Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 3: Ordinance on Extraterritorial Extension Procedures ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Public Hearing: An Ordinance Concerning Extra-Territorial Water and Sewer Extensions Procedures; and Amending Sections 9.7055, 9.7205, 9.7820, and 9.8121 of the Eugene Code, 1971 Meeting Date: May 19, 2008 Agenda Item Number: 3 Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Steve Nystrom www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541/682-8385 ISSUE STATEMENT The City Council will hold a public hearing to consider a proposed code amendment revising the procedures for review of extraterritorial extensions. BACKGROUND In December, 2007, the City Council adopted an ordinance (No. 20400) establishing the procedures for processing of annexation requests, extraterritorial extensions, and withdrawals from special districts. Immediately following adoption of this ordinance, the City Council directed staff to schedule a work session to further discuss extraterritorial extensions. On January 23, 2008, the City Council held the work session and concluded that a discrete amendment to the procedural requirements for extraterritorial extensions was warranted. Accordingly, the City Council passed the following motion: Move to direct the City Manager to prepare an ordinance amending the code so that the process for considering extraterritorial extension applications: 1) Requires a public hearing before the City Council and makes the City Council the final local decision-making body; and 2) Requires that notice of the City Council’s public hearing be posted on the property which is the subject of the application so that the notice is visible from adjacent streets and that the notice be mailed to the appropriate neighborhood associations, and all property owners and residents within 750 feet of that property’s perimeter. Further move to direct the City Manager to hold any applications submitted for extraterritorial extension of water or sewer until the City Council has acted on this proposed ordinance or 60 days after the City Council holds a public hearing on the ordinance, whichever is earlier. Senate Bill 417 was passed in the 2007 legislative session which abolished the Lane County Boundary Commission. Prior to the enactment of Senate Bill 417, the Boundary Commission had the authority to consider requests for extraterritorial extensions. The City Council adopted specific resolutions many years ago regarding extraterritorial extensions. These resolutions included specific policies which served as the basis from which the City would make its recommendation to the Boundary Commission. Y:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080519\S0805193.docm As a result of the passage of Senate Bill 417, the City of Eugene assumed responsibility for processing these requests. The long-standing policies regarding extraterritorial extensions were subsequently codified in Ordinance No. 20400 as the approval criteria for any new requests. Given the explicit nature of the policies, this ordinance established a Type II process which required approval of the Planning Director. However, following further discussion at the January 23, 2008, work session, the City Council expressed concern that some of these requests could be potentially significant or controversial and felt it more appropriate to have such applications elevated to a City Council review. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed amendment on April 22, 2008. Following the close of the public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendments consistent with the City Council’s motion. As of this date, no written testimony has been received on this matter. Two individuals spoke as neutral parties at the Planning Commission public hearing, requesting clarification of statements in the staff report. Staff has attached the Agenda Item Summary to the Planning Commission, dated April 22, 2008 as well as the Agenda Item Summary to the Mayor and City Council regarding the January 23, 2008 work session on extraterritorial extensions to provide further background on this matter. Draft Ordinance The draft ordinance revises the process for extraterritorial extensions as described in the council’s motion above. This revision would require that the City Council hold a public hearing and be the decision maker for all extraterritorial extensions. The proposed ordinance also amends the public notification requirements for all extraterritorial extensions, consistent with the City Council motion. In addition to the council-directed amendment, staff has included another amendment to address an oversight that resulted in the original ordinance adoption in December, 2007. Prior to the City Council’s vote to adopt Ordinance No. 20400, a motion to amend the ordinance was approved by the City Council which increased the requirement for public notification for annexations from 10 to 30 days prior to council consideration. EC 9.7820(1)(c) was revised accordingly, however the motion failed to include a reference to a second portion of the ordinance, EC 9.7820, which contained similar language. Staff is therefore including this proposed amendment to fulfill the original intent of the council. This amendment would ensure that in cases where the City Council decides to hold a