Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Policy 15. Ultimately, land within the UGB shall be annexed to a city and provided with <br />the required minimum level of urban facilities and services. While the time <br />frame for annexation may vary, annexation should occur as land transitions <br />from urbanizable to urban. (page II-C-5) <br /> <br />The following policy from the Residential Element of the Metro Plan is also applicable: <br /> <br />Policy A.2 Residentially designated land within the UGB should be zoned consistent with <br />the Metro Plan, and applicable plans and policies; however, existing <br />agricultural zoning may be continued within the area between the city limits <br />and UGB until rezoned for urban uses. <br /> <br />The Metro Plan designates the annexation area as appropriate for low-density <br />residential use. The River Road - Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan (RR/SC UFP) is the <br />adopted refinement plan for the subject property, which also designates the area for low <br />density residential use. The property is zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential with a /UL <br />Urbanizable Land overlay,consistent with theexistingMetro Planand RR/SC UFP <br />designations. The /UL overlay will be automatically removed from the property following <br />annexation approval. <br /> <br />Regarding applicable policies of the RR/SC UFP, the subject property is not within a <br />defined subarea. Further, none of the general “Residential Land Use Policies” at Section <br />2.2 appear to be directly applicable to the subject request. The “Public Facilities and <br />Services Element” policies of the RR/SC UFP are directed at local government; however, <br />the premise of these policies (regarding the provision of urban services) is the <br />assumption that property within the UGB will be annexed. <br /> <br />As previously discussed in this subsection, and further detailed under subsection (3) <br />below, the proposed annexation is consistent with Metro Plan growth management <br />policies and can be served by the minimum level of key urban services. The annexation <br />procedures beginning at EC 9.7800 are consistent with State law and therefore, as found <br />throughout this report, the annexation is consistent with State law. <br /> <br />Based on the findings above, the proposal is consistent with the applicable policies of the <br />Metro Plan and RR/SC UFP refinement plan. <br /> <br />EC 9.7825(3) The proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key <br />urban facilities and services, as defined in the Metro Plan, can be provided in an <br />orderly, efficient, and timely manner. <br />Complies Findings: Consistent with this criterion, the proposed annexation will result in a <br />boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be <br /> <br />provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner as detailed below: <br />YES NO <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Leah Hyland (A 21-2) April 2021 Page 2 <br /> <br />