HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous DLCD 7/28/2004
l'.
Dregon
Theodore R. Kulongoski, Governor
Department of Laild Conservation and Development
. 635 Capitol Street NE, Suite 150
Salem, Oregon 97301-2540
Phone: (503) 373-0050
Main/Coastal Fax: (503) 378-6033
Director's/Rural Fax: (503) 378-5518
TGM/Urban Fax: (503) 378-2687
Web Address: http://www.lcd.state.or.us
NOTICE OF ADOPTED AMENDMENT
~
July 28, 2004
TO:
Subscribers to Notice of Adopted Plan
or Land Use Regulation Amendments
FROM:
Larry French, Plan Amendment Program Specialist
SUBJECT: Eugene/Springfield Metro Plan Amendment
DLCD File Number 002-04
The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLeD) received the attached notice of
adoption. A copy of the adopted plan amendment is available for review at the DLCD office in
Salem and ihe local government office.
. lit
Appeal Procedures*
"
',H1'}-:':: .
,~
''''' \
DLCD ACKNOWLEDGMENT or DEADLINE TO APPi<:AL: August 12,2004
This amendment was submitted to DLeD for review 45 days prior to adoption. Pursuant to
ORS 197.830 (2)(b) only persons who participated in the local government proceedings leading to
adoption of the amendment are eligible to appeai this decision to the Land Use Board of Appeals
(LUBA).
,
If you wish to appeal, you must file a notice of intent to appeal with the Land Use Board of Appeals
(LUBA) no later than 21 days from the date the decision was mailed to you by the local government.
If you have questions, check with the local government to detennine the appeal deadline. Copies of
the notice of intent to appeal must be served upon the local government and others who received
written notice of. the final decision from the local government. The notice of intent to appeal:1JlUst be
served and filesVin the form and manner prescribed by LUBA, (OAR Chapter 661, Division 10).
Please call LUBA at 503-373-1265, if you have questions about appeal procedures.
*NOTE: THE APPEAL DEADLINE IS BASED UPON THE DATE THE DECISION
WAS MAILED BY LOCAL GOVERNMENT. A DECISION MAY HA VE
BEEN MAILED TO YOU ON A DIFFERENT DATE THAN IT WAS MAILED
TO DLCD. AS A RESULT YOUR APPEAL DEADLINE MA Y BE EARLIER
THAN THE ABOVE DATE SPECIFIED.
Cc: Doug White, DLCD Community Services Specialist
Marguerite Nabeta, DLCD'Regional Representative
::\f:j'~I'~.;~'.~~l 91tg?:tyIott, City of Springfield Planning Director
,~'
. ~/..- ,
'.
.~. j I; .: t
'.,'k 1
.r j.11 '1:.;.:.
Date Received
JUL 2 8 I d~
Planner: BJ \\J'
,
.....,
<pai\> Y.o/
, . j' ~-., ,c, ~~," ~ "II
I'.' >-1", ," r~" : ,......;, .~~ "",\
'~I ~ Il.."l':' i ,.,~ " ~.<
U,;:,p<\,.s... ""."" ":::-._-~_
j)" IU'
tJt}.. .1 I..,
. t<'-\
i Ii'.,
t.,J\--'
(11'
.. .. -Q."
.:1:- ,',.f'\, oj ~. '.1\ . i
.. ': .,:1~: '. r, l/.,
.
,
'.
\
Date Receive j
JUL 2 8, bf
Planner: BJ
I
. ,
FORM 2
D Len NOTICE OF ADOPTION
This form mu.t he mailed to DLGD within 5 workin.. day. after the final deci.ion
per ORS 197.610, OAR Chapter 660 - Division 18
. (~ee reverse ~ide for submittal re~llirement5:)
Di;:PTOF
JUL 2 3 2004
LAND CONSERVATIQN.
AND DEVELOPM!NT
Local File No.: LRP2004-00001
(lfno ~umberl use n.one)
Jurisdiction: City of Springfield
. Date of Ad9ption: Julv 19. 2004
.. '(Must be filled in)
Date Mailed: Jnl v 22.. 2004
(Date mailed or scnllO DLCD)
. .
Date the Notice ofl'roPosed Amendment was mailed to DLCD: July 22, 2004
. .xL .Cu~k'."hensive Plan rext Ainendment
....:.... Land Use Regulation Amendment
_ New Land Use Regulation
.xL Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
.-.:.... Zoning Map Amendment
Other.
. (please SpccUy Type of Action) .
. ..
. .
Summarize the adopted amendment. Do not use techriical terms. Do not write "See AttachecL"
. - . .
The Public Facilities element of the Comprehensive' Plan.'w~s amended to include
"a new nolicv.reauirihe cOffinliance. ~ith wateraualitv standards for dischar~es into
the river, and two Pl'oiects with maps were added. The Pubtic Facilities Plan was
amended to include these same Comorehensive Plan amendments and to add a new chapter
describing the amendment process.
Describe how the adopted ameI!dment differs from the proposed amendment. If it is the same, write
"Same." If you did not give notice for the proposed amendment, write "N/A.".
Same
Plan Map Changed from: N / A
Zone Map Changed from: N / A
to Show nlanned RRnitarv RewRap ~~r;lties
to
Location: Various
Acres' Involved:
New:
N/A'
Specify Density: Previous: N/A
,. f ,I': ~~;~ ,~FP.,ji~W~ftatewide Planning Goals:
Was an Exception Adopted? Yes:-
'1 ~ .,. .
~1 ,,\ iUt ".
~
JUL 28, Df.
Planner:BJ
Goal 11
No: XX
i 1", II' DLCD.File Nt;::
i,.O~, ' "'.;};i ';0( ,11'>'11."'';:''\;
. .
Did the Department of Land Conservation and Development receive a notice of Proposed .
Amendment FORTY FIVE (45\ davs !lrior to the first evidentiarv heaTing. Yes: xx. No:
March<4, 2004 Notice; April 20, 2004 Hearing , ---
. . . Ifno, do the Statewide Planning Goals apply. , Yes: No: . .
lfno, did The Emergency CirCumstances Require immediate adoption, Yes: No:
Affected State or Federal Agencies, Local Governments or Special Districts:
Local Contact: Gree Mott
Area Code + Phone Number: 541-726:"3'774
Address: _ 221 Fifth STreet
City:. ~nY;nof;p1r1
Zip Code+4: q7477
. ADOPTION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
. .'
. . .
This fonnmust he mailed to DLCD within 5 workin~ days ~fter the final decisinn
per ORS 197.610, OAR Chapter 660. Division 18.
1. '. .Send this Form and TWO (2) Conie.~ of the Adonted Ary,endmeittto:
ATIENlJON: PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIALIST
DEPARTMENT OF LAND CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT
, . ' .. . .
635 CAPITOL STREET NE, SUITE 150
SALEM, OREGON 97301-2540
2. Submit TWO (2) copies the adopted material, if copies are boUnded please' submit TWO (2)
complete copies of documents and maps.
3. ;Please Note: Adopted materials must be sent to DLCD not later tba:i1 FIVE (5) working days
following the date of the final decision on the amendment.
4. Submittal of of this Notice of Adoption must include the text of the amendment plus adopted
findings and supplementary information. .
. .
. .
5~ The deadline to appe;U will be extended if you submit this notice of adoption wiihin five
working days of the final decision. Appeals to LUBA may be filed within TWENTY-ONE
(21) days of the date, the "Notice of Adoption",is sent to DLCD.
. 6. . ." In addition to sending the ''Notice of Adoption" to DLCD, you must notify. persons who
. par,ticipa~d in the local hearing and requested notice of the final decision,
. ", ",',"1 . '
; ;"J"I>1 l~ ;:t,~.>.~~d,,~~r~(COPies? You can copy this form on to 8.1/2x I 1 lrreen naner 0*. \~;.cf!i AAeiv ed
. '. ',Or;<:::O'Office at (503) 373-0050; or Fax your request to:(503) 378-5518; or~cJi}p\..t .
. . '-'f,~~~sno Larry.French@state.or.us - ATIENTION: PLAN AMENDMENT SP~,F'I 0 ~
1:\p!,lpaalfQmulnoticead.fnn revised,7/29199
;1" ;,~ '':'~:' .h:('j . Pla'nnera, BJ
4.... .; -:;/J 1".1 '(,f 1 ' .
I .
.','
, ..
~tf: '
".t'.'
,'.:,
,.
""
I. ..! 'l~
'y.'r
.,-
. ORDINANCE NO. 6093
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE"SPRlNGFIELD METROPOLITAN
AREA GENERAL PLAN TEXT, CHAPTER ill, SECTION G. PUBLIC FACILITIES
AND SERVICES ELEMENT AND CHAPTER V GLOSSARY; AND ADOPTING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.' .
.WHEREAS, Chapter IV6fthe Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area' General
Plan (Metro Plan) sets forth procedures for amendment of the Metro Plan, which for
Springfield are implemented by the provisions of Article 7 of the Springfield
Development Code; and .
WHEREAS, on February 17, 2004, the Springfield City Council initiated
proceedings for a Metro Plan amendment; and
- .
. WHEREAS, following an April 20, 2004 joint public hearing with the Eugene
and Lane County Planning Commissions, the Springfield Planning Commission, on June
1,2004, recommended Metro Plan amendmimts to Chapter ill, Section G. Public.
Facilities and ServIces Element to include "wastewater" as a subcategory of service ,
within the UGB; to amend Finding #6 and Policy #3 to recognize the addition of Map 2a .
to the Public Facilities and Services Plan (PFS.P); to amend !,olicy #2 to include local
capital improvement plans as a means to implement policy in the PFSP; to insert two new
findings regarding local and regional wastewater services to development within the
. UGB; to add a new Policy #G.9 that commits the wastewater conveyance and treatment
systems for this area to accommodate projected growth and regulatory requirements; and
to modify definition #36 in Chapter V Glossary to include Treatment Facilities System, .
the exact language for each of the preceding amendments being contained in Appendix A
attached and adopted as part of this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, text, maps and tables set forth in Appendix B at pages 1 and 2 also
amend Chapter ill-G of the Metro Plan as amended in ChapterII'ofthe PFSP; and
WHEREAS, on May 24,2004, the Eugene Planning Commission, and on June 1,
2004, the Larie County Planning Commission recommended Public Facilities and
Services Plan and Metro Plan amendments; and .
WHEREAS, the City Council conducted ajoint public hearing on this amendment
on June 22, 2004, with the Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of
.' ~f.il~i' ,."",:, -:. \ €ommissioners, and is now ready to take action based upon the above recommendations
< . . ...-;l. ",,'if, and~vidence and testimony already in the record as well as the evidence and testimony
,) '" 11presented at the joint elected officials public hearing; and
" t" t
'..~/~' ,
'f' ~" . r~'" WHEREAS, substantial evidence exists within the record demonstrating that the
I." '"proposal meets the requirements of the Metro Plan, Springfield Developmertti;Q41~ fl1lil '
.... ....oapplicable state and local law as described in findings attached as Exhibit l,yg~cllitece,ved
, 'are 'adopted in support of this Ordinance.
"
,: ~ .", , ..' .
JUL 28;01
Planner: BJ
., ,
,.
Ordinance
I
,
1
No.. 6093
NOW, THEREFORE, the Common Council of the City of Springfield does
ordain as follows: . .
Section I: The Metro Plan Chapter III Section G. Public Facilities' and Services
Element, and Chapter V Glossary, are'hereby amended as described inAppendix A
attached and adopted as part of this Ordinance. The' text amendments in Appendix A
shall apply to that version of the Metropolitan Plan in effect at the time ofthe effective.
date of this Ordinance. . .
Section 2: The text, maps and project lists in Appendix B at pages I and 2 are.
adopted as amendments to the Metro Plan.
Section 3: Although not part of this Ordinance, the City Council adopts the
findings set forth in t1i.e attached Exhibit I in support of this action. .
Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision
and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 4: Notwithstanding the effective date of ordiriances as provided by
Section 2.110 of the Springfield Municipal Code 1997, tlus Ordinance shall.become f "
effective upon the date that all ofthe following have occurred: (a) the ordinance has been'
acknowledged as provided by ORS 197.625; (bY at least 30 days have passed since the
date the ordinance was approved; and (c) both the Eugene City Council and the Lane
County Board of Commissioners have adopted ordinances containing substantively
identical provisions to those described in Sections 1 and 2 of this Ordinance.
Adopted by the Common Council of the City of Springfield this 19th day of.
July, 2004 by a vote,of 5 in favor and 0 against.
Approved by the Mayor of the City _Of ~ t: y of July, 2004.
Mayor / U
ATTEST:
CitYR~
Date Received
I
. JUL 28 I b~
Planner: !BJ
I
I
,
I
'.', . ,.;' ~ ,..... ~.
. j.....1.l,: ~;:41 j;C,,'-j,. i
~" . ,.,' '..~
.
"->~~r":
~ " '''':'1,':
REVIEWED'& APPROVED
'~~.! ,4
;,;.n=. (j'; /' !Yv v
-:;iT!;::'E' OF CITY(~
,
, ,I.};
.....r..;
J.
n'~ .J;':r'~
'. ,......;
I:;;' "; I"
. \\ f.
:.\,....t.j
,
,-.
~ .'
,
,
,+ '.