public hearing for a proposed annexation, public notice shall be provided 30 days (as opposed to 14 days) in advance of the hearing. RELATED CITY POLICIES This item is intended as a follow-up to the recent proceedings regarding the adoption of Ordinance No. 20400. That ordinance was adopted as a result of a state mandate (SB 417) which required local jurisdictions to assume the responsibilities for processing annexation requests. COUNCIL OPTIONS The City Council may consider the following options: 1. Approve the proposed ordinance 2. Approved the proposed ordinance with specific modifications as determined by the City Council 3. Deny the proposed ordinance Y:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080519\S0805193.docm CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION This is scheduled for a public hearing only. Following the City’s receipt of all testimony, the City Manager will make a recommendation to be included in the council packet for action on June 9, 2008. SUGGESTED MOTION No motion is proposed as this item is scheduled for a public hearing. ATTACHMENTS A. Proposed ordinance and findings B. Ordinance No. 20400 C. Agenda Item Summary: January 23, 2008, City Council Work Session D. Agenda Item Summary: April 22, 2008, Planning Commission Public Hearing FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Steve Nystrom Telephone: 541/682-8385 Staff E-Mail: steven.a.nystrom@ci.eugene.or.us Y:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080519\S0805193.docm ATTACHMENT A ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING EXTRA-TERRITORIAL WATER AND SEWER EXTENSIONS PROCEDURES; AND AMENDING SECTIONS 9.7055, 9.7205, 9.7820, AND 9.8121 OF THE EUGENE CODE, 1971. THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The entry for “Extra-Territorial Extension of Water or Sewer Service” in the Table set forth in Section 9.7055 of the Eugene Code, 1971, is amended, to provide as follows: 9.7055 Applications and Review Authorities. Table 9.7055 Applications and Review Authorities, lists applications and the review authorities for the decision and the appeal of the decision. Table 9.7055 Applications and Review Authorities R = Recommendation, D = Decision Maker, A = Appeal Review Authority ApplicationTypePlanning Hearings Historic Planning City DirectorOfficialReview CommissionCouncil Board Extra-Territorial Extension of D Water or Sewer Service [II] [D] [A] Section 2. Table 9.7205 set forth in Section 9.7205 of the Eugene Code, 1971, is amended by deleting the entry for “Extra-Territorial Extension of Water and Sewer Service” therefrom. 9.7205 Type II Application Requirements and Criteria Reference. The following applications are reviewed under the Type II review process according to the requirements and criteria set forth for each application as reflected in the beginning reference column in Table 9.7205: Table 9.7205 Type II Application Requirements and Criteria Type II ApplicationsBeginning Reference [Extra-Territorial Extension of Water or Sewer Service EC 9.8115] Ordinance - 1 Section 3. Subsection (2)(d)1. of Section 9.7820 of the Eugene Code, 1971 is amended, to provide as follows: 9.7820 Annexation – Procedures. (2) For an application submitted pursuant to EC 9.7810(3), or an application described in EC 9.7820(1)(c), above: (d) Notice of the public hearing shall be: 1. Mailed at least [14] 30 days prior to the public hearing to those listed in subsection (1)(c) above; Section 4. Section 9.8121 of the Eugene Code, 1971, is amended to provide as follows: 9.8121 Extra-Territorial Extension of Water or Sewer Service – Procedures and Approval Criteria. The city council [planning director] shall [consider] hold a public hearing to consider an application for an extra-territorial extension of water or sewer service[ in accordance with the Type II application procedures contained in EC 9.7200 through 9.7230. The planning director shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application based on compliance with the following criteria:]. (1) Notice of the public hearing shall be: (a) Mailed at least 30 days prior to the public hearing to: 1. The applicant; 2. Owners and occupants of properties located within 750 feet of the perimeter of the subject property; and 3. The neighborhood group or community organization officially recognized by the city council that includes the area of the subject property and any neighborhood group or community organization officially recognized by the city council for the area that is located within 750 feet of the perimeter of the subject property (b) Published in a local newspaper with general circulation at least 20 days prior to the public hearing; and (c) Posted on the property that is the subject of the application in a location clearly visible from adjacent streets. (2) The city council shall adopt a resolution approving or denying the application. The city council’s decision is final, and shall be based on compliance with the following criteria: (1) a The property proposed for service is located within the city’s urban growth boundary, is located within the property boundaries of the Mahlon Sweet Airport, or, for purposes of water extension only, Lane Community College; (2) b In no case shall the city extend services extra-territorially to a property that could, instead, be annexed. Further, to receive extra-territorial