My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item A: Background on Extra-territorial Extensions
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2008
>
CC Agenda - 01/23/08 Work Session
>
Item A: Background on Extra-territorial Extensions
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 12:58:23 PM
Creation date
1/17/2008 3:34:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
1/23/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />It is also important to note that adoption of this ordinance not only ensured consistency with existing <br />city annexation policies, it also ensured the same level of protection for prohibiting urban development <br />outside the Urban Growth Boundary as it did before the Boundary Commission was abolished. <br /> <br />Application History <br />As staff has indicated, the circumstances under which an extra-territorial extension can be granted are <br />very narrow, and therefore, are likely to be limited in number. This has been the case for the past <br />decade. Over the last ten years, two sewer extension requests and one water extension request have <br />been submitted within Eugene’s UGB. Of the three applications, one was submitted by the City of <br />Eugene and another by EWEB. As this data indicates, staff does not expect to see any notable change in <br />the number of requests, as the recently adopted ordinance incorporated the same criteria that have been <br />used over the last 30+ years. In fact, as additional capital projects are implemented (such as the Legacy <br />sewer extension), annexation will become feasible for a greater number of properties, thereby potentially <br />reducing the need for extra-territorial extensions. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br />Based on the information provided above, staff would expect extra-territorial extension requests to <br />continue to be a fairly rare occurrence. Given that the same criteria have been carried over in the <br />recently adopted ordinance, the City Council has ensured these requests will be evaluated in a manner <br />consistent with their long-standing policy direction. <br /> <br />As is the case with annexations, staff will continue to monitor the application process for extra-territorial <br />extensions as it relates to the newly adopted ordinance. Depending on the results, further discussion <br />with the City Council may be warranted to explore specific amendments. <br /> <br /> <br />RELATED CITY POLICIES <br />Discussion of this item is intended as a follow up to the recent proceedings regarding the adoption of <br />Ordinance No. 20400. This ordinance was adopted as a result of a state mandate (SB 417) which <br />required local jurisdictions to assume the responsibilities for processing annexation requests. <br /> <br /> <br />COUNCIL OPTIONS <br /> <br />No formal action is required. The City Council requested this item to more fully understand the recently <br />adopted process concerning extra-territorial extensions. <br /> <br /> <br />CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION <br /> <br />No action is required on this item as this is an information session only. <br /> <br /> <br />SUGGESTED MOTION <br /> <br />No action is required on this item. Therefore, no motions are offered by the City Manager at this time. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> F:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080123\S080123A.doc <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.