ORDINANCE NO. 6094
.AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN
AREA PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES PLAN (PFSP) BY ADDING NEW
TABLES AND MAPS IDENTIFYING WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
AND CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS IN CHAPTER II; AMENDING CHAPTER IV
WASTEWATER SYSTEM'CONDITION ASSESSMENT AND ADOPTING TABLE
16a; ADDING A NEW CHAPTER VIAMENDMENTS TO THE PFSP; AND
ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
WHEREAS" Chapter IV of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General
Plan (Metro Plan) sets forth procedures for amendment of the Metro Plan, and by
extension, amendment of refinement and functional plans that supplement the Metro
Plan, which' for Springfield are implemented by the provisions of Article 7 of the
Springfield Development Code; and
WHEREAS, on February 17,2004, the. Springfield City Council initiated
proceedings for a Public Facilities and Services Plan amendment and related Metro Plan
text amendments; and
WHEREAS; following an April 20, 2004 joint public hearing with the Eugene
and Lane County Planning Commissions, the Springfield Planning Commission, on June
1,2004, recommended the related Metro.Plan text amendments and Public Facilities imd
Services Plan amendments to include new tables identifying wastewater treatment system
and primary collection system improvement projects as identified in Appendix B; to
include new maps showing existing wastewater treatment systerris and planned
wastewater project sites; to revise the wastewater system condition assessment by
describing and distinguishing 'treatment system and conveyance; to inciude an expanded
discussion of wastewater service within the urbanizable area; toinclude project titles,
rough cost estimates and completion dates for the wastewater treatment and collection
system improvements; and to add a new Public Facilities and Services Plan amendment
process, tlle exact language for each of the preceding amendments being contained in
Appendix A and B attached and adopted as part of this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, .on May 24,2004, the Eugene Planning Commission and on June 1,
2004, the Lane County Planning Commission recommended the Metro Plan text
amendments and Public Facilities and Services Plan amendments; and
n,b~k~,(".i,,(,;t'.f ;,\~'(.~(WHEREAS,the City Council conducte.d ajoint public hearing on this amendment
'.'. ..;:. ,...-,;h. on' June 22, 2004, wIth the Eugene CIty Counctl and Lane County Board of
.q ,. c~mlInissioners, and is now ready to take action based upon the above recommendations
, " 'and evidence and testimony already in the record as well as the evidence and testimony
i ' . '''" '..' ._ p'res~1Jtyd 'at the joint elected officials public hearing; and
I '3'" , ! ,." 1,'-" I"
'..f .{:~( I' . -'1. ': :.,'1' 'tl ~ : t:-...,; I! '-"r
WHEREAS, substantial evidence exists within the record demonstrat~~ '
proposal meets the requirements of the Metro Plan, Springfield Developmen~~~rIaleCeIVed
JUL 28 ,.1)1.{
Planner: BJ
Ordinance No..6094
applicable state and local law as described in [mdings attached as Exhibit I, and which
are adopted in support of this Ordinance.
"C (
NOW,THEREFORE, the Corrunon Council of the City ofSpririgfield does
ordain as follows: .'
Section 1: The Public Facilities and Services Plan is hereby amended asJollows:
a) Chapter II is amended to include the text, tables and maps set forth in Appendix B at
pages 1 and 2, attached hereto; b) Chapter IV is amended to reflect the text and tables set
forth in Appendix B at pages 3 and 4; and c) Chapter VI is added and shall consist of the
text set forth in Appendix B at pages 5 and 6. .Appendix Bis adopted as.parrof this
Ordinance. ' . '.
Section 2: Chapter II of the Public Facilities and Services Plan is further amended
to reflect the changes to Chapter III-G, Public Facilities and Services Element and
Chapter V, Glossary of the Metro Plan as set forth in Appendix A, attached hereto and by
this reference incorporated herein. .
Section 3: Although not part of this Ordinance, the City Council adopts the
findings set forth in the attached Exhibit '1 in support of this action.
Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this
Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competerit . (:.
jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision
and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 5:. Notwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided by
Section 2.11 0 of the Sp'ringfield MuniCipal Code 1997, this Ordinance shall become
effective upon the date that all of the following have occurred: (a) the ordinance has been
acknowledged as.provided by ORS 197.625; (b) at least 30 days have passed since the
date the ordinance was approved; and (c) both the Eugene City Council and Lane County
Board of Corrunissioners have adopted ordinances containing identical provisions to .
those described in Section 1 of this Ordinance.
Adopted by the Common Council of the City of Springfield this 19th day of
July, 2004 by a vote of 5 in favor and 0 against. '.
ATTEST:
Approved by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this 19 t7)diy of J ly, 2004 I
" 0~ J <-- )1Jate Recei~ed
Ma~o~7 {/;:.--- -]~~ 28 IOV i
~~. Planner: BJ
City Recorder V
", .'C""!O["'I!I, APDC1()\lCn ,
~4 j(,
-. 11 (S1Q.~/
-
,,-.,..... '1; .. r ~,,{ ~ 9f.,~'1
~.:....f\l"(C.,..}' ~.-:~.,. ~ -.l~ I'
'. J .. 1; ~'" ',_""""" ,I .. \ "
~ ~ I, 'l
:1 ..~~< .
. 1/ ~ I ',,' /', "/ r:. .
".~'i;' "\. ,-"7\' ','.
. ....}J.l ", '",'..'
APPENDIX Aa
PROPOSED CHANGES'TO THE METRO PLAN
_ (Current version of the Metro Plan)
G. Public Facilities and Services Element
. .
This Public Facilities and Services Element provides direction for the future provision of
urban facilities and services to planned land uses within the Metro Plan Plan Boundary
(I>lan Boundary). .
The availability of public facilities and services is a key factor influencing the location
and density offuture development. The public's investment in, and scheduling of, public
facilities and services are a major means of implementing the Metro Plan. As the
population of the Eugene-Springfield area increases and land development patterns
change over time, the demand for urban services also increases 'and changes. These
changes require th~t service providers, both public and private, plan for the provision of
services in a coordinated manner, using consistent assumptions and projections for
~~~~~~ . -
The policies in this element complement Metro Plan Chapter II-A, Fundamental
Principles, and Chapter II-C, Growth Management. Consistent with the principle of
. .
compact urban growth prescribed in Chapter II, the policies in this element call for future
urban water and wastewater services to be provided exclusively within the urban growth
boundary. This policy direction is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal II : Public
.Facilities and Services, "To plan and develop a timely, orderly imd efficient arrangement
of public facilitie.s and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural
development." On urban lands, new development must be served by at least the
minimum level of key urban services and facilities at the time development is completed
and, ultimately, by a full range of key urban services and facilities. On rural lands within
the Plan Boundary, development must be served by rural levels of serVice. Users of
facilities and services in rural areas are spread out geographically, 'resulting in a higher
per-user cost for some services and, often, in an inadequate revenue base to support a
higher level of service in the future. Some urban facilities may be located or managed
outside the urban growth boundary, as allowed by state law, but only to serve
development within the urban growth boundary.
Urban facilities and services within the urban growth boundary are provided by the City
of Eugene, the City of Springfield, Lane County, Eugene Water & Electric Board' .
(EWEB), the Springfield Utility Board (SUB), the Metropolitan Wastewater
Management Commission (MWMc), electric cooperatives, and special service districts.
Special service districts provide schools and bus serVice, and, in some areas outside the
'Cities, they provide water, electric, fire service or parks and recreation service. This
element provides guidelines for special service districts in line with the compact urban
development fundamental principle of the Metro ))lan. '..
Appendix Aa Page I
Date Received
JUL 2 Sf 6c/
Planner: BJ
;)'~iV"I,:,".\n~ ,,,}r:.!f '.1
' ,'. ~. ,..;...,1....~J Ir j....;!t, ;,'".\~,
,~11~ ;r t,
~ 1-.) .
.. -
. -'i Id.~:~1'.~.~:,~'J..
...',";' '....
lbis element incorporates the findings and policies in the Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan (public Facilities and Services
Plan), adopted as a refmement to the Metro Plan. The Public Facilities and Services
Plan provides guidance for public facilities and services, including planned water,
wastewater, stormwater, and electrical facilities. As required by Goal 11, the Public
Facilities and Services Plan identifies and shows the general location' of the water,
wastewater, and stormwater projects needed to serve land within the urban growth
boundary.2' The Public Facilities and Services Plan also contains this information for
electrical facilities, although not required to by law.
The project lists and maps in the Public Facilities and Services Plan are adopted as part.
of the Metro Plan. Information in the Public Facilities and Services Plan on project.
phasing and costs, and decisions on timing arid financing of projects are not part of the
Metro Plan and are controlled solely by the capital improvement programming and
budget processes of individual service providers.
lbis element of the Metro Plan is organized by the following topics related to the .
provision of urban facilities and services. Policy direction for the full range of services,
. iRellldiag wa;'::' ',.':er serviee, may be found under any of these topics, although the first
topic, Services to Development Within the Urban Growih Boundary, is further broken
down into sub-categories.
Services to Development Within the Urban Growth Boundary
. Planning and Coordination . . .
. Water
. Wastewater
. Stormwater
. Electricity
. Schools
. Solid Waste.
. Services to Areas Outside the Urban Growth Boundary
. Locating and Managing Public Facilities Outside the Urban Growth Boundary
. Financing
The applicable findings and policies are contained under each of these topic headings,
below. .
The policies listed provide direction for public and private developmental and program
decision-making regarding urban facilities and services. Development should be
coordinated with the planning, financing, and construction of key urban facilities and
services to ensure the efficient use and expansion of these facilities.
~ . -. . ,
'. " -,j'.) -::"II/~'
";-" ~..~..... .
I The exact location of the projects shown on the Public Facilities and Services Plan planned facilities
maps is determined through local processes. . .
..2.qOall1 also requires transportation facilities to be included in public facilities plans. In this metropolitan
'al:ea;'.tfa11sP<1.rtation facilities are addressed in Metro Plan Chapter lII-F and in the Eugene-SWdt.ld R' ce'lve' d
!ransportation System Plan (Trans Plan). Uale e
" t
1
;ol-
II'
.t'~
r-: -" ~,
It. '.
Appendix Aa Page 2
JUL 2 810~
Planner: BJ.
. !
.. ,
r .
...--".
. .
Goals
I. Provide and. maintain public facilities and services in an efficient and
environmentally responsible manner.
2. Provide public facilities and services in a manner. that encourages orderly and
sequential groWth. .
Findinl!s and Policies
Services to DevelopmenfWithin the Urban Growth Boundary: Planning and
Coordination
Findinl!S
I. Urban expansion within the urban growth boundary is accomplished through in-
fill, redevelopment, and annexation of territory which can be served with a
minimum level of key urban services and facilities. This permits new
development to use existing facilities and services, or those which can be easily
extended, minimizing the public cost of extending urban facilities and services.
2. In accordance with Statewide Planning Goal II and. OAR 660, the Public
Facilities and Services Plan identifies jurisdictional responsibility for the
provision of water, wastewater and stormwater, describes respective service areas.
. and existing and planned water, wastewater, and stormwater facilities, and
contains planned facilities maps for these services. Electric system information
and improvements are included in the Public Facilities and Services Plan,
although' not required by state law, Local facilitY master plans and refinement
plans provide more specific project information.
3. Urban services within the metropolitan urban growth boundary are provided by
the City of Eugene, the City of Springfield, Lane County, EWEB, SUB, the
MWMC, electric cooperatives, and special se\Vice districts..
4. The Public Facilities and Services Plan finds that almost all areas within the city
limits of Eugene and Springfield are served or can be served in the short-term (0-5
years) with water, wastewater, stormwater, and electrie service. Exceptions to
this are stormwater service to portions of the Willow Creek area and southeast
Springfield and full water service at some higher elevations in Eugene's South
Hills. Service to these areas will be available in the long-term. Service to all
areas within city limits are either in a capital improvement plan or can be
extended with dev~lopment.
,.5. . With the improvements specified in the Public Facilities and Services Plan .
(.~, l';Y~~ )~~~\-i ~~'J~;p~\)ject lists, all urbanizable areas within the Eugene-Springfield urb€)afeIAeceived
,
,.l., .1'
f if
.'.>,
,
Appendix Aa Page 3
JUL 28,O(
. Planner: BJ
,.
,.
boundary can be served with water, wastewater, stormwater, and electric service
at the time those areas are developed. In general, areas outside city limits
. serviceable in the long-term are located near the urban growth boundary and.in .
urban reserVes, primarily in River Road, Santa Clara, west Eugene's Willow
Creek area, south Springfield, and the Thurston and Jasper-Natronareas in east
Springfield. .'
6. OAR 660-011-0005 defines projects that must be included in public facility plan
project lists for water, wastewater, and stormwater. These definitions are shown
in the keys of planned facilities Maps 1,2, 2!l. and 3 in the Pu~lic Facilities and
Services Plan.
7. In accordance with ORS 195.020 to 080, Eugene, Springfield, Lane County and
special service districts are required to enter into coordination agreements that
define how planning coordination and urban services (water, wastewater, fire,
parkS, open space and recreation, and streets, roads and mass transit) will be
provided within the urban growth boundary.
8. Large institutional uses, such as univerSities and hospitals, present complex
planning problems for the metropolitan area due to their location, facility
expansion plans, and continuing housing and parking needs. .