water or sewer service an applicant must demonstrate the inability to satisfy either EC 9.7825(2) or (3); Ordinance - 2 (3) c The applicant has entered into an annexation agreement on forms provided by the city pertaining to the property proposed to be served or will enter into such an annexation agreement as a condition of approval; (4) d The property proposed for service is not vacant; (5) e The provision of service will not prolong uses which are nonconforming uses under the Eugene Code, 1971; (6) f In the case of an application for extension of water service, the property to be served is connected with an approved means of sewage disposal; (7) gThe proposed extension is consistent with adopted resolutions, policies, plans and ordinances concerning extra-territorial extensions; and (8) h Even if a proposed extension is inconsistent with the criteria above, the city may approve an extra-territorial extension of water or sewer service consistent with adopted city resolutions, policies, plans and ordinances: (a)1. Where a communicable disease hazard exists and the extension is the only practical remedy; or (b)2. To property within a dissolved water district within which EWEB is providing service to some properties. Section 5. The Legislative Findings attached as Exhibit A hereto are adopted in support of this Ordinance. Section 6. The City Recorder, at the request of, or with the concurrence of the City Attorney, may correct any reference errors contained herein, or in other provisions of the Eugene Code, 1971, to the provisions added, amended, or repealed herein. Passed by the City Council this Approved by the Mayor this ____ day of ____________, 2008 ____ day of _______________, 2008 ___________________________ _____________________________ City Recorder Mayor Ordinance - 3 Exhibit A FINDINGS The following criteria from EC 9.8065 shall be applied to the proposed code amendment: (1) The amendment is consistent with applicable statewide planning goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. Goal 1 - 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 City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement which insure the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process and set out requirements for such involvement. The action taken did not amend the citizen involvement program. The process for adopting these amendments complies with Goal 1 because it is consistent with the citizen involvement provisions. Specifically, the Planning Commission held a public hearing followed by a similar public hearing process before the City Council. Additionally, the proposed amendments will provide increased opportunity for public involvement by requiring a public hearing and increasing the public notice requirements. These amendments further support this goal. Based on this information, the process followed is consistent with Goal 1. Goal 2 - Land Use Planning. To establish a land 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 basis for such decisions and actions. The Eugene Land Use Code specifies the procedure and criteria that were used in considering these amendments to the code. The record shows that there is an adequate factual basis for the amendments. Specifically, the City Council held a work session to discuss this matter and ultimately voted to direct staff to prepare the draft ordinance now under consideration. The Goal 2 coordination requirement is met when the City engages in an exchange, or invites such an exchange, between the City and any affected governmental unit and when the City uses the information obtained in the exchange to balance the needs of the citizens. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City engaged in an exchange about the subject of this amendment with all of the affected governmental units. Specifically, the City provided notice of the proposed action and opportunity to comment to Lane County, Springfield and the Department of Land Conservation and Development. There are no Goal 2 Exceptions required for these amendments. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 2. Goal 3 - Agricultural Lands. To Preserve Agricultural Lands. The amendments are for property located within the urban growth boundary and do not affect any land designated for agricultural use. Therefore, Goal 3 does not apply. Goal 4 - Forest Lands. To conserve forest lands. The amendments are for property located within the urban growth boundary and do not affect any land designated for forest use. Therefore, Goal 4 does not apply. Goal 5 - Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources. To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources. These amendments do not create or amend the citys list of Goal 5 resources, do not amend a = code provision adopted in order to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5, and do not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with a significant Goal 5 resource site. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Goal 5. Goal 6 - Air, Water and land Resource Quality. To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state. The amendments do not affect the Citys ability to provide for clean air, water or land resources. = The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Goal 6. Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards. To Protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards. The amendments do not effect the Citys restrictions on development in areas subject to natural = disasters and hazards. Further, the amendment does not allow for new development that could result in a natural hazard. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Goal 7. Goal 8 - Recreational Needs. To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors, and where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. The amendments do not effect the citys provisions for recreation areas, facilities or recreational = opportunities. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Goal 8. Goal 9 - Economic Development. To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregons citizens. = The amendments do not impact the supply of industrial or commercial lands. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 9. Goal 10 - Housing. To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. The amendments do not impact the supply of residential lands. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 10. Goal 11- Public Facilities and Services. To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. The cities of Eugene, Springfield and Lane County have adopted the Public Facilities and Services Plan (PFSP) which serves as a primary tool for implementing a regional strategy consistent with this goal. The proposed ordinance will not impact the PFSP. The current ordinance specifically limits any future extraterritorial extension requests to sites within the Eugene’s Urban Growth Boundary. This proposed amendment will maintain that specific limitation. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 11. Goal 12- Transportation. To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. The proposed code amendment does not affect the provision of safe, convenient and economic transportation systems and does not significantly affect any transportation facilities. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. There are no amendments proposed to other adopted plans, nor are there any geographically specific amendments that would change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility, or change the standards implementing a functional classification system. As a citywide legislative action focused on procedural requirements, this ordinance does not include any provisions that would affect the functional classification or performance of any transportation facility at the end of the planning period (2015). For the reasons described above, the proposed ordinance is consistent with Goal 12. Goal 13 - Energy Conservation. To conserve energy. The amendments do not impact energy conservation. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Goal 13. Goal 14 - Urbanization. To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendments will not result in any action affecting compliance with this goal. The criteria regarding extraterritorial extensions will remain unchanged as will the existing annexation provisions, thereby maintaining the city’s current policies which promote orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. For the reasons described above, the proposed code amendments are consistent with Goal 14. Goal 15 - Willamette River Greenway. To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway. The amendments to not contain any changes that affect the regulation of areas within the Willamette River Greenway. The proposed ordinance involves a legislative action which revises existing procedures for review of specific applications. As such, the proposed code amendment has no material impact related to this goal. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Goal 15. Goals 16 - 19. Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean resources. These Statewide Planning Goals do not apply to the actions taken. (2) The amendment is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and applicable adopted refinement plans. The proposed ordinance revises the review process for extraterritorial extensions and increases the noticing requirements for annexation applications. The limited nature of these amendments will have minimal impact on the provisions of the Metro Plan and refinement plans, however, it can be concluded that the amendments will provide greater opportunity for citizen involvement and are therefore supported by the following Metro Plan policy: Improve and maintain local mechanisms that provide the opportunity for residents and property owners in existing residential areas to participate in the implementation of policies in the Metro Plan that may affect the character of those areas. (Metro Plan policy K.3, page III-K-3) Based on this requirement and the fact that no amendments are proposed to any adopted plans, the proposed code amendments will be consistent with this criterion. (3) The amendment is consistent with EC 9.3020 Criteria for Establishment of an S Special Area Zone, in the case of establishment of a special area zone. The proposed amendments do not establish a special area zone. Therefore, this criterion does not apply to this code amendment. ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Work Session: Extra-Territorial Extensions Meeting Date: January 23, 2008 Agenda Item Number: A Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Steve Nystrom www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541/682-8385 ISSUE STATEMENT The City Council has requested a work session on extra-territorial extensions to better understand the nature of these requests and the process recently adopted by the City Council. BACKGROUND On December 10, 2007, the City Council adopted an ordinance (No. 20400) establishing procedures for processing annexations, withdrawals from service districts and extra-territorial extensions. The passage of Senate Bill (SB) 417 abolished the Boundary Commission, which served as the responsible governmental body for review of annexation requests and extraterritorial extensions within Lane County. Effective January 1, 2008, the City must approve any extensions of water or sewer service from within the City to areas outside of the city limits. Therefore, it was necessary for the City to adopt a review process and criteria for considering applications proposing extra-territorial extensions, in place of the Boundary Commission. While the City Council did so with its passage of Ordinance No. 20400, a work session was requested to further discuss the City’s policies related to extraterritorial extensions. An extra-territorial extension is defined in the ordinance as an extension of water or sewer service from inside the city limits to serve property located outside the city limits. The ordinance further restricts these extensions to property within the Urban Growth Boundary, except as provided for in previously approved resolutions. Adopted Policies The City has long-standing policies, in Resolution No. 2643 (attached), that were applied as the City made recommendations to the Boundary Commission regarding extra-territorial extensions. The provisions addressing extra-territorial extensions in Ordinance No. 20400 are based on the policies in Resolution No. 2643. This resolution emphasizes that the provision of city services should be limited to residents of the city. However, the resolution also acknowledges that there are some unique circumstances in which an extra-territorial extension outside of the city may be in the best interests of the city. Therefore, the resolution set forth specific criteria under which requests for extra-territorial extensions could be approved. These criteria were imported into the recently adopted ordinance in order to maintain the City Council’s current policy direction. Process and Criteria Section 9.8121 (see attached Ordinance No. 20400) stipulates the process and approval criteria for extra- territorial extensions. Under the Eugene Code, requests for extra-territorial extensions are subject to a Type II land use process. This process requires public notice to properties within 300 feet and an administrative decision by the Planning Director. That decision can be appealed to the City’s Hearings Official who would hold a public hearing to consider the matter. Section 9.8121 also provides the criteria of approval for all extra-territorial extensions. Each request must meet all of the criteria in order to be approved. Most notable are the following criteria: The property cannot be annexed for reasons other than the mere fact that the property is not ? contiguous to the city The property is not vacant ? The provision of service will not prolong non-conforming uses ? Section 9.8121(8) provides two exceptions to these criteria: If the extension is the only practical remedy to a communicable disease hazard; or ? The property is within a dissolved water district in which EWEB is providing service. ? As the criteria in Section 9.8121 indicates, the intent is to provide a means for water or sewer service for existing developed properties which cannot otherwise annex to the city. Conversely, these provisions specifically discourage extra-territorial extensions as a means to accommodate growth or new development without first annexing to the city. Resolution No. 2643 (on which these criteria were based) provides a clear policy position that the urban services should not be provided outside of the city except under unique circumstances. The provision of such services to the Airport, Lane Community College and sewer service to River Road are examples of such circumstances. The Metro Plan provides similar policy direction by prioritizing annexation as the primary means to receive urban services (Policy 21, page II-C-6). The City’s land use code also supports this policy direction as explained below. Relationship to Annexation requirements When discussing extra-territorial extensions, it is also important to understand the City’s existing requirements for annexation. As noted above, the criteria for extra-territorial extensions are intended to address existing circumstances, rather than accommodate future development potential. The requirements for annexation provide an additional tool to ensure this occurs. These requirements were not amended or impacted with the City Council’s adoption of Ordinance No. 20400. These provisions have been in place for many years, with only a few revisions made since 2001 (LUCU). In general, the following activities could not be considered without first annexing to the city: Zone Changes ? Partitions and Subdivisions ? Planned Unit Developments ? New dwellings ? New commercial or industrial development ? Expansion of existing commercial or industrial development which result