the system for setting regional sewer rates is technical and complicated. The Eugene staff had helped the subcommittee understand the system. Mr. Trickett recommended the formation of a standing MWMC Budget Committee that would consider the MWMC budget and rate- setting and explain them to the public. Mr. Trickett said the sewage treatment system should be efficient and the costs should be defendable. The Chamber of Commerce subcommittee recommended that $4.5 million of the MWMC surplus be returned to customers in a rate reduction over four years. It also recommended that the Eugene and Spring- field local rate not increase so much that it will negate the regional reduc- tion and that the increase be used for capital improvements. He noted that the recommended regional and local charge represents only a 30~ reduction for most users. The subcommittee expressed concerns about the efficiency of the management of the MWMC and the indirect costs. It indicated that the indirect Eugene costs can be justified, but, if that is done, the direct costs that Springfield charges are difficult to justify. It seems the Eugene indirect costs are the same regardless of the Springfield management costs. Discussing local rates, Mr. Trickett said the subcommittee indicated that the inclusion of street sweeping and storm sewer costs in sewer charges is appro- priate, but the subcommittee recommended the street sweeping and storm sewer costs be based on impervious units (square footage or some other measure). A system for calculating impervious units is important because street sweeping and storm sewer costs are 42 percent of the local rate. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 20, 1985 Page 3 - Rudol~h Malnar, 792 Merian Lane, concurred with the recommended system descrlbed on the slides Mr. Guenzler had shown. Gene Gustafson, 885 Grant, represented Dutch Girl Ice Cream Company and Echo Spring Dairy. He said the companies spent much money to conserve water and to monitor extra strength charges. He felt it was not fair for the companies' charges to be based on water usage now. He agreed with the other testimony concerning industrial customers. There being no other requests to testify, Mayor Obie closed the pUblic hearing. Responding to the testimony, Mr. Guenzler said that records indicate there are only seven or eight industrial customers in the metropolitan area. Now, their effluent and water usage is monitored. The MWMC had decided to retain the current billing practice for them. Their reclassification to a general strength category would be satisfactory to Mr. Guenzler and would end the practice of changing signals to those customers. Mr. Guenzler said the recommended Eugene rates are comparable to the rates in Salem. The Eugene sanitary flow rate would be about 20 percent more than the Portland rate and the storm sewer rate would be equivalent to the Portland rate if Eugene could charge as Portland does. e Answering questions from Mr. Rutan, Mr. Guenzler said that only seven or eight customers would be affected if the industrial category is eliminated. Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Guenzler said that Eugene has 4,500 non-residential customers. In order to charge those customers by square footage for storm sewers, much additional data would have to be collected and inserted in the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) billing base. Such a system would be more fair, but a way to collect and maintain the data could not be found by July 1,1985. Mr. Gleason added that it would take eight months to collect the data. Ms. Bascom expressed concern about .allocating storm sewer and street sweeping charges on the basis of water and flow usage for commercial and industrial customers. She wondered if another simple system could be found. Mr. Guenzler did not know of one. He briefly discussed a system being pro- posed to the Springfield City Council which compares meter size to the pro- perty served. He recommended against adoption of a system with many excep- tions or a system which is just marginally better than the present system. He said funds have been requested for an area-wide storm sewer master plan which will facilitate the billing of storm sewer charges based on impervious units. Responding to Ms. Bascom, Ms. Schue said that the industrial and commericial customers object to storm sewer and street-sweeping charges based on flow. They also object to the new recommended regional rates. The industrial custo- mers could be moved into the commercial category, but some of them might be worse off. The matter would have to be studied. