Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAMENDED Agenda Packet 11-25-19 MeetingNovember 25, 2019, Meeting AMENDED AGENDA EUGENE CITY COUNCIL November 25, 2019 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING Harris Hall, 125 East 8th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 Meeting of November 25, 2019; Her Honor Mayor Lucy Vinis Presiding Councilors Betty Taylor, President Emily Semple, Vice President Greg Evans Chris Pryor Mike Clark Claire Syrett Jennifer Yeh Alan Zelenka Note: This amended agenda reflects the addition of Item 5. 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1.PUBLIC FORUM 2.CONSENT CALENDAR A.Approval of City Council Minutes o October 23, 2019, Work Session o October 28, 2019, Work Session o October 28, 2019, Meeting o October 30, 2019, Work Session B. Approval of City Council Tentative Agenda C.Adoption of a Resolution Annexing Land to the City of Eugene (Assessor’s Map 17-04-23-42, Tax Lot 3900 Located West of 830 Willow Avenue)(City File: Steinhouse, Elizabeth; A 19-7) D.Adoption of a Resolution Annexing Land to the City of Eugene (Assessor’s Map 18-03-16-30; Tax Lot 200; located on Spring Boulevard) (City File: Axline- Hazen; A 19-9) November 25, 2019, Meeting E.Adoption of a Resolution Annexing Land to the City of Eugene (Assessor’s Map 17-04-14-42; Tax Lot 6500—located at 625 Howard Avenue)(City File: Burhnam, Jake; A 19-8) 3.ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Restrictions on the Use of Polystyrene Containers and Adding Sections 6.874, 6.876, and 6.878 to the Eugene Code, 1971. 4.ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Single-Use Checkout Bags, Amending Sections 6.850 and 6.855 of the Eugene Code, 1971, and Repealing Sections 6.860 and 6.865 of that Code. 5.ACTION: A Resolution Calling for a Statewide Addiction Recovery Continuum of Care. The Eugene City Council welcomes your interest in these agenda items. This meeting location is wheelchair-accessible. For the hearing impaired, an interpreter can be provided with 48 hours' notice prior to the meeting. Spanish-language interpretation will also be provided with 48 hours' notice. To arrange for these services, contact the receptionist at 541-682-5010. City Council meetings are telecast live on Metro Television, Comcast channel 21, and rebroadcast laterin the week.El consejo de la Ciudad de Eugene agradece su interés en estos asuntos de la agenda. El lugar de la reunión tiene acceso para sillas de ruedas. Se puede proveer a un intérprete para las personas con discapacidad auditiva si avisa con 48 horas de anticipación. También se puede proveer interpretación para español si avisa con 48 horas de anticipación. Para reservar estos servicios llame al 541-682-5010. Las reuniones del consejo de la ciudad se transmiten en vivo por Metro Television, Canal 21 de Comcast y son retransmitidas durante la semana. For more information, contact the Council Coordinator at 541-682-5010, or visit us online at www.eugene-or.gov. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 1 EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Public Forum Meeting Date: November 25, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 1 Department: Central Services Staff Contact: Beth Forrest www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5882 ISSUE STATEMENT This segment allows citizens the opportunity to express opinions and provide information to the council. Testimony presented during the Public Forum should be on city-related issues and should not address items which have already been heard by a Hearings Official or are on the present agenda as a public hearing item. SUGGESTED MOTION No action is required; this is an informational item only. FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Beth Forrest Telephone: 541-682-5882 Staff E-Mail: bforrest@eugene-or.gov November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2A EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Approval of City Council Minutes Meeting Date: November 25, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 2A Department: Central Services Staff Contact: Beth Forrest www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5882 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve City Council minutes. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the minutes for the work sessions on October 23, 28 and 30, 2019, as well as the meeting on October28, 2019. ATTACHMENTS A. October 23, 2019, Work Session B. October 28, 2019, Work Session C. October 28, 2019, Meeting D. October 30, 2019, Work Session FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Beth Forrest Telephone: 541-682-5882 Staff E-Mail: bforrest@eugene-or.gov MINUTES – Eugene City Council October 23, 2019 Page 1 Work Session M I N U T E S Eugene City Council Harris Hall, 125 East 8th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 October 23, 2019 12:00 p.m. Councilors Present: Emily Semple, Betty Taylor, Alan Zelenka, Jennifer Yeh, Mike Clark, Claire Syrett, Chris Pryor Councilors Absent: Greg Evans Mayor Vinis opened the October 23, 2019, work session of the Eugene City Council by outlining the meeting format. 1.WORK SESSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION: An Ordinance Concerning Accessory Dwellings; Replacing the Term “Secondary Dwelling” with “Accessory Dwelling” Throughout the Eugene Code 1971; Making Additional Amendments to Sections 9.0500, 9.2010, 9.2011, 9.2740, 9.2741, 9.2750, 9.2751, 9.2775, 9.3060, 9.3115, 9.3125, 9.3210, 9.3215, 9.3310, 9.3510, 9.3615, 9.3625, 9.3810, 9.3811, 9.3815, 9.3910, 9.3915, 9.3970, 9.6410, and 9.8030 of that Code; and Addressing the Oregon Land Use Board Of Appeals’ Remand of Ordinance Nos. 20594 And 20595.Principal Planner Alissa Hansen provided background on the topic that led to the work session.Discussion o Councilor Clark – said he looked forward to a future conversation on incentives that wouldmake building accessory dwelling units more affordable; expressed concern about quality oflife in neighborhoods with more people parking on the street. o Councilor Syrett – said she was interested in putting forward a motion to limit minimum lotsizes; asked for clarification on minimum setback requirements; said she thought landowners with smaller lots were being discriminated against under current ordinance. o Councilor Taylor – said she wanted to work with other communities to refuse to complywith State’s regulations; change in parking was sufficient to warrant another public hearing. o Councilor Zelenka – asked about the elimination of maximum number of bedroomsrequirement as it relates to density and maximum occupancy requirements. o Councilor Clark – said shrinking minimum lot size would result in more units per acre thanthe current density; agreed with Councilor Taylor that the State should not have imposedHouse Bill 2001 on the City and supported efforts to fight it. o Councilor Taylor – said she thought accessory dwellings should be connected to the mainhouse and require owner occupancy; noted air quality was a concern with increaseddensity; thought property owners should be able to depend on their zoning not changing;hoped Eugene would resist the State’s law MOTION AND VOTE: Councilor Yeh, seconded by Councilor Syrett, moved to un-table her own motion from the September 16, 2019, council work session on ADUs. PASSED 5:2, Councilors Taylor and Clark opposed. RE-READ OF THE MOTION: Councilor Yeh (seconded by Councilor Syrett) moved to direct the City Manager to revise the draft ordinance to eliminate the ADU ATTACHMENT A November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council October 23, 2019 Page 2 Work Session standards for the AG, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and S-E zones that apply only to flag lots, making ADUs on flag lots in those zones subject to the same lot standards that apply on regular (non-flag lot) lots in the same zone. o Councilor Yeh – said she thought it was unreasonable to treat flag lots as if they werefundamentally different from another type of lot. o Councilor Semple – said she thought flag lots were fundamentally different because theywere landlocked and wanted to protect green space and privacy. o Councilor Zelenka – asked for clarification about lot size minimums for ADUs built on flaglots; asked whether the Land Use Board of Appeals challenge covered issues pertaining toflag lots; asked how many lots there were that met the minimum and what was challengedrelated to flag lots in the LUBA remand; said he doubted the motion would accomplish much. o Councilor Syrett – said she thought owners of flag lots should not be more restricted indeveloping their land than owners of lots with different shapes; shared her intent tosupport the motion. o Councilor Taylor – said she preferred to postpone the entire conversation about ADUs;supported reviewing each proposed change individually. o Councilor Clark – said his intention in proposing the R-1 code amendments in 2014 was toprotect the rights of property owners and the quality of life in R-1, rather than to limit ADUsor the ability of land owners. o Councilor Pryor – said he thought the R-1 code amendments were designed to limit owners’ability to develop their land; wanted to continue to uplift livability while accommodating agrowing population in accordance with Senate Bill 100. o Mayor Vinis – noted the Climate Recovery Ordinance called on council