in a need for additional ? urban facilities and services Based on these requirements, the approval of any extra-territorial extension would not enable a property to further develop. The triggers described above would apply to all properties regardless of the urban services that are currently provided to the site. Quite simply, if a property owner of land outside the city limits requested approval any of the land use action listed above, they would first be required to annex to the city before any such application could be processed, regardless if they had previously obtained an extra-territorial extension or not. It is also important to note that adoption of this ordinance not only ensured consistency with existing city annexation policies, it also ensured the same level of protection for prohibiting urban development outside the Urban Growth Boundary as it did before the Boundary Commission was abolished. Application History As staff has indicated, the circumstances under which an extra-territorial extension can be granted are very narrow, and therefore, are likely to be limited in number. This has been the case for the past decade. Over the last ten years, two sewer extension requests and one water extension request have been submitted within Eugene’s UGB. Of the three applications, one was submitted by the City of Eugene and another by EWEB. As this data indicates, staff does not expect to see any notable change in the number of requests, as the recently adopted ordinance incorporated the same criteria that have been used over the last 30+ years. In fact, as additional capital projects are implemented (such as the Legacy sewer extension), annexation will become feasible for a greater number of properties, thereby potentially reducing the need for extra-territorial extensions. Conclusion Based on the information provided above, staff would expect extra-territorial extension requests to continue to be a fairly rare occurrence. Given that the same criteria have been carried over in the recently adopted ordinance, the City Council has ensured these requests will be evaluated in a manner consistent with their long-standing policy direction. As is the case with annexations, staff will continue to monitor the application process for extra-territorial extensions as it relates to the newly adopted ordinance. Depending on the results, further discussion with the City Council may be warranted to explore specific amendments. RELATED CITY POLICIES Discussion of this item is intended as a follow up to the recent proceedings regarding the adoption of Ordinance No. 20400. This ordinance was adopted as a result of a state mandate (SB 417) which required local jurisdictions to assume the responsibilities for processing annexation requests. COUNCIL OPTIONS No formal action is required. The City Council requested this item to more fully understand the recently adopted process concerning extra-territorial extensions. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION No action is required on this item as this is an information session only. SUGGESTED MOTION No action is required on this item. Therefore, no motions are offered by the City Manager at this time. ATTACHMENTS A. Ordinance No. 20400 B. Resolution No. 2643 FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Steve Nystrom Telephone: 541/682-8385 Staff E-Mail: steven.a.nystrom@ci.eugene.or.us ATTACHMENT D AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 22, 2008 To: Eugene Planning Commission From: Steve Nystrom, Planning Division Subject: CA 08-1: Public hearing to consider an ordinance revising procedures for processing of Extraterritorial Extensions Action Requested Hold the public hearing, deliberate and recommend action to the City Council regarding the proposed ordinance. Briefing Statement In December, 2007, the City Council adopted an ordinance establishing the procedures for processing of annexation requests, extraterritorial extensions, and withdrawals from special districts. Immediately following adoption of this ordinance, the City Council directed staff to schedule a work session to further discuss extraterritorial extensions. On January 23, 2008, the City Council held the work session and concluded that a discrete amendment to the procedural requirements for extraterritorial extensions was warranted. In response, the City Council passed the following motion: Move to direct the City Manager to prepare an ordinance amending the code so that the process for considering extraterritorial extension applications: 1) Requires a public hearing before the City Council and makes the City Council the final local decision making body; and 2) Requires that notice of the City Council’s public hearing be posted on the property which is the subject of the application so that the notice is visible from adjacent streets and that the notice be mailed to the appropriate neighborhood associations, and all property owners and residents within 750 feet of that property’s perimeter. Further move to direct the City Manager to hold any applications submitted for extraterritorial extension of water or sewer until the City Council has acted on this proposed ordinance or 60 days after the City Council holds a public hearing on the ordinance, whichever is earlier. As a result of this motion, staff is processing a code amendment to carry out Council’s