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 20, 1985 Page 4 e Responding to questions from Mr. Hansen, Mr. Gleason said that Eugene operates the regional sewage treatment plant for the metropolitan area, the local sew- age transportation system, and the local storm sewer system. The MWMC is an intergovernmental agency and is staffed by Springfield. The MWMC was formed to construct the sewage treatment plant which Eugene operates. The MWMC has served its function and it is time to simplify the administrative structure. The 12.3 percent cost for the operation of the MWMC includes grants for the completion of construction projects. The operation of some sewage treatment plants is privately contracted, but Mr. Gleason would not recommend contrac- ting for the operation of a regional plant. A contractor would not want to become involved in the intergovernmental relationships in the MWMC. Ms. Schue said that one attempt had been made to simplify the MWMC organization and she assumes more attempts will be made. Answering a question from Ms. Ehrman, Mr. Guenzler said that a 1980 Lane Council of Government (L-COG) report indicated the contents of storm sewer run-off. Mr. Gleason discussed present and former American Public Works Association recommendations about storm sewers and street sweeping. Reponding to a question from Mr. Holmer and a comment from Mayor Obie about alternatives, Mr. Guenzler said he would propose that single-family residences be charged for 3,000 square feet of impervious surface. Data would have to be collected for the 4,500 commercial and industrial customers. Mr. Gleason added that billing information, the sewer flow, and the impervious area are not easy to relate in the EWEB system. The charge for storm sewers could be a flat rate, but it would not be a very fair system. _ Ms. Ehrman wished those in the audience to know that the issue of sewer rates is complex. The council wants to address the inequities, but it is a slow process. She said that more data is available each year. Mr. Miller wondered about the impact of moving the seven or eight industrial customers into another category. He wondered if an interim system could be found for the storm sewer and street-sweeping charges until a system based on impervious units could be developed. Ms. Bascom said the council seemed to support the flow-based rates. Mr. Hansen said that user fees should be based on user activity. He saw no relationship between street sweeping and storm sewer usage and the amount of water a person uses. Therefore, he would not support street sweeping and storm sewer charges based on water usage. He said the MWMC administrative costs need the council's attention. He suggested eliminating the industrial categories and approval of the rest of the recommendation. Responding to a question from Mr. Holmer, Mr. Hansen said he would support the regional rates subject to a review of the administrative costs. He would sup- port the local rate if street sweeping is excluded. He understood the local rate would not have to be increased in that case. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 20, 1985 Page 5 ~ e e e Mr. Gleason said the regional industrial category could be changed, but the change should be coordinated with Springfield. He suggested the council not act on the regional rate. He suggested that the local rate be adopted with direction to the staff to present to the council as soon as possible a modifi- cation of the storm sewer charges. Answering questions from Mr. Miller, Mr. Gleason said that commercial custo- mers could be billed in July 1985 just as they have been billed in the past. The current system could be continued. Mr. Miller said the key issue is equity. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, to table consideration of sewer user rates for FY86-87 until June 12, 1985. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. Mr. Hansen asked the staff to provide information about the local rate if the storm sewer and street sweeping charges are not included. Ms. Bascom said she supports the inclusion of street-sweeping charges in the sewer charges. Mr. Holmer noted that funds for street sweeping are included in the general fund for FY86. He would not support including those charges in the sewer bills for that year. He would support including street-sweeping charges in the sewer bills in FY87. Ms. Ehrman suggested that industrial firms be contacted about a possible change to the commercial category. Mayor Obie recessed the meeting at 8:55 p.m. and reconvened it at 9:08 p.m. B. River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan Land Use Element (memo, background information distributed) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. Jim Farah of the Planning Department gave the staff report. The council held a public hearing on the land use element in December and clarifications recommended then had been incorporated into the element. The Lane County Board of Commissioners unani- mously recommended