9. . Duplication of services prevents the most economical distribution of public
facilities and services. . -
10. As discussed in the Public Facilities and Services Plan, a majority of nodal
development areas proposed in TransPlan are serviceable now or in the short-
term. The City of Eugene's adopted Growth Management Policy #15 states,
"Target publicly-financed infrastructure extensions to support development for
higher densities, in-fill, mixed uses, and nodal development."
Policies
G.1 Extend the minimum level and full range of key urban faCilities and services in an
orderly and efficient manner consistent with the growth management policies in
Chapter II-C, relevant policies in this chapter, and other Metro Plan policies.
G.2 Use the planned facilities maps of the Public Facilities and Services Plan to guide.
the general location of water, wastewater, stormwater, and electrical projects in
the. metropolitan area. Use local facility master planS, refmement plans, caoital
imorovement olans. and ordinances as the guide for detailed planriing and project
. implementation.
G.3 Modifications and additions to or deletions from the project lists in the Public
Facilities and Services Plan for water, ~astewater, and stormwater public facility
.' ,!,-jl.1,\:,:" .c;1'-' : l,/ _~rojects or significant changes to pr~ject location, from that describetla1e Received
" JUL 2 81 D~
'-,'
. I,.';t',,:
'J
.~ ~"
,.,. ,
Appendix Aa Page 4
P'anner~ ~,,;
,
-"" .;
t""
.. .
~"'.
. Public Facilities'and Services Plan planned facilities Maps I, 2, ~ and 3,
requires amending the Pubic Facilities and Services Plan and the Metro Plan,
. except for the following: .
a.
. .
Modifications to a public facility project which are minor in nature and do
not significantly impact the project's general description, location, sizing,
capacity, or other generill characteristic of the project; or
b.
Technical and environmental modifications to a public facility which are
made pursuant to final engineering on a project; or .
'..,
Modifications to a public facility project which are made pursuant to
fmdings of an Environmental Assessment pr Environmental Impact
Statement conducted under regulations implementing the procedural
. provisions of the national Environmental Policy Act of 1969 or any .
. federal or State of Oregon agency project development regulations
consistent with that act and its regulations
c.
GA The 'cities and Lane County shall coordinate with EWEB, SUB, and special
service districts operating in the metropolitan area, to provide the opportunity to
review and comment on proposed public facilities, plans, programs, and public
improvement projects or changes thereto that may affect one another's area of
responsibility.
G.5 The cities shall continue joint planning coordination with major institutions, such
as universities and hospitals, due to their relatively large impact on local facilities
and. services.
G.6 Efforts shall be made to reduce the number of unnecessary special service districts
and.to revise confusing or illogical service boundaries, including those that result
in a duplication of effort or overlap of service. When possible, these efforts shall
be pursued in cooperation with the affected jurisdictions.
G.7 Service providers shall coordinate the provision offacilities and services to areas
targeted by the cities for. higher densities, infill, mixed uses, and nodal .
development.
G.8 The cities and county shall coordinate with cities surrounding the metropolitan.
area to develop a growth management strategy. This strategy. will address
regional public facility needs. .
Services to Develo'nment Within the Urban Growth Boundarv: Wastewater
Findinl!s
-,
. .t"'fl'- '(' <n' , ,-
;',.1.'9 flL-~,~ 1 ....t1."f ~.;;'t.T~I; :
. ."_H ,,\ .1'1.1 ,;~...",:~: .;;>\ .
I, ,
. ;,.,~ IIJ..'
~"'-
-",'-'
',',' .. ,',: ,',_" ,i!('. '
II , t .q,....,~;.
f, . ,-.;'.i". .
Appendix Aa Page 5
Date Received
JUL 281o~
Planner: BJ
11. Snrimmeld and EUl!:ene rely on a combination of re<rional and local services
for the nrovision of wastewater services. Within each City. the local.
iurisdiction nrovides collection of wastewater through a svstem of saniw.r
sewers and numniril!: systems. These collection facilities connect to a rezional
system of similar sewer collection facilities owned and vu"...;"j b'J the
Metronolitan Wastewater Manaqement Commission ("MWMC"'- an entity
formed under an interqovernmental alITeement created nursuant to ORS 190.
TOl!:ether. these collection facilities (which exclude nrivate laterals which.
convev wastewater frOm individual residential or commerciallindustrial
comiections) constitute the nrimarv collection system.
. '
12. The nrimarv collection svstem conveys wastewater to a treatment facilities svstem
owned arid onerated bv MWMC. This system consists of an interconnected Water
Pollution Control Facilitv ("WPCF"1. a biosolids facilitv_ and a beneficial reuse
facilitv." .
Policies
G.9 Wastewater conveyance and treatment shall be nrovided to meet the needs of.
proiected lITOwth inside the urban lITowth boundarY that are canable of comnlvinl!:
with rel!Ulatorv reauirements l!:overninl!: beneficial reuse or dischar'!e of effluent
and beneficial reuse or disDOSal of residuals..
Services to Development Within the Urban Growth Boundary: Water
. Findinl!!!
1+3. Springfield relies on groundwater for its sole source of water. EWEB water
source is the McKenzie River and EWEB is developing groundwater sources.
The identification of projects on the Public Facilities and Services Plan planned
facilities map does not confer rightS to a groundwater source.
Policies
G.910 Eugene and Springfield and their respective utility branches, EWEB and
Springfield Utility Board (SUB), shall ultimately be the water service providers
within the urban growth boundary. .
G.1Gl . Continue to take positive steps to protect groundwater supplies. The cities,
county, and other service providers shall manage land use and public facilities for
groundwater-related benefits through the implementation of the Springfield
.'. Drinking Water Protection Plan and other wellhead protection plans. .
Management practices instituted to protect groundwater shall be coordinated
among the City of Springfield, City of Eugepe, and Lane County.
~ ;{, '.
'j :',j
,...,; ...
Appendix Aa Page 6
Date Received
JUL 2 8 I D~
Planner: BJ
-'-:,. ;J~<:'!':{:', ',trJ\.
..
. ",.f, :,~;.-"..."iI" .::,1-;'
,.;~~~
G.l +2 Ensure that water main extensions within the urban growth boundary include
adequate consideration of fire flows.
G.l~3 SUB, EWEB, and Rainbow Water District, the water providerS that currently
control a water source, shall examine the need for a metropolitan-wide water .
master program, recognizing that a metropolitan-wide system will require'
establishing standards, as well as coordinated source and delivery systems.
Services to Developm'ent Within the Urban Growth Boundary: Stormwater
Findings
124. Historically, stormwater systems in Eugene and Springfield were designed
primarily to control floods. The 1987 re-authorization of the federal Clean Water
. Act required, for the fIrst time, local communities to reduce stormwater pollution
. within their municipat storm drainage systems. These requirements applied
iDitially to the City of Eugene and subsequent amendments to the Act exterided
these requirements to Springfield and Lane County.
1';5. Administration and enforcement of the Clean Water Act stormwater provisions
occur at the state level, through National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permitting requirements. Applicable jurisdictions are required to obtain
an NPDES stormwater permit from the Oregon Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ), and prepare a water quality plan outlining the Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to be taken over a fIve-year permit period for reducing
stormwater pollutants to "the maximum extent practicable."
146. Stormwater quality improvement facilities are most efficient and effective at
intercepting and removing pollutants when they are close to the source of the
pollutants and treat relatively small volumes of runoff.
I ~7. The Clean Water Act requires states to assess the quality of their surface waters
every three years, and to list those waters which do not meet adopted water
quality standards. The Willamette River and other water bodies have been listed
as not meeting the standards for temperature and bacteria. This will require the
development of Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for these pollutants, and
, an allocation to point and non-point sources.
, '.
, .";-'-j,
168. The listing of Spring Chinook Salmon as a threatened species in the Upper
Willamette River requires the application of Endangered Species Act (ESA)
provisions to the salmon's habitat in the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers. The
. decline in the Chinook Salmon has been attributed to such factors as destruction
of habitat through channelization. and revetment of river banks, non-point source
pollution, alterations of natural hydro graph by increased impervious surfaces in
d::,: ~;..' .' j tp.e?~,}n, an~ d:gradation ofna.tural functions of riparian lands due to ljS.moval or .
,,;), , !alte~tlOn ofmdlgen()Us vegetatIOn. . . uate ReceIved
i",
'. , ' . I' ~
I.~ /. ";'1'
'l.. f;.
,:' ~.,l: ~~;
Appendix Aa Page 7
JUL 28, {)C{
Planner: BJ
1 ..
1+9. There are many advantages to keeping channels open, including, at a minimum,
natural biofiltration of storm water pollutants; greater ability to attenuate effects of
peak stormwater flows; retention of wetland, habitat, and open space functions;
and reduced capital costs for stormwater facilities.
~20. An increase in impervious surfaces, without mitigation, results in higher flows
during peak storm events, less opportunity for recharging of the aquifer, and a
decrease in water quality. .
+921. Stormwater systems tend to be gravity-based systems that follow the slope ,?f the
land rather than political boundaries. In many cases, the natural drainageways
such as Streams serve as an integral part of the stormwater conveyance system.
2G2. In general, there are no programs for stormwater maintenance outside the Eugene'
and Springfield city limits, except for the Lane County roads program. State law
limits county road funds for stormwater projects to those' located within the public
right-of-way.
2+3. Filling in designated floodplain areas can increase flood'elevations above the
elevations predicted by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
models, because the FEMA models are typically based only on the extent of
development at the time the modeling was conducted and do not take into account
the ultimate buildout of the drainage area This poses risks to other proPerties in
or adjacent to floodplains and can change the hydrograph of the river.-
Policies
G.I34 Improve surface and ground water quality and quantity in the metropolitan area
by developing regulations or instituting programs for stormwater to:'
a. Increase public awareness of techniques and practices private individuals.
can employ to help correct water quality and quantity problems;
b. Improve management of industrial and commercial operations to reduce
negative water quality and quantity impacts;
c. Regulate site planning for new development and construction to better
manage pre- and post-construction storm runoff, including erosion,
velocity, pollutant loading, and drainage;
. d.' Increase storage and retention and natural filtration of storm runoff to
lower and delay peak storm flows and to settle out pollutants'prior to
discharge into regulated waterways;
I .... 1 ." " ~ J '
~ r !,1 ... \ ,I ,t'l ,:"';:' . -'., .
Appendix Aa Page 8
Oate Rece\\fed
JlIL 28 rD4- .
Planner: 6J
'. " '\"
1,_ ,,~k._ t 1\1~1,' 'I
'IJ '.. '~'.' ."
-..;> ..'
";', 'l
~. .
'," II"
')'",.i
.....it..-
\ .
e. .Require on-site controls and development standards, as practical, to reduce . .
off-site impacts from Stormwater runoff;
f. Use natural and simple mechanical treatment systems to provide treatment
for potentially contaminated runoffwaters;
g. Reduce street~reilited water quality and' quantity problems;
h. Regulate use and require containment and/or pretreatment of toxic
substimces;
i. Include containment measures in site review standards to minimize the
effects of chemical and petroleum spills; and
. j. Consider impacts to' ground water quality in the design and location of dry.
wells. :
G.145 Implement changes to Stormwater facilities and management practices to reduce
the presence of pollutants regulated under the Clean Water Act and to address the
requirements of the Endangered Species Act.
G.l ~ Consider wellhead protection areas and surface water supplies when planning
stormwater facilities.
G.1 (,7 Manage or enhance waterways and open stormwater systems to reduce water
quality impacts from runoff and to improve stormwater conveyance.
G.1+8 Include measures in local land development regulations that minimize the amount
of impervious surface in new development in a manner that reduces stormwater
pollution, reduces the negative affects from increases in runoff, and is compatible
. with Metro Plan policies.
G.l&9 The cities and Lane County shall adopt a strategy for the unincorporated area of
the urban growth boundary to: reduce the negative effects of filling in floodplains
and prevent the filling of natural drainage channels except as necessary to ensure
public operatioris and maintenance of these channels in a manner that preserves
and/or enhances.floodwater conveyance capacity and biological function.
GA..920Maintain flood storage capacity within the floodplain, to the maximum extent
practical, through measures that may include reducing impervious surface in the
floodplain and adjacent areas.
".',
Services to Development Within the Urban Growth Boundary: . Electricity
, ...... ~
'", "''''', ","'. Fi.(J"'"
:\..::...."H\t..:..~}>:....:'I-'-I, n ID!!S
.-
._:,(.~
,. . ~, .. '7, I
,", _, .:;' ""'; ~ "ttr,
Appendix Aa Page 9
'Date Received
JUL28,oc{
Planner: BJ
(. "
l' ,
2~. According to local municipal utilities, efficient electrical service is often
accomplished through mutual back-up a6,,,,,ments and inter-connected systems
. are more efficient than isolated systems. .
Policies
G.2Gl The electric service providers will agree which provider will serve areas about to
be annexed and inform the cities who the service provider will be and how the
transition of services, if any, will occur.
Services to Development Within the Urban Growth Boundary: Schools
Findinl!S
2~5. ORS 195.1l0requires cities and cOunties to include, as an element of their
. comprehensive plan, a school facility plan for high growth districts prepared by
, the district in cooperation with the city or county; and for the city or county to
initiate the planning activity. The law defines high growth districts as those that
have an enrollment of over 5,000 students and an increase in enrollment of six
percent or more during the three most recent school years. At present, there are no
high growth school districts in the urban growth boundary.