explicit direction. Accordingly, this code amendment is limited in scope to the process revisions specified in the City Council motion above. Background An extra-territorial extension is defined in the current ordinance (No. 20400) as an extension of water or sewer service from inside the city limits to serve property located outside the city limits. The current ordinance further restricts these extensions to property within the Urban Growth Boundary, except as provided for in previously approved resolutions. These exceptions include the previously approved service to the Mahlon Sweet Airport and Lane Community College. This proposed amendment will maintain that specific limitation. As the Planning Commission will recall, the Boundary Commission had the authority to consider requests for extraterritorial extensions prior to the enactment of Senate Bill 417, which abolished the Boundary Commission. In transferring this responsibility to the City, there are no state statutes or other city requirements which specified the review process, or appropriate decision maker. The City Council adopted specific resolutions many years ago regarding extraterritorial extensions. These resolutions included specific policies which served as the basis from which the City would make its recommendation to the Boundary Commission. These policies were subsequently codified in the recent adoption of Ordinance No. 20400. Given the explicit nature of the policies, the draft ordinance proposed a Type II process which required approval of the Planning Director. Ordinance No. 20400 was adopted by the City Council, which included this Type II process. However, following further discussion at the January 23, 2008 work session, the City Council expressed concern that some of these requests could be potentially significant or controversial and felt it more appropriate to have such applications elevated to a City Council review. Draft Ordinance The draft ordinance revises the process for extraterritorial extensions as described in the Council’s motion above. This revision would require that the City Council hold a public hearing and be the decision maker for all extraterritorial extensions. The originally adopted ordinance required that the Planning Director be the decision maker. In addition, the proposed ordinance includes the specific noticing requirements for all extraterritorial extensions. As noted above, the existing ordinance specifically limits any future extraterritorial extension requests to sites within the Eugene’s Urban Growth Boundary. Although State Law does enable some limited ability to extend urban services outside of urban growth boundaries, the City Council specifically directed the current ordinance to be limited to requests inside the urban growth boundary. Since the proposed amendments do not revise this provision, compliance with applicable State Statutes is ensured. In addition to the Council directed amendment, staff has included an additional amendment to address an oversight that resulted in the original ordinance adoption in December, 2007. Prior to the Council vote to adopt Ordinance No. 20400, a motion to amend the ordinance was approved which changed the requirement for public notification for annexations from 14 to 30 days prior to Council consideration. EC 9.7820(1)(c) was revised accordingly, however the motion failed to include a reference to a second portion of the ordinance, EC 9.7820, which contained the same language. Staff is therefore including this proposed amendment to fulfill the original intent of the Council. Public Notice and Testimony The public hearing notice was sent to the City of Springfield, Lane County, all neighborhood organizations, as well as community groups and individuals who have requested notice. In addition, notice was published in the Register Guard. As of the writing of this report, no testimony has been received by the city. Applicable Criteria The Eugene Planning Commission shall address the relevant approval criteria in making recommendations to the Eugene City Council on the proposed code amendment, as listed below: E.C. 9.8065 Code Amendment Approval Criteria. The Eugene City Council shall apply the following criteria to the proposal to amend the Land Use Code according to EC 9.8065: (1) Is consistent with applicable statewide planning goals as adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. (2) Is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and applicable adopted refinement plans. (3) In the case of establishment of a special area zone, is consistent with EC 9.3020 Criteria for Establishment of an S Special Area Zone. Staff has attached the draft findings to support adoption of this ordinance. Recommendation Given the limited scope of this ordinance, Staff recommends that following the public hearing, the Planning Commission deliberate and take action on April 22. Staff further recommends that the Planning Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the attached ordinance amending Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code. For more Information th Contact Steve Nystrom, Planning and Development Department, 99 West 10 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon, 97401; telephone: (541) 682-8385; e-mail: steven.a.nystrom@ci.eugene.or.us Attachments A. Draft Ordinance and Findings B. Ordinance No. 20400