approval of it. Mayor Obie opened the public hearing. Michael Tharp, 975 Oak, represented John Pennington, who owns property at the southwest corner of Maxwell Street and Park Avenue. Mr. Pennington supported the adoption of the land use element. There being no additional requests to testify, Mayor Obie closed the public hearing. MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 20, 1985 Page 6 e Ms. Ehrman noted that the task team had addressed Mr. Pennington's concerns. She said it is nice to know the work is appreciated. She thanked Mr. Penning- ton for his support. Answering a question from Mr. Hansen, Mr. Farah said the concerns of Mr. and Mrs. Koberstein had been addressed. Res. No. 39l9--A resolution adopting the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan, Land Use Element. Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt Resolution No. 3919. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. II. ROUTINE ITEM FOR COUNCIL APPROVAL: IMPROVEMENT PETITIONS A. Sanitary Sewer on Country Club Road (assessible cost: sanitary sewers--37 percent; City cost--none) City Manager Micheal Gleason introduced the item. No staff report was pre- sented, but City Engineer Bert Teitzel answered questions from Ms. Bascom and Ms. Ehrman by saying that the improvements were the result of petitions from property owners, and that the council had not vacated the alley between Patterson and Hilyard streets from 22nd to 23rd avenues. e Res. No. 39l6--A resolution authorizing sanitary sewers on Country Club Road from Kerns Acres Road to Sand Avenue and Elwood Drive from 100 feet north of Country Club Road to Country Club Road and Elwood cul-de-sac from Elwood Drive to 300 feet east (2155). B. Paving, Sanitary Sewers, and Storm Sewers in Goodpasture Lakes Loop Road (assessible cost: paving--100 percent; sanitary sewers-- 100 percent; storm sewers--100 percent; sidewalks--100 percent; City cost--none) Res. No. 39l7--A resolution authorizing paving, sanitary sewers, and storm sewers in Goodpasture Lakes Loop Road (northerly portion) from 1,300 feet north of Goodpasture Island Road to Goodpasture Island Road, paving and sidewalks on Goodpasture Island Road from Goodpasture Lakes Road to east 300 feet (2180). c. Paving and Storm Sewer in Alley (assessible cost: 77 percent (by frontage); 81 percent (by area); City cost: none) Res. No. 39l8--A resolution authorizing paving and storm sewer in alley between Patterson Street and Hilyard Street from 22nd Avenue to 23rd Avenue (2182). e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 20, 1985 Page 7 e e I _ Mr. Hansen moved, seconded by Ms. Schue, to adopt the Resolutions Nos. 3916, 3917, and 3918. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. The hearing was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. ~~ ~i;"~ea~r--- Ci ty Manager (Recorded by Betty Lou Rarick) BLR: cj /1737C MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 20, 1985 Page 8 ''')-~ . '; M E M 0 RAN 0 U M e DATE: May 16, 1985 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Mike Gleason, City Manager SUBJECT: SEWER USER RATES FY86-87 Background - Regional Treatment Rates In accepting federal sewerage construction grants, Eugene and Springfield assured the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that sewer user rates would be reviewed every two years to ensure adequacy and equity. The last review was completed in May 1983 when the current rate was adopted. The re-evaluation is due this month. Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) was responsible for reviewing the revenues and expenditures for the Eugene-Springfield region which are required for wastewater treatment. The analysis began in October and included a public hearing in April. MWMC recommended that each city adopt a revised user charge as follows: e REGIONAL (TREATMENT) RATES 7-1-83 7-1-85 11-1-85 7-1-86 7-1-85 11-1-85 7-1-86 7-1-87 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING $6.30/mo. S4.80/mo S4.80/mo. S1. 61/mo + $0.50/1000g GENERAL CUSTOMER Low Strength $6.30 or 54.80 or $4.80 or Sl.61/mo + (grea~er figure) $1.089/1000g $0.50/1000g $0.50/1000g $0.50/1000g Medium Strength $6.30 or $4.80 or $4.80 or $1.61/mo + (greater figure) $1.089/1000g SO.50/1000g SO.71/1000g SO.71/1000g High Strength S6.30 or S4.80 or S4.800r S1.61/mo + (greater figure) $1.089/1000g SO.50/1000g Sl.14/1000g $1.14/1000g INDUSTRIAL CUSTOMER BOD BOD BOD BOD $145.50/1000# SI20.51/1000# 5120.51/1000# 5120.51/1000# 5S S5 SS SS S87 . 30/1000# $136.24/1000# 5136.24/1000# 5136.24/1000# FLOW FLOW FLOW FLOW e $1. 