246. ORS 197.296(4)(a) states that when the Urban growth boundary is amended to
provide needed housing, "As part of this process, the amendment shall include
sufficient land reasonably necessary to accommodate the siting of new public
school facilities. The need and inclusion of lands for new public school facilities
shall be a coordinated process between the affected public school districts and the .
local government that has the authority to approve the urban growth boundary."
r
2!j7. Enrollmentprojections for the five public school districts in the metropolitan area
and the University of Oregon and Lane Community College (LCC) are not
consistent. Bethel School District and the University of Oregon expect increases
while SpriIigfield and Eugene School Districts and LCC are experiencing nearly
flat or declining enrollments. Enrollment is increasing fastest in the elementary
and high school attendimce areas near new development.
~8. . Short~term fluctuations in school attendance are addressed through .the use of
adjusted attendance area boundaries, double shifting, use of portable classrooms,
and busing. School funding from the state is based on student enrollment for
school districts in the State of Oregon. This funding pattern affects the
willingness of districts to allow out-of-district transfers and to adjust district
.; boundaries. Adjustments in district boundaries may be feasible where there is no
net loss or gairi in student enrollments between districts.
"'\. ",' .~,' .'. ,~\",: Crea~g or retaining sm.all, neighborhood schools r7duces the need fofl\gte 4iilbceived
. ;: I,'. .-" ":;) , '.".. '.' . provides more opportunIty for students to walk or bike to school. QuaIifY1maiMv
. . .. JUL 2 ~ ~i
Planner: IBJ
. ,
. }.;, ';
"
" ,
Appendix Aa Page 10
"" ',~ ~. . . ; ,: "~'..-., ..
.. '~, . ~:!
schools may allow more parents to stay in established neighborhoods and to avoid
moving out to new subdivisions on the urban fringe or to bedroom communities.
However, growth patterns do not always respect school district boundaries. For'
example, natural cycles of growth and neighborhood maturation result in Wleven .
geographic growth patterns in the metropolitan area, causing a disparity between
the'location of some schools and school' children. This results in some fringe area
schools exceeding capacity, while some central city sc~ools are Wlder capacity..
~30. Long-range enrollment forecasts detennine the need to either build new schools,
expand existing facilities, or close existing schools. Funding restrictions imposed
by state law and some provisions in local codes may discourage the retention and
redevelopment of neighborhood schools. Limits imposed by state law on the use
of bond funds for operations and maintenance make the construction of new,
lower maintenance buildings preferable to remodeling existing school buildings.
In addition, if existing schools were expanded, some school sites may not meet
. cUrrent local parking and other code reqUirements.
2931. Combining educational facilities with local park and recreation facilities provides
financial benefits to the schools while enhancing benefits to the community. The
Meadow View School and adjacent City of Eugene community park is an
example of shared facilities. .
Policies
0.2+2 The cities shall initiate a process with school districts within the urban growth
boundary for coordinating land use and school planning activities. The cities and
school districts shall examine the following in their coordination efforts:
a. The need for new public school facilities and sufficient land to site them;
b. How open enrollment policies affect school location;
c. The impact of school building height and site size on the buildable land
suppiy;
d. The use of school facilities for non-school activities and <opp,vl',;ate
reimbursement for this use; .
e. The impact of building and land use codes.on the development and
redevelopment of school facilities;
f. . Systems development charge adjustments related to neighborhood
schools; and,
.-
'.
" .
it. ~ \; I ~:~~:.~.:~:,,;?:.c.,<;'!.~; -~::
I,
.',
.f ~~.
Appendix Aa Page II
Date Received
JUL 2 S,Ot{
Planner: BJ
.\ .,'
g.
The possibility of adjusting boundaries, when practical and whim total
enrollment ,will not be affected, where a single, otherwise internally .
cohesive area is divided into more thim one school district. '
G.2~3' Sl.y!"u.; financial and other efforts to keep neighborhood schools open and to
retain schools sites in public ownership following school closure,.
G.2M Support the retention of University of Oregon and LCC facilities in central city
areas to increase opportunities for public transit and housing and to retain these
schools' attractiveness to students and faculty.
Services to Development Within the Urban Growth Boundary: Solid Waste
Findinl!s
3G2. Statewide Planning Goal II requires that, "To meet current and long-range needs,
a provision for solid waste disposal sites, includiIig sites for inert waste, shall be
included in each plan." ,
Policies
G.245 The Lane County Solid Waste Management Plan, as updated, shall serve as the
guide for the location of solid waste sites, including sites for inert waste, to serve
the metropolitan area. Industries that make significant use of the resources
. recovered from the Glenwood solid waste transfer facility should be encouraged
to locate in that vicinity.
Services to Areas Outside the Urban Growth Boundary
, Findings
3+3. Providing key urban services, such as water, to areas outside the urban growth
boundary increases pressure for urban development in rural areas. This can
encourage premature development outside the urban growth boundary at rural
densities, increasing the cost of public facilities and services to all users of the
systems.
3~. Land application ofbiosolids, treated wastewater, or cannery waste on
agricultural sites outside the urban growth boundary for beneficial reuse of treated
. wastewater byproducts generated within the urban growth boundary is more
efficient and environmentally beneficial than land filling or other means of
'. disposal.
3;5. Lane County land use. data show that, outside the urban growth boundary, land
uses consist of:
h,., ,.,.,;~:' ~'i';:: ~ ~'/i"'~~ '
r'
.,.
.." ,
~ .' i t-
i .~...
Appendix Aa Page 12
Date Received
JUL 28 Ictf
, ' I
Planner: lJ
~, ' . i: ' .
~" "
1)
Those which are primarily intended for resource management; and
,,"
2) Those where development has occurred and are committed to rural
development as established through the exceptions process specified in
Statewide Planning Goal 2. '
Policies
. a.2M Wastewater 'and water serVice shall not be provided outside the urban growth
boundary except to the following areas, and the cities may require consent to
annex agreements as a prerequisite to providing these services in any instance:
a The area of the Eugene Airport designated' Government and Education on
the Metro Plan Diagram, the Seasonal Industrial Waste Facility, the
Regional Wastewater Biosolids Management Facility, and agricultural
sites used for land application ofbiosolids.and cannery byproducts. These
sites serve the entire metropolitan area
b. . An existing development outside the urban growth boundary when it has
been detennined that it poses an immediate threat of public health or
safety to the citizens within the Eugene-Springfield urban growth
boundary that can only be remedied by extension of the service.
In addition, under prior obligations, water service shall be provided to land within
the dissolved water districts of Hillcrest, College Crest, Bethel, and Oakway. .
G.2e7 The Eugene Airport shall be served with the necessary urban services required to
operate the airport as an urban facility. Development outside the urban growth
boundary in the vicinity of the airport, outside the portion of the airport boundary
designated Government and Education in the Metro Plan diagram, shall not be
provided with urban services.
0.2+8 Plan for the following levels of service for rural designations outside the urban
growth boundary within' the Plan Boundary: '
" '
a Arnculture. Forest'Land. Sand and GraveL and Parks and O.,en Soace.
No minimum level of service is established.
b. Rural Residential. Rural Commercial. Rural IndustriaL and Government,
and Education. On-site sewage disposal, individual water systems, rural
level of fire and police protection, electric and communication service,
schools, and reasonable access to solid waste disposal facility.
.. '..i'ii"" .;':.,f...li, ~~~~tj!lg'and Managing Public Facilities Outside the' Urban Growth Boundary
Findinlls,
~ ,: J':,
'~;~. ~;;':":~~:";..~:'-".~
Date Received
JUL 2 8)'O~
Appendix Aa Page 13
Planner: BJ
346. In accordance with statewide plaDning goals and administrative rules, urban
water, wastewater, and stonnwater facilities may, be located on agricultural land
and urban water and wastewater facilities may be located on forest land outside
the urban growth boundary when the 'facilities exclusively serve land within the
urban growth boundary, pursuant to OAR 660-006 and 660-033.
3~7. In accofdance with statewide planning goals and administrative rules, water, and
wastewater facilities are allowed in the public right-of-way of public roads and
highways. .
368. The Public Facilities and Services Plan planned facilities maps show the location
of some planned public facilities outside the .urban growth boundary and Plan
. Boundary, exclusively to serve land within the urban growth boundary. The
ultimate construction of these facilities will require close coordination with and
permitting by Lane County and possible Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan
amendments.
3+9. Statewide Planning Goal 5 and OAR 660~023-0090 require state and local
jurisdictions to identify and protect riparian corridors.
;840. In accordance with OAR 660-033-0090, 660-033-0130(2), and 660-033-0120,
building schools on high value farm land outside the urban growth boundary is
prohibited. Statewide planning goals prohibit locating school buildings on farm
or forest land within three miles outside the urban growth boundary.
Policies .
G.289 Consistent with local regulations, locate new urban water, wastewater, and
stonnwater facilities on farm land and urban water and wastewater facilities on
forest land outside the urban growth boundary only when the facilities exclusively
serve land inside the urban growth boundary and there is no reasonable
alternative.
G.:W30Locate urban water and wastewater facilities in the public right-of-way of public
roads and highways outside the urban growth boundary, as needed to serve land
within the urban growth boundary.
G.3QI
Facility providers shall coordinate with Lane County and other local jurisdictions
and obtain the necessary county land use approvals to amend the Lane COl,lnty
Rural Comprehensive Plan, or the Metro Plan, as needed and consistent with state
, law, to appwp,;ately designate land for urban facilities located outside the urban
growth boundary or the Plan Boundary.
, I'
bate Recei'!ed
JUL 2 8( o~
.~ ' ,ii, ,{,
'j> ,i ~ ~. ,
, 'I.~i. .~~. t' ~l
,. .. ~ I
, .
I.,
"
."
" .: ~ l
'I :. ,I'
Appendix Aa Page 14
Planner: BJ
G.3l2 The cities shall coordinate with Lane County on responsibilitY and authority to
address stOrrilV...;". ,elated issues outside the Plan Boundary, including outfalls
outside the Springfield portion of the urban growth boundary.
-,"
, G.3~3 Measures to protect, enhance, or alter Class F Streams outside the urban growth
boundary, within the Plan Boundary shall, at a minimum, be consistent with Lane
County's riparian standards.
G.3M New schools within the Plan Boundary shall be built inside the urban growth
boundary.
Financing ,
>
,Findinlls
~1. ORS I 97.7 I 2(2)(e) states that the project timing and fmancing provisions <.if.
public facility plans shall not be considered land use decisions. .
4G2. ORS 223.297 and ORS 223.229(1) do not permit the collection oflocal systems
development charges (SDCs) for fire and emergency medical service facilities and
schools, limiting revenue options for these services. Past attempts to change this
law have, been unsuccessful.
4+3. SerVice providers in the metropolitan area use sbCs to help fund the following
facilities: '
. Springfield: stonnwater, wastewater, and transportation;
. Willamalane Park and Recreation District: parks;
. SUB, Rainbow Water District: water;. '
. , Eugene: stonnwater, wastewater, parks, and transportation; and,
. EWEB: water.
Q4. Oregon and California timber receipt revenues, afedeiaIly-funded source of
county road funds, have declined over the years and their continued decline is
. expected. -
~5. Regular maintenance reduces long tenn infrastructure costs by preventing the
need for frequent replacement and rehabilitation. ORS 223.297 to 223.314 do not
allow use of SDCs to fund operations and maintenance.
446.
The assessment rates of Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County are each different,
'. creating iriequitable financing of some infrastructure improvements in the
metropolitan area
..~'.'
.,.~.,:""'.
,', '.
IV)
I"
Appendix Aa Page 15
Date Received
JUL 2 8 ) o~
Planner: BJ
Policies
'.'J~ ,'ll:.t~:-(,--'/_'I~""" ",' ~,/' .'
~: .. ;lr,_ "." " 'j.- , .'1,"'" -41 .
. I .', ; _: ~ :, j .
G.345 Changes to Public Facilities and Services Plan project phasing schedules or. '
anticipated cOsts and financing shall be made in accordance with budgeting and
capital improvement program procedures of the affectedjurisdiction(s).
G.3~ Service providers will update capital improvement programming (planning,
programming, and budgeting for service extension) regularly for those portions of
the urban growth boundary where the full range of key urban services and
facilities is not available.
G.3{i7 Require development to pay the cost, as determined by the local jurisdiction, of
extending urban services and facilities. This does not preclude subsidy, where a
development will fulfill goals and recommendations of the Metro Plan and other
applicable plans determined by the local jurisdiction to be of particular
importance or concern.
G.31& Continue to implement a system of user charges, SDCs, and other public
financing tools, where al't',vt'.:ate, to fund operations, maintenance, and
improvement or replacement of obsolete facilities or system expansion.
G.389 Explore other funding mec\1anisms at the local level to finance operations and
maintenance of public facilities.
G.3940Set wastewater and stormwater fees at a level commensurate with the level of
impact on, or use 'of, the wastewater or stormwater service~
G.mOThe cities and Lane County will continue to cooperate in developing assessment
practices for inter-jurisdictional projects that provide for equitable treatment of
properties, regardless of jurisdiction.
