Hearings Official Decision - Laserfiche WebLink

Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) Referral comments confirm the availability of electricity service. As discussed in the Staff Report and in the EWEB Referral comments, there is sufficient water to supply the proposed PUD. However, the existing water system infrastructure does not have adequate capacity to provide the required domestic and fire water flows resulting from the increased demand of the proposed development. Accordingly, under this criterion, because the services are not presently available, the applicant must demonstrate the future availability of those services. Specifically, EWEB determined that the applicant would need to work with EWEB's water engineering department in order to discuss options for design of a new water distribution system, which includes a new pump station and associated piping to provide adequate water for the development; and the applicant would responsible for cost sharing of the new system. To satisfy that requirement, that applicant submitted an "Owner Commitment to Contribute to Cost of Water Infrastructure." That statement, signed by the owners, states the owners' current written commitment to pay their proportionate share of capital costs required to upgrade EWEB off-site facilities, as needed to adequately serve the proposed development of this property". EWEB has accepted this statement. A member of the Response Committee disputes the adequacy of the form of commitment, the scope of EWEB's authority to enter into this agreement and the scope of the commitment. She argues, in part, it does not appear to cover the entire subject property. She is correct; it does not list Tax Lot 201. However, the applicant explains that this omission was a result of a typographical error, and that the applicant intends that the commitment over the entire property. As a condition of this approval, that Commitment must be re-executed to clarify that the subject property to which it applies includes Tax Lot 201. The hearings official further finds that EWEB's acceptance of the commitment to be within its authority, and that the written statement is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with EC 9.8320(7)(c). As discussed in findings of compliance with EC 9.6505(l), prior to final subdivision approval, the applicant will also need to provide documentation from EWEB ensuring adequate water service. With regard to other public facilities and services, Public Works Referral comments (page 8-9) concurs with the applicant's statement that adequate public utilities and services are presently available to the site, as also indicated on the applicant's plans. Findings of compliance with EC 9.8320(10)(b) and 0), regarding public improvements and stormwater, further address the availability of these services to the site. The applicant has proposed a stormwater system to be constructed through the PEPI process, which will limit post development runoff to pre- development levels, consistent with the criteria set forth in EC 9.6791 through 9.6797. Those standards outline the requirements for flood control, water quality, and flow control and are further discussed below. In response to neighborhood concerns regarding the adequacy of the public street system, the applicant prepared a Traffic Safety and Street Connectivity Study to confirm the adequacy of transportation facilities. As explained in the Staff Report, the city's traffic analysis discusses the roadway conditions on Capital Drive and Spring Boulevard, and reviews the applicant's traffic Hearings Official Decision (PDT 17-1) 55