089/1000g SO.50/1000g SO.50/1000g SO.50/1000g ~~'. , ~' Background - Local Collection Sewer Rates: The City maintains approximately 440 miles of sanitary sewers, 19 pump ~ stations and an extensive storm sewer system. Public Works staff projected ~ program costs for FY86 and FY87. The current wastewater budget was prepared using the same assumptions used for the FY86 executive budget; additionally, increments were added to reflect the costs of a sewer jet truck for River Road/Santa Clara, increased capital construction, and funding street sweeping from the sewer utility. The staff recommendation on local sewer rates is as follows: LOCAL SEWER/STORM SEWER RATES Single Family Dwelling All Others (greater figure) 7-1-83 7-1-85 7-1-86 7-1-85 7-1-86 7-1-87 $4.20/mo $5.70/mo $0.98/1000g $4.20 or $5.70 or $5.70 or $0.726/1000g $0.98/1000g $0.98/1000g Work Session Issues The City Council held a work session May 13 and discussed the FY86-87 rate proposals. Several questions were posed for staff response: . 1. Give more information about the transition from flat rate to a flow based rate for residential service in July, 1986. The average single family uses 5,800 gallons of water during winter months when customers are not using water for lawns, gardens and swimming pools. Customers would be notified in the fall of 1985 that beginning July 1, 1986, they will be charged for sewer service based upon their winter water use. For example, the customer would pay $1.61 + $1.48 (winter monthly use) regardless or their summer water consump~ion. As a result, the average family would pay $1.61 + $1.48 (5.8) = $10.20. e No data are available to relate water consumption to income. A 1978-79 metropolitan housing survey showed that the poverty household contained 2.35 persons while the non-poverty household contained 2.61 persons. Indirectly, it appears that flow dependent rates would lessen the cost to small, low income households. 2. Since the general fund now includes street sweeping, what happens to that money when sewer funds are substituted? The general fund forecast I reviewed with you in April (when presenting my FY86 proposed budget) projects an approximate 51 million deficit for each of the next 3 years. This assumes, among other things, a growth of only 3% per year in wage costs. To get ahead of this situation and avoid substantial layoffs and service reductions, I am asking each department head to propose a 5% reduction in staff levels over a 2 year period. ~ If the $461,127 cost of street sweeping is moved into the sewer fund, ~ the savings to the general fund will be pledged towards anticipated deficits and service reductions. In effect, this action can solve a major part of the FY87 budget deficit. Funds freed up in FY86 can be used for capital improvements or as a contingency for such items as the Fair Labor Standards Act. If the Council does not use e e e ~ sewer funds to cover street sweeping costs, it will have lost an important opportunity to avoid major budget problems in the coming year. 3. It is difficult to discern what's happening when local and regional rates are presented separately. Residential rates will decrease from SI0.S0/month to SI0.20/month. An extensive table is attached which lists the impacts on some specific businesses. Increases will be experienced by large high strength custom- ers in November 1985. The delay in implementation is designed to allow a business to submit data that the customer feels will prove that the extra strength charge should not be applied. If a high strength customer does not or cannot prove that extra strength charges are inappropriate, they will be placed on the new charge schedule in November. 4. Is there justification for charging the cost of street sweeping against a customer's water comsumption? Staff evaluated three alternative methods of allocating storm sewer costs among customers: 1) assigning an equal amount to each account; 2) using the water meter size as a surrogate for lot size which in turn is a measure of storm run-off; and 3) assigning costs based upon the customer's reiative share of that area's impervious surface. It was concluded that the customer's impervious surface is the ideal measure of the cost contribution for storm sewer maintenance. However, this approach would require keeping billing information for 33,000 customers' properties, which is not now available. Neither of the other two approaches allocates costs more accurately than the flow method being recommended. Staff recommends continued allocation of cost on the sanitary flow. 5. Can the City justify spending sewer funds for street cleaning? Certain costs of street sanitation will stay assigned to the general fund such as dead animal and debris pickup. Tests were performed by the Lane Council of Governments in 1980 that show dirty streets are a significant cause or pollution in run-off water. Moreover, dirt which is not re- moved from streets is deposited in catch basins and storm sewers where its removal is more difficult and more expensive. Recommendation Recommended Motion: Move that the Council direct the City Manager to prepare an ordinance for consideration which implements the rates recommended by the staff. '-., . - COMBINED SEWER USER CHARGES COMMERCIAL CUSTOMER COMPARISONS e " , ~ - e - ~ I M E M 0 RAN 0 U M May 20, 1985 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Planning Department ADOPTION OF RIVER ROAD-SANTA CLARA URBAN FACILITIES PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT I. BACKGROUND In 1983, Lane County and the cities of Springfield and Eugene began joint development of an Urban Facilities Plan (UFP) for the River Road and Santa Clara areas. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Plan provided direction to undertake development of the UFP. Work on the UFP has progressed rapidly. The first element, the Sanitary Sewer Element, was adopted in May of 1984. That document provided the basis for a $5.9 million grant application to cons~ruct sewers in the area. The success of that application provided the necessary resources to initiate construction of sanitary sewers in River Road and Santa Clara. That construction project is progressing on schedule and should be substantially completed by the end of this calendar year. On December 10, 1984, the Council conducted its public hearing on the Land Use Element of the UFP. The Council closed the public hearing on th is item and wa s schedu 1 ed to ta ke act i on on Februa ry 27, 1985. The Board of of County Commissioners considered the Land Use Element at their meeting of February 20th. At that time the Commissioners: 1) identified several questions which/they requested that the Citizens Advisory Team and the Policy Committee consider; and 2) directed the County.s staff to prepare an ordi nance, adop~ i ng the Land Use El ement. Because of thi s action, the Council's adoption of the UFP was postponed. This delay provided an opportunity for the Citizens Advisory Team and Policy Committee to discuss questions raised by the Board. At its meeting of April 24th, the Lane County Board of Commissioners passed unanimously Ordinance PA 896 which adopted the Lane Use Element of the UFP. At the same time the Board passed PA 895 which readopted the Sanitary Sewer Element by ordinance instead of resolution. Considering the fact that the version of the Plan finally adcDted by the Board differs from that considered by the Council at the oubl ic hearing of December 10 and because almost five months have elaosed between the Council's hearing and potential adoption, the staff suggests the Council reopen the public hearing on this item. An adopting orcinance ;s provided under separate cover for the Council's consideration. ~)., ... , . II. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION Responding to the request of the Board of Commissioners, both the Citizens Advisory Team and RR-SC Policy Committee (councilors Holmer and Miller represent the Council on this Committee) spent considerable time considering possible changes to the draft land Use Element. Attachment A shows changes to the text developed by the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAT) and Policy Committee. The Board included all of these modifications as part of its adoption of the land Use Element. As a result of written testimony presented to the Board (Attachment B) the Commissioners also included a change in plan designation from residential to commercial for one lot located on the northeast corner of River Road and Hilcrest Street. This change is to be reflected in the Plan Diagram. e The changes contained in both Attachments A and B ei ther refl ect efforts to clarify pol icy statements or specifically designate single parcels for future commercial development. III. CONCLUSION Development in the River Road and Santa Clara areas has occurred without benefit of a coordinated public facility plan. Since acknowledgement of the t~etropol itan Plan substantial progress has been made in developing a coordinated urban service delivery and land use program for the area. The CAT, which has actually developed both the Sanitary Sewer and Land Use Elements is now. working on the Public Facilities Element. This element will address Parks and Recreation facilities, Schools, Water and Electricity, Storm Sewers, Library facilitfes, Street lights. and Solid Waste collection systems. Through the work of the CAT, and direction contained in the UFP, greater efficiencies in service delivery will ultimately be achieved. This will benefit the residents and property owners in River Road-Santa Clara and the entire Eugne-Springfield Metropolitan area. e IV. RECOMMENDED ACTION Based on the consi stency of the draft land Use Element with the Metropol itan Plan and the process used for its development, the staff recommends its adoption with the changes contained in Attachment A. .