Chapter V Glossary
36. Public facility nroiects: Public facility project lists and maps adopted as part of
the Metro Plan are defined as follows:
a. Water: Source, reservoirs, pump stations; and primary distribution
systems. Primary distribution systems are transmission lities 12 inches or
larger for SUB and 24 inches or larger for EWEB.
b. Wastewater:
. primarv Collection System: Pump stations and wastewater
lines 24 inches or larger.
,
I ~J .,~' .
"",...;.
'/ ',,' ": (~:
'. ,. I
Treatment Facilities System: Water Pollution Control
Facilitv CWPCF) nroiect. beneficial reuse uroiect and
residuals nroiect necessarY to meet wastewater treatment.
facilities system desil!n canacities for averal!e flow. nelJl\ 'd
flow. biochemical OXVl!en demand and total s!slaTQdHeCelVe
JUL 2 8 (o~
Planner: B1J
Appendix Aa Page 16
, ~." ;" . I .
. t~ 1'J' .; .' ,~t_.) 1:'4 ;f;'tl'v:,.>;i ~
.... ...
", !UL
I
. I, IC' "r~/,..:yl; ,.-~\ ';1 .','~'N ,":'".
,,-.'1.,. :.)1--;,1'-,' " il'A.I! '
.:,__ 1 ._ _ :~..
'~". ': ~,' :~:i;'4F':::-~"'-:'~~
, ., :" lor' ~ ...'. I. . 1\ ij.~' .
f".' "" ,'V"'....
. - ~.' .
solids so as to nrovide service within the urban 12T0wtb_
boundarv ruGm for a nroiected D01)ulation in 2025
consistent with the nODulation assumed in this Plan. in
comnliance with MWMC's discharge nerrnit. MWMC's
Canitallrnnrovements Plan. as amerided from time to time. ,
shall be used as the lljlide for detailed nlanning and
imnlementation of the WPCF nroiect. the beneficial reuse'
proiect and the residuals oroiect.
. c. Stormwater: Drainage/channel improvements and/or piping systems 36
inches or larger; proposed detention ponds; outfalls; water quality
projects; and waterways and open systems..
d. Specific projects adopted as part of the Metro Plan are described in the
project lists and their general location is identified in the planned facilities
maps in Chapter II of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Public
. Facilities and Services Plan (public Facilities and Services Plan).
Appendix Aa Page 17
Date Received
JUL 28 ,u{
Planner: BJ
c', ., .~ ,. \: .. .~l\~ 0" C'-
. I,;~. "'f I t)~IL~I"" I ,,j .;\
' I., 'J . , ~, ,. 1... .~ I,.
I '.',
';'l-,.
- ' .(,
" ,,~. :~Y:~~l.. .- .
Date Received
JUL 2 8 J b~
Planner: Br-~ '
. .; ,....t ~f..:,.
APPENDIX Ab
PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE METRO PLAN
(Version cUrrently before the elected officials as a part of Periodic Review) .
. .' I
,G. .Public Facilities and Services Element
This Public Facilities and Services Element provides direction for the future provision of
urban facilities and services to planned land uses within the Metro Plan Plan Boundary
(plan Boundary). ,
The availability of public facilities and services'is a key factor influencing the location'
and density of future development. The public's investment in, and scheduling of, public
, facilities and services are a major means of implementing the Metro Plan. As the'
population of the Eugene-Springfield area increases and land development patterns
change over time, the demand for urban services also increases and changes. These .
changes require that service providers, both public and private, plan for the provision of
services in a coordinated manner, using consistent assumptions and projections for
population and land use.
The policies in this element complement Metro Plan Chapter II-A, Fundamental
Principles, and Chapter I1-C, Growth Management. Consistent with the principle of
compact urban growth prescribed.in Chapter 11, the policies in this element call for future
urban water and wastewater services to be provided exclusively within the urban growth
boundary (DGB). This policy direction is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal II :
Public Facilities and Services, ','To plan and develop a'tllnely, orderly and efficient
arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural
development." On urban lands, new development must be served by at least the .
minimum level of key urban services and facilities at the tiIDe development is completed
and, ultimately, by a full range of key urban services and facilities. On rural lands within
the Plan Boundary, development must be served by rural levels of service. Users of
facilities and services in rural areas are spread out geographically, resulting in a higher
per-user cost for some services and, often, in an inadequate revenue base to support a
higher level of service in the future. Some urban facilities may be located or managed
outside the urban growth boundary, as allowed by state law, but only to serve
development within the UGB.
Urban facilities and services within the UGB are provided by the City of Eugene, the City
of Springfield, Lane County, EugeneWater & Electric Board (EWEB), the Springfield
Utility Board (SUB), the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC),
electric cooperatives, and special service districts. Special service districts provide
schools and bus service, and, in some areas outside the cities, they provide water, electric,
'fire service. or parks and recreation service. This element provides ,guidelines for special
service districts in line with the compact urban development fundamental principle of the
I,., '.,,..,;.... ',i Metr.o;ljlan. Date Rece,'ved
' 1. .., " .It -:-. r1' ~ ::.l;..''>:(.
JUL 28)of
Planner: BJ
t; ,"I.!',
. .
"
.<
, " -,- ~ - l:('~
:. ; ; 1:1:....:~~~~.,
, ~ ~ ,jl
Appendix Ab Pagel
Ibis element incorporates the findings and policies in the Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan (Public Facilities and Services
, Plan), adopted as a refinement to the Metro Plan. The Public Facilities and Services
Plan provides guidance for public facilities and services, including planned water,
wastewater, stormwater, and electrical facilities. As required by Goal 11, the Public
Facilities and Services Plan identifies and shows the general location' of the water, ,
wastewater, and stormwater projects needed to serve land within the UGB.' The Public
Facilities and Services Plan also contains.this information for electrical facilities,
although not required to by law:
The project lists and maps in the Public Facilities and Services Plan are adopted as part
of the Metro Plan. Information in the Public Facilities and Services Plan on project
phasing and costs, and decisions on timIDg and financing of projects are not part of the
Metro Plan and are controlled solely by the capital iinprovement programming and
budget processes of individual service providers. .
The policies listed provide direction for public and private developmental and program
decision-mw.dtig regarding urban facilities and services. . Devi:lopment should be
coordinated with the planning, financing, and construction of key urban facilities and
services to ensur~ the efficient use and expansion of these facilities.
Goals
I. Provide and maintain public facilities and services in an efficient and
environmentally responsible manner.
2. Provide public facilities and services in a manner that encourages orderly and
sequential growth. .
Findings and PoliCies
The findings and policies in this element are organized by the following four topics
related to the provision of urban facilities and services. Policy direction for the full range
of urban facilities and services, iBehlEiffig wastewat<-< ,<-,-,,';Q.!; may be found under any of
these topics, although the frrsttopic, Services to DevelopmentWithin the Urban. Growth '
Boundary, is further broken down into sub-categories.
. Services to Development Within the Urban Growth Boundary
. Planning and Coordination
. Water
" The exact location of the projects shown on the Public Facilities and Services Plan planned facilities
. maps is d~rmined through local processes. .
. '.. ,,;; I ': ",~' :,2:Gow:1~I(itlso r~quires .~portation facili~es to be included in public faci1~ties plans. In tIti\'ATI!f.~Ce'IV - d
"..' " f 0 ,arell;'transportatJon faCIlItIes are addressed ill Metro Plan Chapter III-f and ill the Eugene-~GIl(!1l nti b
" ,Transportation System Plan (Trans Plan).
..\ '. .1\1 JUL 28 ( 01
,l ,,'
,..I, ~,
, -.., -o.v ff.-:'~" ~ '1 i1~'
,i.'il' 'l~i' --'.
",I". '_.. I
Appendix Ab Page2
Planner: BJ
, I '
.,
. Wastewater Trea1ment
. Stormwater
. Electricity
. Schools
. Solid Waste rrea1ment
. Services to Areas Outside the Urban Growth BoUndary
. Locating and Managitlg Public Facilities Outside the Urban Growth Boundary
. Financing .
(
Services to Develooment Within the Urban Growth Boundarv: 'Plannin!! and
Coordination
Findings
L Urban expansion within.the UGB is accomplished through in-fill, redevelopment,
and annexation of territory which can be served with a minimum level of key
urban services and facilities. This permits new development to use existing
facilities arid services, or those which can be easily extended, minimizing the
public cost of extending urban facilities arid services.
2. In accordance with Statewide Planning Goal II and OAR 660, the Public
Facilities and Services Plan identifies jurisdictional responsibility for the
provision of water, wastewater and stormwater, describes respective service areas
and existing and planned water, waStewater, and stormwater facilities, and
contains planned facilities maps for these services. Electric system information
and improvements are included in the Public Facilities and Services Plan,
although not required by state law, Local facility master plans and refinement
plans provide more specific project information.
3. Urban services within the metropOlitan UGB are provided by the City of Eugene,
the City of Springfield, Lane County, EWEB, SUB, the MWMC, electric
coup"",,~;ves, and special service districts.,
4. The Public Facilities and Services Plan finds that almost iul.areas .within the city
limits of Eugene and Springfield are served or can be served in the short-term (0-5
years) with Water, wastewater, st<?rmwater, and electric service. Exceptions to
this are stormwater service to portions of the Willow Creek area and southeast
Springfield and full water service at some higher elevations in Eugene's South
Hills. Service to these areas will be available in the long-term. Service to all
areas within city limits are either in a capital improvement plan or can be
, extended with development. .
5. With the improvements specified in the Public Facilities and Services Plan
'.,' " ~,' ._.project lists, all ui'banizable areas wit~ the Eugene-Springfield UGB can be
'~-;..'r:;:;-l\l'j\,..1 '.";'c .~:-, served with water, wastewater, stormwater, and electric service at the time those
.: ;.',. '::;ilr~as are developed; In general, areas outside citY limits serviceable in the eate Receivec
JU'L 2 8 J c<f
Planner: 8"
~
Appendix Ab Page3
term are located near,the UGB and in urban reserves, primarily in River Road,
Santa Clara, west Eugene's Willow Creek area, south Springfield, and the
ThurstOn and Jasper-Natron areaS in east Springfield.
6. OAR 660-011-0005 defines projects that must be included iIi public facility plan
project lists for water, wastewater, and stormwater. These definitions are shown
, in the keys of planned facilities Maps 1, 2, ~and 3 in the Public Facilities and
Services Plan.
7. In accordance with ORS 195.020 to 080, Eugene, Springfield, Lane County and
special service districts are required to enter into coordination agreements that
define how planning coordination and urban services (water, wastewater, fire,
parks, open space and recreation, and streets, roads and mass transit) will be
provided within the UGB.
. ", ,\r'. \' , .'. ,..'. I .
,~t.l ,!'.. .. 1~ ~~....: I.. (.r~\ .
i.I' I';'
I .""
,.,r ~.. ,fL. \.. 11: '" t' Ii -
, .'11 . 4',."
8. Large institutional uses, such as universities and hospitals, present complex
planning problems for the metropolitan area due to their location; facility
. expansion plans, and continuing housing and parking needs.
9. Duplication of services prevents the inost economical distribution of public
, facilities and services.
10. As discussed in the Public Facilities and Services Plan, a majority of nodal
development areas proposed in TransPlan are serviceable now or in the short-
term. The City of Eugene's adopted Growth Management Policy #15 states,
"Target publicly-financed infrastructure extensions to support development for
higher densities, in-fill, mixed uses, and nodal development:" ,
Policies
G.I
,Extend the minimum level and full range of key urban facilities and services in an
orderly and efficient manner consistent with the growth management policies in
Chapter H-C, relevant policies in this chapter, arid other Metro Plan policies.
G.2
Use the planned facilities maps of the Public Facilities arid Services Plan to guide
the general location of water , wastewater, stormwater, and electrical projects in
the metropolitan area. Use local facility master plans, refinement plans, canital
imnrovement nlans. and ordinances as the guide for detailed planning and project
implementation.
G.3
Modifications and additions to or deletions from the project lists in the Public
,', Facilities and Services Plan for water, wastewater, and stormwater public facility
projects or significant changes to project location, from that described in the
Public Facilities and Services Plan planned facilities Maps I, 2, 2ih and 3,
requires amending th~ Pubic Facilities and Services Plan and the Metr~la'l;. Race', "ed
except for the followmg: . Uale l'
JUL 28,o~
Appendix AbPage4
Planner: B J
a
'. . .' .
Modifications to a public facility projectwluch lire minor innature and do
not significantly impact the project's general description, location, sizing,
capacity, or other general characteristic of the project; or
."
b.
Technical and environmental modifications to a public facility which are
made pursuant to fmal engineering on a project; or
c.
Modifications to a public facility project which are made pursuant to
findings of an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact
Statemerit conducted under regulations implementing the procedural
provisions of the national Environmental Policy Act of 1969 or any
federal or State of Oregon agency project development regulations
consistent with that act and its regulations; or
d.
Public facility projects included in the PFSP to serve huid designated
Urban Reserve prior to the removal of the Urban Reserve designation,
which projects shall be removed from the PFSP at the time of the next
Periodic Review of the Metra Plan.
0.4 The cities aild Lane County shall coordinate with EWEB, SUB, and special
service districts operating in the metropolitan area, to provide the opportunity to
review and comment on proposed public facilities, plans, programs, and public
improvement projects or changes thereto that may affect one another's area of
. responsibility. '. .
