12/08/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the court would review the existing record and no supplemental materials could be filed with the record by the City. At the time of the Boundary Commission hearing, the City did not approach it in preparation for litigation so the City's position is not as advantageous as Mr. Long would like it to . be. Mrs. Beal .wondered where EWEB would be legally if the City were to request EWEB not to supply water and the EWEB Board did in fact come to a decision that it was against their policy to do so. Mr. Long replied that ErvEB does have the right of refusal under their contract with Willamette Water Co. Ordinarily, the Boundary Commission decisions are binding; however, in this case, the cOmnUssion noted as a condition that its approval will cease if EWEB does not agree to modification of its existing service area agreement between EWEB and Willamette Water Company. Mr. Haws questioned what the City's options would be if EWEB should agree to extend. Mr. Long noted it may raise a question as to the relationship between the City and EWEB. Other forms of legal recourse could be looked at, possibly a declaratory judgment. Mrs. Beal moved seconded by Mr. Keller that the City transmit Corom to EWEB its continued adherence to the policy on extension 12/3/75 of water lines outside the urban service boundary and suggest Approv,e, to EWEB that this particular case is no exception to that standard. Mr. Keller wondered if Mr. Long would feel comfortable going to court on the is~ue, and Mr. Long responded that, since legitimate serious questions could be raised with regard to the Boundary COmnUssion decision, he would not be uncomfortable if Council felt going to court was warranted. e Mr. Williams raised a question regarding whether an area outside the urban service area has to conform to the 1990 Plan. Planning Director answered the policy states clearly extension would be considered to a community where there is a plan and urban service concept for that community. The Shade Oaks subdivision has no detailed plan of any kind; therefore, extension to that area would be against city policy. Manager noted that, in connection with any presentations to EWEB, the Planning Department is compiling data to show past history of development occurring after water extension, citing specific examples, and explaining how it impacts the zoning, also showing negative effects on the 1990 Plan. Mrs. Beal:raised the point that the water line if extended to the Shade Oaks subdivision would pass across undeveloped land to reach the new development - 3,000 feet of it in fact - and supposed EWEB would be responsible for further water supplies for any future development. Mr. Long referred to the Boundary Commission Final Order which stipulated that, in the future, only existing houses with direct access to the water line between I-5 and the subdivision would be considered for connection upon request to the Boundary COmnUssion (in accordance with state law). That proviso is an attempt to limit what will be connected to the line. From another viewpoint, Mr. Haws wondered what would happen to the people _. in the Shade Oaks subdivision should water not be extended. Planning Director answered they would then have to come up with an independent 12/8/75 - 8 '3~