0.5 The cities shall continue joint planning coordination with major institutions, such
as universities and hospitals, due to their relatively large impact on local facilities
and services. "
0.6 Efforts shall be made to reduce the number of unnecessary special service districts
and to revise confusing or illogical service boundaries, including those that result
in a duplication of effort or 'overlap of service. When possible, these efforts shall
be pursued in cooperation with the affected jurisdictions.
0.7' Service providers shall coordinate the provision Of faCilities and services to areas
targeted by the cities for higher densities, infill, mixed uses, and nodal
development.
0.8 The cities and county shall coordinate with cities surrounding the m""vpvlitan
area to develop a groWth management strategy. This strategy will address
,', regional public facility needs. .
Services to Develonment Within the Urban Growth Boundarv: Wastewater
Findilie:s
. I~ :'I,J~t..,'c':":\i;""l ",,~;::,c,.;
-' . 1'"..Ji".i1iqH I' t1~,JqO.. ~
I ~ \ :' :_'\' oj',:"
\;t. ::;.. r. t ,;-. -' t~ ~
'. . , " ! l' -".,' .
Appendix Ab PageS .
Date Received
JUL 28, 6l{
Planner: BJ
11. SnriDl@eld and EUl!ene rely on a combination of remonal and local services for
the nrovision of witstewater services. Within eachCitv. the local iurisdiction'
nrovides collection of wastewater throuqh a system of sanitary sewers and
1)umnina SystE:!1:1s. These collection facilities connect to a rel!ional system of
similar sewer collection facilities owned and onerated bv the M"';'vuulitan
Wastewater Manal!ement Commission ("MWMC"t an entity fonned under an
intereoyerninental aereement created OUTSuant to ORS 190. Toqether, these
collection facilities (which exclude orivate laterals which convey wastewater from
individual residential or commercial/industrial connections' constitute the nriniarv
collection system.
12. . The nriniaril collection system conveys wastewater to a treatment facilities system
owned and onerated bv MWMC. This system consists of an interconnected Water
Pollution Control Facilitv ("WPCF"t a: biosolids facility. and a beneficial reuse
facility.
Policies
0.9 Wastewater conveyance and treatment shall be nrovided to meet the needs of.
projected lITowth inside the UOB that are canable of comolvin'l with rel!lllatorv,
reouirements l!overninl! beneficial reuse or discharee of effluent and beneficial
reuse or disoosal of residuals.
SUBSEQUENT FINDINGS AND POLICIES SHALL BE RENUMBERED
ACCORDINGLY WITHIN TIDS.CHAPTER .
Chapter V Glossary
37. . Pubtic facility nroiects: Public facility project lists and maps adopted as part of
the Metro Plan are defmed as follows:
a: Water: Source, reservoirs, pump stations, and primary .distribution
systems. Priniary distribution systems are transmission lines 12 inches or
. larger for Springfield Utility Board (SUB) and 24 illches or larger for
Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB).
b. Wastewater: priniarv Collection System: Pump stations and wastewater
lines 24 inches or larger.. .
- ,(; ';u~':' .:\....1~-'-i I :'-.'rr J'
".. ... \:....",r-;,\
Treatment Facilities System: Water Pollution Control,
Facilitv (WPCF) nroiect beneficial reuse IJroiect and
residuals nroiect necessary to meet wastewater treatment
facilities system desilm caoacities for ayeraczeflow. neak
flow. biochemical oxvczen demand and total susoended,
solids so as to orovide service within the ~ IUO~ ' d
" ,.' . Uau=~t\e",~IVe
Appendix Ab Page6
JUL 28(t!{
Planner~ S.,,~
J
.,
'"
boundarY (UGH) for a nroiectedoonulation in 2025
consistent with the nonulation asswned in this Plan. ill
comnliance with MWMC's discharQ'e nermit. MWMC's'
Canital Imnrovements Plan. as amended from time to time.
shall be used as the guide for detailed nlanninl! and
imnlementationofthe WPCF nroiect the beneficial reuse
nroiect and the residuals nroiect.
c. Stormwater: Drainage/channel improvements and/or piping systems 36
inches or larger; proposed detention ponds; outfalls; water quality
projects; and waterways and open systems:
d. Specific projects adopted as part of the Metro Plan ai:e described in the
project lists and theii' general location is identified in the planned facilities
maps in Chapter II of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Public
Facilities and Services Plan (Public Facilities and Services Plan).
Appendix Ab Page? .
Date Received
JUL 281 of
Planner: BJ
. Ji_/" I;~::"I," ~,~~\.,; '~~~~~~;~'I
~, /,... I." , f 1("""
I. ,..,:
- ~,
, \1 . {. 'X.; -. .~ . 1 L .' . ~':'.
, ,):.. JJ~. .
i
" ': ''}:.- ',;,~.".; ;"" .
'l' Iii ~ I' '!,,''''.... '
.,' ,
. ... .'''' I-.~.,r-I
r\'~I' "t!".""'~i.~'<,-, .', '..:!
, '", ",,;.;., I," .., ,._"
'. ....,~' )1",;;
, Date Received
JUL 2 8,o~
Planner: B~
,'.I,l('
, ': !i. J ~. J
, .'~' ~ '; _. l!' ;.' iI' "
"
APPENDIX B
PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES
AND SERVICES PLAN (PFSP)
1.
Modify the text preceding existing Table 3 to read as follows:
Planned Wastewater System Improvements
Planned short aFld loa!'; term wastewater system improvement projects are listed in
tables3,004 4, 4a and 4b. The general location of these facilities is shown in Map 2:
Plaimed Wastewater Facilities;and Map 2a: Existing Wastewater Col/ection and
Treatment Systems. [NOTE: This map presently exists as Map 6 in the Technical
Background Report: Existing Conditions and Alternatives and should be
incorporated without change.)
2. Insert, following Table 4, Tables 4a and 4b, as follows:
Table 4a
_ MWMC Wastewater Treatment System Improvement Projects
Project Project Name/Description
Number
I 300 WPCF Treatment Project
I 301 Residuals Treatment Project
I 302 Beneficial Reuse Project
Table 4b
MWMC Primary Collection System Improvement Projects
I Project Proj ect N ame/Description I
Number
./ 303 Willakenzie Pump Station I
I 304 ' Screw Pump Station I
I 305 Glenwood Pump Station
. -
r .r'- ,'" .f' l'-~; It )1;' ~-.l ,,' i
. -_OJ II ',' l~~j~" ._ I ".,'
J' " .'.: . ~ .. .'~. ., ,._' .
'\ '. - I
.,:\: J..
Date Received
JUL 2 8 J N
:.1" '{ .' ;~~I/ \- ~ '. ,,~~~~-~,::
Appendix B Page 1
Planner: . BJ
3.' Modify Map 2 to show Projects 300 through 305, and insert Map 2a.
--~.
\---
\
.' " ,
Euge:ne-Sprlngflekl Publlo F ..oOlties'..nd'Se~I08~ PliIn"
Planned ~W..C W .utt.,t.~ Projeot S.les'
~cbcttm'/ntKII:S.,'"
__W--'lIoo
11......"-.-
.. --.-
.........----
. . . .......al. . IN
"0___....,. '. ,',)
~==-~!~~-,..:~ \. :
. - --..--...... .
.. .--.......
----- .:,';
'I'
'-
'."/;", "
...:
... I:.
'.""":'-
.'" / ,.'
.~ ,"
.'r-J..'.'
-wi '
-
)'---...-
t h_..~~______ _....._
----...-- '
--
)",
. .~.
'Eugene.Sprmgfield,Public Facilitie~ a~d Services Plan' '
EXIsting MWMC Wastewater Treatment Systems"
.1' c~.:., ,: .~. '.' .'
:it!) --.--o.._'_.~".'
--.-...."'&_~
.......'-'- '
---.. ",
r= . ___'I,
'c:::I:--
'-.:
,',+
-----.--
-...-..-
..--.-..--
,MAP 2.
--
n;,
Date Receiv~d
JUL 28 I o~
','
:,'lli.:j" '1-....'\<.\1. c;':;'v,.\.tr:-r
"'li' ,,-'"'jIltl, '/I'V'l\
"
'.
.'j 1~;!.1-'. 'r"+"1'( ~.'
.' " ' I' I )i)\ t. ~
Appendix B Page 2
Planner: BJ
I
,..e,__
. 4. Modify Chapter IV. Of the Public Facilities and Services Plan, by modifying'
the subdivision entitled "Wastewater System condition Assessment"
(presently on page 82) to read as follows:
Wastewater System Condition Assessment
Coaver ~,,,- H .':'r.!':'~'" ,".d-iJHk.,.. .:, ,. J iBfiltFaHoa (III) mHOS are importaat e.";~.";,,-
by whieh t8 assesa the'perfonBaaee 8f a waot""".."n- l8Ueetioa system. Coa"~'aaee
eapae~' is a funeHon of adequate pipe 59!; aDd meaaUFes a syatem's ability to
." ,. .', 2mueat eftieiently. JaAow and iBfJltFuti, ,., ,,:.~:,lIS eIflFesa the amount of
storBtWater eateriB!; a sewer ~'atem through defeetF:e pipes Bad pip:; ":,,,I&,-m'-
threugh the er8sa eeaneeH8a ef sL......'.r.llter !iaes, e8mbiBed sewers, eateh basins, 81'
maah8L . ;.." "_"~. Sueh es:tFune8ua sL :"" " " :,.:er enteM!; the waotewateF system
unaeeessarilr burdens beth,; ".,,, ,",.inee and treatment faeilities.
. '
Treatment: MWMC Wastewater Treatment System
MWMC existine infrastructure is monitored for oroblems that need to be addressed
durine ooerational and maintenance activities. MWMC has om!Oilli! orOlrrams to helo
olan for and imolement eauioment reolacement and'maior rehabilitation of existing
systems. With these on Imine oroerams used to detect existing oroblems. the
infrastructure can be maintained and oreserved to helo extend its useful life for future
years.
In March of 2003. MWMC hired CH2M HILL to evaluate and olan for regional
wastewater caoital imorovements that will serve the Eugene/Soringfield urban l1Iowth
boundarv into year 2025. MWMC will need to imolement the recommended
imorovements to meet rellUlatorv reauirements based on oroiected oollution loads and
flows. CH2M HILL as oart of its work to evaluate and olan for regional wastewater
imorovements has oreoared a technical memo related to "Flow and Load Projections"
dated Aoril 12. 2004. This historical and OToiected information is being used to olan for
needed MWMC caoital irilOrovements based on engineering evaluation methods and bv .
comoarine technology ootions. It is estimated that aooroximatelv $160 million dollars
(in 2004 dollars) are needed for MWMC 1)roip:c:t~ tc) ad(l!p:,~s regulatorv reauirp:rnents and
\!TOwth throueh year 2025. .
Convevance:
Conveyance caoacitv and inflow and infiltration (III) ratios are imoortant criteria bv
which to assess the oerformance of a wastewater collection system. Convevance'caoacitv
.is a fuD.ction of adeouate oine sizing and measures a svstem's abilitv to move effluent
efficiently. Inflow and infiltration ratios exoress the amount of stormwater entering a
sewer system throueh defective oioes and oioe ioints. or throueh the cross connection of
~ormwater lines. combined sewers. catch basins. or manhole covers. Such extraneous
. ,,' . . ' , 'sto~wa~r e~t.e~g the wastewater system unnecessarilv burdens both conveyance and_, d
'E't#~~;;:n\~:'rtre~~~ntfac1l1ties. .' Date ReceIve
.,. ~.;., I'~i JUL 2 8 ,O~
'of :~'-:;.
.,
~ ;".:,
I( ,~- - '~" "
! 'I,)" ''.,'''I!::;.,:
, .,' ,'or' ~,. "', l'
Appendix B Page 3
Planner: BJ
5. Modify Chapter IV. Of the Public Facilities and Services Plan, by modifying'
the discussion ofwastewatei", in the subdivision entitled "Long-Term Service
Availability Within Urbanizable Areas" (presently on page 97) to read as
follows:
..
I. There are no areas within the m..;'vt'vlitan UOB that will be difficultto serve with
wastewater facilities over the long-term (six to 20 years) assuming that oublic
infrastructure sDecifications and reauirements of the' develooinl! area can be
addressed. Auu<uu,;ate em!ineerin!! desim oractices must be used durin!! the
develonment and exnansion into sensitive areas that are aooroved for
develonment (ex. - hi1l8ide construction. etc.). ; hewsvel', ellpaasiea Expansion of
the existing collection system will he necessary to meet demands of growth over
this time period. '
2. Based on 2003 analysis, the Eu!!ene-Sorin!!field m,,;'vuvlitail area treatment
facilities will reauire facilitvimnrovements to address both drv and wet weather
rel!Ulatorv reauirements relatinl! to oollutant loads and wastewater flows.
Re!!ional and local wastewater imnrovements to the' collection and treatment
, svstems are hein!! nlanned for and will be imnlemented to allow for l!rowth within
the UOB and for rel!Ulatorv comoliance. The eugeae Springfield metrepelitaB
area R-egiaaal Waste'.vater Trealmeat PI;:at Iu:5 sdIi ~ieat desib- ",,,paeity ta
ll&o=mojate pefll:IL;;'"", ;",,,..:Jases Me! serve all aew e!evelepmeat ft~ :'.:;:JGJ.;:a.
Ya"}.<e';:l, r::;:l: -::et"'J,'eather e,on.Lho,w limit the tFea;"'",n, pl!Ult fFem aomil'.<iBgits
desigaee! eapaeity. Wet, weather relatee! imjlrevemeais = needee! at the plllBt
and within the regieaal eelleotic:: 3l3~:Jm ta eKtead th: jll&lit' J wet '.veather
eapaeity ';<lEal! the year 2997.
6. Add Table 16a following Table 16, as follows:
Table 16a
MWMC Wastewater Treatment and'Collection System Improvements, Rough Cost
EstiIDate, and Timing Estimate
IJ~~~\~~~~~~'~~~ ~~~:~~~~ifi~~~~1!~il~l1~~ti~Xi~t\~~~ ?]f~~~Mff,tts' ~~~r~~r~!i~~I~!)]1
I 300 WPCF Treatment Project $120,500. 2025 I
I 301 Residuals Treatment Project $6,000 2018 I
I 302 Beneficial Reuse Project $25,000 2018 I
I 303 Willakenzie Pump Station $6,000 2010
! 304 Screw Pump Station $2,000' 20 I 0
I 305 Olenwood Pumo Station $500 . 2012
*Cost estimated in 2004 dollars
.' '~~!v,IP;'w;j~'1l;~:'l~.,::,>..~..; ~(\ ~.#
. . . ,.'," -,~...~,.: i'- !-., , _, " ',':
. . "
..., .~, .", - "
,,"::".lo
"
.;. .
Date Received
JUL 2 8 , DL{
Planner: B~J
I
, :
'.
~'II t.
Appendix B Page 4
/.... . ":'! , .;. ,:I.'L.
"',-' .'
7. Add a new chapter, to the Public,Facilities and Sen'ices Plan, to be Chapter
VI.,readingas'follows: '
VI. Amendments to tbe Plan
This chapter describes the method to be used in the event it becomes necessary or .
appropriate to modify the text, tables or the maps contained in the Public Facilities and
Services Plan ("the Plan").' '
Flexibility ofthe Plan, .
Certain public facility project descriptions, location or service area designations will
necessarily change as a result of subsequent design studies, capital improvement
programs, environmental impact studies and changes in potential soUrces offunding. The,
Plan is not designed to either prohibit projects not included in the plan for which
unanticipated funding has been obtained, preclude project specification and location
decisions made according to the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act, or subject
administrative and technical changes to the plan to post-acknowledgement review or
review by.the Land Use Board of Appeals.
, For the pwposes of this Plan, two types of modifications are identified:
A. Modifications requiring amendment of the Plan.
The following modifications require amendment of the Plan:
1. Amendments, which include those modifications or changes (as
represented by Table 16a) to the location or provider of public facility
projects which significantly impact a public facility project identified in
the comprehensive plan, and which do noiqualify as administrative or
, technical and environmental changes, as defined below. Amendments are
subjectto the administrative procedures and review and .appeal procedures
applicable to land use decisions.
2. Adoption of capital improvement program project lists by any service
provider does not require modification of this PI~ unless the requirements
of subparagraph I above are met.
B. . Modifications permitted without amendment of the Plan.
The following modifications do not require amendment of this Plan:
1.
Administrative changes are those modifications to a public facility project
which are minor in nature and do not significantly impact the project's
general description, location, sizing, capacity or other general
characteristic of the project. .
: Technical and environmental changes are those modificatioruf1\l~R:ibD . d
. facility project which are made pursuant to "fmal engineeringll.Wlt'l"rdj!eCeIVe
JUL 2 8l!f
. .'
'.. ').,~ -, tr' l"=i\I,.J .. ".'1,";./' ,
'ry\{~tl~ :}v/:ll! bi~~ )1t .~.
. {'., I'"..
. r). ." .
"j l__~j
'.if,
''\I'::.~ I. : I
... . ,.
. r,,,c,
\ , -' \ '.
Appendix B Page 5
Planner: BJ
J
or those which result from the findings of an EnvironrD.ental Assessment
or Environmental Impact Statement conducted under regulations
implementing the procedural provisions of the' National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969' or any federal or state agency project development
regulations Consistent with that Act and itS regulations.'
. , Process for making Changes
A.
, .
Administrative and Technical or Environmental Changes. Any jurisdiction niay
make an administrative or technical and environmental change, as defined herein,
by forwarding to each jurisdiction covered by this Plan, and to the Lane Council
of Governments a copy of the resolution or other fmal action of the governing
board of the jurisdiction authorizing the change.
AmendmentS
.B.
For purposes of processing amendments, as defined herein, such amendments are
divided into two classes. '
a. Type I Amendments include amendments to the text of the Plan, or to a
list, location or provider of public facility projects which significantly
impact a public facility project identified herein, which project serves
more than one jurisdiction. '
b. Type II amendments include amendments to a list, location or provider of
public facility projects which significantly impact a public facility project
identified herein, which project serves only the jurisdiction proposing the
amendment. .
C. Processing Amendments
.. ,.
Any of the adopting agencies (Lane County, Eugene, or Springfield) may initiate
an amendment to this plan at any time <?n their own motion or on behalf of a
citizen.
a Type I amendments shall be forwarded to the planning commissions of the
respective agen?ies and, following.their recommendation, shall be
considered by the governing boards of all agencies. If a Type I
amendment is not adopted by all agencies, the amendment shall be
referred to MPC for conflict resolution. Subsequent failure by agencies to
'adopt an MPC-negotiated proposal shall defeat the proposed amendment.
If an amendment is adopted, all agencies shall adopt substantively
identical ordinances '
Type II amendments shall be forwarded to the Planning Commission of
the initiating agency and, following their recommendation, shall be
considered by the governing board of the initiating agency.
b.
: ',', "i~' ..-. ;.'1(...,
L.,I,1 ,t ' :., ~\I'
. AppendixB Page 6
Date Received
JUL 2 8 I Dtf
Planner: 3J
I
,
. . .' 1....
,',1"\\ I"l!.itl"t,f \\ ' , "if'-.....
. .'~-'1' ~ i". ,f;" ,I"" It \.. I ;', \
. t\' "I.
Exhibit 1
- 1 -
Staff Report and Findings of ComPUance with the Metro Plan and Statewide'
Goals and Administrative Rules .
File LRP 2004-0001 Amendments to the Metro Plan and Public Facilities and Services
Plan
Applicant: . .
City of Springfield on behalf of the Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission
(MWMC) .
, Nature ofthe Application:
, The applicant proposes to amend the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General
, Plan (Metro Plan) and the Public Facilities and Services Plan (PFSP)\ to (1) more
adequately reflect the impact that new discharge pennit restrictions will have had on the
capacity of the regional wastewater treatment system, (2) to clarify the relationship
betweel). the PFSP project list and locally adopted capital improvement plans, and (3) to
modify (streamline) the administrative and legislative processes thatgovem the
implementation and amendment of the PFSP projects list.
Background: " . , ,
MWMC's regional wastewater treatment facilities were designed and constructed in the
'!ate 1970's with a 20-year life expectancy. Slower than expected population growth in the
1980's extended this life expectancy. In 1996--97 MWMC developed a Master Plan to
evaluate the performance of its facilities, to ascertain areas of constraints within the '
existing permit co~ditions, to identify short-term improvements (e.g. how to address
seismic hazards), and to address other major issues that needed to be studied further.
In May of 2002 the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality '(DEQ) imposed new
,and more stringent discharge pennit standards on the regional wastewater treatment
facilities, particularly in regard to the treatment of ammonia and thermal loading. As
MWMC staffbegan to evaluate design needs for its wastewater facilities, it became
apparent to them that the existing facilities could not meet the demands imposed by the .
, new discharge permit restrictions.
Recognizing that a thorough assessment 'of wastewater collection, treatment and
disposal/reuse needs for the next 20 years was essential, the MWMC began work on the
2004 Wastewater Facilities Plan, a comprehensive facilities plan update. The objectives
of the 2004 Wastewater Facilities Plan are two'fold. First, it is intended to provide for
adequate community growth capacity through 2025, considering policies in the Metro
Plan and current planning assessments for population and development. Second, the 2004
Wastewater Facilities Plan is intended to protect community health and safetY by
addressing sanitary sewer overflows, river safety, pennit compliance and the cost-
effective use of existing facilities and the efficient design of new facilities.
~';:~,j~f!8;)8H:f;r~r . . " Date Received '
i! ,;. '_See appendices Aa, Ab, & B respectively. JUL 2 8/ ,~
" 7.' ~
l;:""-I .: -J(,:{.ju'~;~~'it~-~
. ~"
Staff Report and Findings Page 1
;
Planner: BJ
Exhibit 1
-2-
The 2004 Wastewater Facilities Plan recognizes, and addresses the, faCt that the regional
, wastewater system for the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area does not have the
'capacity to meet all of the discharge stimdards imposed by state and federa1law. Neither
. the Metro Plan nor the PFSP currently reflect this situation. Statewide Planning Goal 2
requires thafthe city, county and special district plans be conSistent: In large part, the
amendments y.vyvsed by this application address the.issue of consistency between the
Metro Plan and the PFSP and consistency of the 2004 Wastewater Facilities Plan with the
fonner documents. The proposed amendments provide infonnation that should have been
included in the PFSP when it was iuiopted and present a more accurate description of .
wastewater services that will be available after certain capital improvement projects are
completed.
Phasing objectives of the 2004 WaStewater Facilities Plan necessitate that construction of '
several key facility components begin by June of 2005 in order to meet federal standards
that require that peak wet weather events be inanaged by 2010. In order to meet this
rigorous construction schedule, MWMC must have released Requests for Proposals
(RFPs) for engineering design for by October of2004. Prior to this date, the 2004
,Wastewater Facilities Plan must be adopted by the three metropolitan jurisdictions and
the Metro Plan and the PFSP should be updated to reflect current infonnation. .. .
, In summary, the application proposes the following changes:
Metro Plan,
1. SpecificaIly recognizes "wastewater" as a subcategory of service within the Urban
Growth Boundary. [Chapter III-G] . '
2. Amends Finding #6 and Policy #3 to recognize the addition of Map 2a "Existing
Wastewater Collection and Treatment Systems" to the PFSP. [Chapter III-G]
3. Amends Policy #2 to include local capital improvement plans as a means to
implement policy in the PFSP. [Chapter III-G] ,
4. '. Inserts two fmdings regarding local and regional wastewater serVices to
development within the urban growth boundary. [Chapter III-G]
5. Adds a new policy G.9 that makes a commitment to providing the conveyance
'and treatment of wastewater to meet the needs of projected growth within the
urban growth boundary and that meets regwatory requirements. [Chapter III-G]
6. . Modifies definition 37. Wastewater: Public Facilities Projects. [Chapter V
. Glossary]
, ,7. Adj:!s new wastewater project lists and anew map and revises an existing map as .
':'b,Vli. :,<".~i .':~)::,:des.cribed in the changes to the PFSP. . Date Received
.-' :.. .'r.". .
,:' ~. ,
JUL 2 8, of
" -
" ~, I}...
~Cf"'j~! :!. ',I'.
Staff Report and Findil;1gs Page 2
Planner: BJ
I
, "
"
Exhibit 1
- 3 -
PFSP
1. Modifies the text on page 28, preceding Table 3, and adds Tables 4a and 4b that
identify MWMC Wastewater Treatment and Primary Collection System
improvements, respectively.
'2. Modifies Map 2, which shows Planned Wastewater Facilities, and adds Map 2a
that concerns Existing Wastewater Facilities.
3. Modifies the existing narrative on "Wastewater System Condition Assessmenf' in
Chapter IV. (page 82)
4. Modifies existing paragraphs #1 and #2 under the discussion of "Wastewater" in
the subdivision entitled "Long- Tenn Service Availability Within Urbanizable .
Areas" in Chapter IV. (page 97). .
5. Adds new Table 16a (following Table 16) entitled "MWMC Wastewater
Treatment and Collection System Improvements, Rough Cost Estimate, and
Timing Estimate." (Page 101)
6. Adds new Chapter VI regarding amendinents to the PFSP.
Metropolitan Area General Plan Amendment Criteria
The proposed 'amendments are considered to be Type I Metro Plan amendments becaUse
they are non-site specific amendments to the Plan text. Amendments to the Plan text,
which include changes to functional plans stich as TransPlan and the PFSP, and that are
non-site specific require approval by all three governing bodies to become effective.2
Springfield, Eugene and Lane County each adopted identical Metro Plan amendment
criteria into their respective implementing ordinances and codes. Springfield Code'
Section 7.070(3) (a & b), Eugene Code 9.128(3) (a & b), and Lane Code 12.225(2) (a & .
b) requirethat the amendment be consistent with relevant statewide planning.goals and
that the amendment will not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. These criteria
are addressed as follows:
(a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant statewide planning goals
adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission;
Goal! - Citizen Involvement
To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens
to be involved in all phases of the planning process.
" The two cities and the county have acknowledged land use codes that are intended
to serve as the principal implementing ordinances for the Metro Plan. SDC Article
7 METRO PLAN AMENDMENTS and SDC Aiticlel4 PUBLIC HEARINGS '
. .' " ,;,:..., ,: . Bfescribe the manner in which a Type I Metro Plan amendment must be noticed. .
. .: ;i-'\'I~r~;;""~!;1'2:~E'~~';.070(IXa), EC 9.7730(1)(a), and LC 12.225(1)(aXi). ' '. ,Date Received
',. '11 'd
: ." Ii, JUL 28 I D't
~ ~ ,).",,1
" "'
'_' ,:.. '.' . ,1.1"'1, '
jl Q... _~ ." '. " ., z-~: Ii '" -4'
. ~';j.' ~<. ..j,l
Staff Report and Findings Page 3
Planner: BJ
Exhibit I
-4c
Citizen involvement for a Type I Metro Plan amendment not related to an urban
growth boundary amendment requires: I) Notice to mterested parties; 2) Notice
shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation; 3) Notice shall be '
provided to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) at
least 45 days before the initial evidentiary hearing (planning commission).
Notice of the joint planning commission hearing was published in the Springfield
News and in the Register-Guard on March 31, 2004. Notice to interested parties'
was mailed on April I, 2004. Notice of the first evidentiary hearing was provided
t~ DLCDon March 4, 2004. The notice to DLCD identified the City of Eugene,
Lane County, DEQ and EP A as affected agenCies. -
.
Requirements under Goal I are met by adherence to the citizen involvement
processes required by the Metro Plan and imple1J1ented by the Springfield
Development Code, Articles 7 and 14; the Eugene Code, Sections 9:7735 and
9.7520; Lane Code Sections 12.025 and 12.240.,
Goal 2 - Land Use Planning.,. To establish a larid use planning process and
policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land
and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions.
All land-use plans and implementation ordinances shall be adopted by the
governing body after public hearing and shall be reviewed and, as needed,
revised on a periodic cycle to take into account changing public policies and '
circumstances, in accord with a schedule set forth in the plan. Opportunities'
shall be provided for review and comment by citizens and affected governmental
units during preparation, review and revision of plans andimplementation
ordinances.
Implementation Measures - are the means used to carry outthe plan. These are
of two general types: (1) management implementation measures such as
'.ordinances, regulations or project plans, and (2) site or area specific
implementation measures such as permits and gt:ants for construction,
construction of public facilities or provision of services.
The most recent version of the Metro Plan is being considered on. May 17, 2004
for fmal adoption by Springfield (Ordinance No. ~, by Eugene (Council Bill
No. 4860) and by Lane County (Ordinance No. 1197) after numerous public
meetings, public workshops and joint hearings of the Springfield, Eugene and
Lane County Planning Commissions and Elected Officials.
, The Metro Plan is the "land use" or comprehensive plan required by this goal; the
Springfield Development Code, the Eugen~ Code and the Lane Code are the
"implementation measures" required by this goal. Comprehensive plans; as
defined by ORS 197.015(5/, must be coordinated with affected governmental
I)~WL; ,j!!~;;. ,~.;~,::;': ~.\; Date Received
3 Incorporated by reference into Goal 2.
. " .,'!I.II JUL 28) O~
, ,,-'
l~~ '
.~ ~ . .\\,
j :,;'"
,
:.'~,::-~;~':
Staff Report and Findings Page 4
Planner: BJ
Exhibit 1
- 5 -
units.4 Coordination' means that comments from affected govemmental units are
solicited and considered. In this regard, DLCD's Notice of PropoSed Amendment
form was sent to the City of Eugene, Lane County, DEQ and EPA. .
One aspect of the' Goal 2 coordination requirement concerns population
projections. In this respect, the proposed amendment to the PFSPGlossary
concerning Wastewater incorporates a projected year 2025 population for the
Eugene--Springfield Urban Growth BoUndary 'of 297,585.5 This projection is
consistent with the most recent (1997)fihal forecasts provided to Lane County by
the Oregon Office of Economic Analysis and the Year 2000 Census. The adoption
of this modification to the PFSP will effectively "coordinate" this population
assumption.
Goal 3 - Agricultural Lands
The changes do not affect Metro Plan or PFSP consistency with this goal and it
does not apply within adopted, acknowledged urban growth boundaries.
Goal 4 - Forest Lands
The changes do not affect Metro Plan or PFSP consistency with this goal and it
does not apply within adopted, acknowledged urban growth boundaries.
Goal 5 - Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
_ The changes do not affect acknowledged goal 5 inventories so this goal is not
applicable to the proposed amendments. '
Goal 6 - Air, Water and Land Resources QualitY:.... To maintain and improve
the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state. .
This goal is primarily concerned With compliance with federal and state
environmental quality statutes, and how this compliance is achieved as
development proceeds in relationship to air sheds; river basins and land resources.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, P.L. 92-500, as amended in 1977,
became known as the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.c. 1251 et seq.). The'goal of this
Act was to eliininate the discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters. ORS '
, '
468B.035 requires the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission (EQc) to
implement the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The primary method of
implementation of this Act is through the issuance of a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit prior to the discharge of any
wastes into the waters of the state. (ORS 468B.050) Among the "poilutants"
regulated by the EQC are temperature (OAR 340-041-0028) and toxic substances
(OAR 340"041-0033).. . .
4 " , . ,
See DLCD v. Douglas County, 33 Or LUBA 216, 221 (1997). ' '
1 '8 \/L~' '1, L\ t:fa~le,~, of technical memorandum entitled "Metropolitan Wastewater Managem~nt Commission - . d
.. "'" ,1,.',. "tPoptilatioiiIProjections for Wastewater Facilities Plan," prepared by Matt Noesen, CH2M JIiI\~-'Rece,ve
9,2004) , , -uc:no ' ,
.' \ f:~: .I:!L JLJL 28,Dt!:
. t(.l\ ..., r., ,'-\, ~ {;i. .'
A',i . ,tj' r! ,j4>t .'\
Staff Report and Findings Page 5
Planner: BJ
Exhibit I
-6-
"
- '. . .
, ,
" One pmposeofthe proposed ~endments is to ensure that the Metro Plan and the
PFSP accurately reflect regional wastewater system needs as imposed by Federal
and State regulation. Currently, the PFSP, states that"... the Regional Wastewater
Treatment Plant has sufficient design capacity to accommodate population
increases and serve all new development at buildout." Recent analyses have
.determined that facility improvements are now required to address both dry and
, 'wet weather requirements relating to pollutant loads and wastewater flows. The
section in Chapter IV of the PFSP entitled "Long-Term Service Availability ,
Within Urbanizable Areas" is proposed to be modified to reflect the need for
, facility improvements necessary to address dry and wet wea~er regulatory
requirements. '
Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards
The changes do not affect Metro Pliln or PFSP consistency with this goal and it is
not applicable to the proposed amendments.
GoalS - Recreational Needs
The changes do not affect Metro Plan or PFSP consistency with this goal and it is
not applicable to the proposed amendments.
Goal 9 - Economic Development - Goal 9 provides, in part, that it'is intended
to: "Provide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types,
,locations, and service levels for a variety of industrial and commercial uses
consistent with plan policies." The proposed amendments' are consistent with
this objective in that the Metro Plan, the PFSP and the 2004 Wastewater Facilities.
Plan must be consistent in order to comply with State discharge permit conditions
that will determine the improvements to the Regional Wastewater System that are
necessary to address new regulatory standards. The improvements are necessary
to allow adequate service and conveyance, treatment, reuse' and disposal capacity
, to serve new and existing industrial and commercial uses.
Goal 10 -Housing - To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
Goal 10 Planning Guideline 3 states that "[p]lans shouldprovidefor the
, appropriate type, 'location and phasing of pubic facilities and services sufficient to
support housing development in areas presently developed or undergoing
developmentor redevelopment. "
OAR 660-008-0010 requires that "[S]ufficient buildable land shall be designated
" on the comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs by type and density
, range as determined in the housing needs projection." Goal I 0 defines buildable
lands as ". . . lands in urban and urbanizable areas that are suitable, available and
>._:.: ).; t.'..., .. " .c,. ,. ,,' ~:cessary for residential Use." 660-008-0005(13), in part; defines l~d that is . '. .
,t::lf'~';~:}i!",(~rf~t~' " ' .uate ReceIved
, i; '_'
!.
.; : J .
~ -~, f....'!i-'!::, "'~' J
.11, . ..~,~!.-'<.'"!
Staff Report and Findings Page 6
JUL 28, Of
Planner: B~I
. ,'...: ,I:,
, '
Exhibit 1
-7-
"suitable'imd available" as laild "for which public facilities are planned or to
which public facilities can be made available."
Similar to Goal 9, adequate public facilities are neCessary to accomplish the
objectives of this goal and applicable administrati~e rules (OAR Chapter 660,
Division 008r The purpose of the proposed amendments is to provide the
comprehensive planning framework to allow for the improvements to the regional
. wastewater system that support the housing needs of the Eugene-Springfield
metropolitan area.
Goal11 - Public Facilities and Services - To plan anidevelop a timely, orderly
and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework
for urban and rural development. . '.
OAR Chapter 660, Division 011, implements goal I!. OAR 660-011-0030(1)
requires that the public facility plan identify the general location of public
facilities projects. In regard to the Metro Plan, the ,..J",,,uce to Public Facilities
and Services Plan Map 2a in Finding 6 and Policy G.3 in the l"uyvsed "
amendments addresses this requirement. In regard to the PFSP, the modification
of the introductory narrative under "Planned Wastewater System Improvements
(page 28)," the insertion of new Tables 4a and 4b'(page 28), and the modification
of Map 2 and the insertion of new Map 2a, also address this requirement.
OAR 660-011-0035(1) requires that the public facility plan include a rough cost
estimate for sewer public facility projects identified in the facility plan. In
conformity with this requirement, it is proposed that the PFSP be amended by the
insertion of Table 16a (Inserted following Page 101), which addresses rough cost
estimates and a timing estimate for MWMC Wastewater Treatment and
Collection System Improvements. The rough cost estimates in Table 16a are
based on costs set forth in the MWMC 2004 Facilities Plan and Project list. This
2004 Plim was the result of an exhaustive study that examined alternatives
ranging from $144M to $233M (See Attachment 3). The preferred alternative,
found inTable i 6a, was selected because, among other reasons, it provides the
least expensive means to comply with federal requirements and maximizes
MWMC's existing investments.
OAR 660-011-0045(3) provides that modifications to projects listed within a
public facility plan may be made without amendment to the public facility plan.
This applica~ion proposes to add a new chapter to the PFSP regarding.
amendments to that plan. Proposed Chapter VI incorporates the standards for
amending a public facility plan allowed by OAR 660-011-0045(3) and adopts an
." amendment process. .
Goal 12 - Transportation
"11~;~ 9i.Drl~"t~ C;,1f;;(j
" 'to i.' \V I" .J'~-c.\'.Ji'l . l'~, ,.."./'.::.,
Date Received
~',~" . J.I j'
, f~." . I,
I ~ .'
. '~
~ It
1<,-'
....{, ....b -( r ';1 -::: ~ _.~
. \:~::)> ' :, ~.~ -, 1
Staff Report and Filidings Page 7
JUL 2 8/o~
Plannf:)r:
fC1' 6
r~-:>: p.
Exhibit 1
- 8-
, .
The changes do not affect Metro Plan or PFSP consistency with this goal and it is '
. not applicable to the proposed amendments. '
Goal 13 - Energy Conservation .'
,ii~~~-
J
r:
'..
The changes doe not affect Metro Plan or PFSP consistency with this goal and it
is not applicable to the proposed amendments. ,
Goal 14 - Urbanization - Toprovidefor an orderly and efficient transition from
rural to urban land use.
The changes do not affect Metro-Plan or PFSP consistency with this goal and it is
~" not applicable to the proposed amendments, as they do not affect the existing
urban growth boundary.
Goal 15 - Willamette River Greenway
The changes do not affect Metro Plan or PFSP consistency with this goal and it is
not applicable to the proposed amendments.
Goal 16 Estuarine Resources, Goal 17 Coastal Shorelands, Goal 18 Beaches
and Dunes, and Goal 19 Ocean Resources
These goals dg not apply to the Eugene-Springfield M..;'vpvlitan Area.
(b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally
inconsistent.
The'p~vpvsedchanges to the Metro Plan are essentially ofa "housekeeping"
nature. They essentially recognize.the role of wastewater service provision within
the urban growth boundary by the addition or mo~ification of applicable findings
. and add or modify policy language to clarify the relationship between the Metro'
Plan arid the PFSP in regard to capital improvement plans and the commitment to
comply with regulatory requirements. The proposed changes, as presented, will
not create internal inconsistencies within the Metro Plan.
,The proposed changes also amend the PFSP to more accurately' reflect MWMC's
planned improvement projects for its wastewater treatment system and primary
collection'system, to provide rough cost and timing estimates for those'
. improvements, update narrative infonnation regarding necessary improvements to
the wastewater treatment system and primary collection system, and,more clearly
, implement the plan modification standards contained in OAR 660-011.,-0045(3).
The proposed changes to the PFSP do not create any inconsistencies within the
PFSP not do they create any inconsistencies between the PFSP and the Metro .
. . '.' Plan.
,:,,(. \:' ~(~, 'l~; -.\. (~'rrr.,!'
-',/ I' _ J. ';-~ ,;[; ;~.s _ .,,0\
.;"~. :
Staff Report and Findings Page 8
Date Recei"ed
JUL 28,~f
Planner: BJ
I