to find ways to liveand grow within the urban growth boundary, which would require more people to live inthe city’s neighborhoods; said she thought flag lots were an opportunity to add infill. o Councilor Taylor – said she felt changing zoning was dishonest to current property owners. VOTE: FAILED 3:4, Councilors Clark, Taylor, Semple and Zelenka opposed. MOTION: Councilor Yeh, seconded by Councilor Syrett, moved to direct the City Manager to revise the draft ordinance to allow ADUs on alley-access lots in the R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4 zones, subject to the same ADU standards that apply on regular(street access) lots in the same zone. o Councilor Clark – said he wanted a plan to catch up on the list of unimproved roads in needof repair; noted the motion, if passed, would result in increased wear on alleys. o Councilor Semple – asked whose responsibility it was to maintain the alleys; expressedconcern about access to the home for people in wheelchairs when alleys were unpaved. o Councilor Zelenka – said ADUs aren’t the panacea for the affordable housing crisis, but thedetails for how they would be built would impact neighbors; said he thought the impact ofHB 2001 in the university area would be dramatically different than for otherneighborhoods; voiced concern about marginal housing being razed and multiplexes beingbuilt on the same land; said he did not intend to support the motion. o Councilor Taylor – said she thought the legislation would impact the whole city—not justthe university neighborhood—and result in higher housing prices for renters and buyers. o Councilor Syrett – noted that additional cars being driven on the alleys would only occur ifthe land owner provided an on-site parking spot for the ADU; expressed concern that thework session would result in the City being in violation of HB2001; said she wasdiscouraged by the tenor of the conversation. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council October 23, 2019 Page 3 Work Session o Councilor Yeh – said ADUs were not the cure-all or the curse of the city, but the issuepointed to different land use philosophies; said she thought it reasonable that land ownerson alleys, even if there are few of them, should have the same rights to develop their land aspeople on street-front lots; expressed disappointment about the conversation. o Councilor Pryor – noted that the conversation was symbolic; said he was invited by LUBA tosit on the advisory body to create the rules for HB2001; supported taking a proactiveapproach to shaping the impact of the law. o Councilor Semple – asked how many more alley lots could be created; asked about parkingrequirements in alleys; said she thought future appeals and caselaw would give guidance;voiced concern about the impact in the university neighborhood, especially on historicbuildings; supported moving on to the issues presented by HB2001, includingneighborhood outreach. o Mayor Vinis – asked for clarification on the number and location of alley access lots in R-1. VOTE: FAILED 3:4, Councilors Clark, Taylor, Semple and Zelenka opposed. MOTION: Council Yeh, seconded by Councilor Syrett, moved to direct the City Manager to revise the draft ordinance to remove the barriers to above-garage ADUs in the AG, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and S-E zones by adjusting the standards for ADU building height and interior setback. o Councilor Yeh – said she thought building ADUs above garages was challenging undercurrent code and utilizing an already-existing footprint to build one would be desirable. o Councilor Semple – supported adding a second level to a garage; asked for clarificationabout interior setbacks. o Councilor Clark – supported the motion because it did not alter the footprint; supportedrequiring onsite parking for the above-garage ADU. o Councilor Zelenka – said he thought motion would increase density and result in privacy issues;asked about provisions for screening and windows that would remedy privacy concerns. o Councilor Semple – asked for clarification about why a resident could not build a two-storyADU under current code. o Councilor Taylor – said she thought the motion required more thought because of threats toprivacy. VOTE: PASSED 6:1, Councilor Taylor opposed MOTION: Councilor Yeh, seconded by Councilor Syrett, moved to direct the City Manager to revise the draft ordinance to remove barriers to ADUs on sloped lots in the AG, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and S-E zones by adjusting the standards for ADU building height and interior setback. o Councilor Yeh – said she hoped to remove a common barrier to building ADUs for anyonewho owned a sloped lot. o Councilor Semple – supported the motion and thought it would open up more lots to ADUs. o Councilor Clark – asked what the steepest allowable slope would be; asked for clarificationon whether there would still be a height restriction; said he thought the motion would havea detrimental impact on neighborhood parking. o Councilor Zelenka – asked for further clarification about the height restriction. o Councilor Taylor – said she thought council should be more aware about the reasons therewere restrictions on slopes and get the neighborhood associations involved. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council October 23, 2019 Page 4 Work Session VOTE: PASSED 5:2, Councilors Clark and Taylor opposed. o Mayor Vinis asked Councilors Taylor, Syrett, and Zelenka for clarification regarding each oftheir intended motions. o Councilor Syrett – said she would introduce a motion to remove minimum lot sizes for ADUs. o Councilor Zelenka – expressed intention to introduce two motions: one to retain themaximum bedroom requirement in the university area and a second to retain the maximumoccupancy requirement for ADUs in the university area MOTION: Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Semple, moved to postpone action on ADUs until the following steps have been taken: (1) every neighborhood organization has had the opportunity for a facilitated discussion of the proposed changes, including the implications for their neighborhood, and (2) another public hearing has been held. o Councilor Taylor – said she would like to see well-advertised discussions about ADUs at theneighborhood level; supported facilitated neighborhood association meetings to giveresidents information and answer questions; said she thought the changes to parkingrequired another public hearing and the City should resist preemption of local authority. o Councilor Clark – expressed support for the sentiment and not the motion itself; said hethought people understood the idea of ADUs but did not understand the implications;supported moving past the ADU conversation because so few people would actually buildthem, and they would not contribute to more affordable housing. o Councilor Syrett – said she was not in favor of the motion and did not think the parkingchanges warranted a public hearing; opposed waiting until every single neighborhood had afacilitated discussion as that process could take years. o Councilor Semple – pointed out that the state required the parking changes; said it wouldtake an enormous amount of time to facilitate discussions with all neighborhoods and thatwould be useful for the HB2001 discussion but wanted to move on from ADUs; said she didnot support the motion. o Councilor Pryor – agreed with Councilor Semple; said the change on parking did not requirea public hearing; noted a need for ongoing community engagement on growth management. o Councilor Zelenka – asked for clarification on the process going forward; did not thinkcouncil needed another public hearing about the topic because it was not required, andupcoming public forums could serve as opportunities for residents to provide input; said hedid not support motion. o Councilor Taylor – supported voting on each change proposed individually. o Councilor Clark – asked for clarification of the motion on the table. VOTE: FAILED 1:6, Councilors Clark, Yeh, Pryor, Semple, Syrett and Zelenka opposed. The meeting adjourned at 1:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beth Forrest City Recorder (Recorded by Cas Casados) Link to the webcast of this City Council meeting here. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Work Session October 28, 2019 Page 1 MINUTES Eugene City Council and Eugene Urban Renewal Agency Harris Hall, 125 East 8th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 October 28, 2019 5:30 p.m. Councilors Present: Betty Taylor, Emily Semple, Alan Zelenka, Jennifer Yeh, Greg Evans, Claire Syrett, Chris Pryor Councilors Absent: Mike Clark Mayor Vinis opened the October 28, 2019, work session of the Eugene City Council. 1.Committee Reports and Items of Interest •Councilor Syrett – shared an update from the Sustainable Schools Network. •Councilor Pryor – reported that he’s participating in the Complete Count Committee for the U.S.Census; said it’s important to get a good count this year because federal funding is tied topopulation count and Oregon could also get an additional federal representative; saidparticipating in the Census will collect data on where you are on April 1, 2020. •Councilor Taylor – shared a few constituent concerns about 5G, e-scooters, and Airbnbs/short-term rentals; said she would like to look at Corvallis’ regulations for short-term rentals topossibly use as a template in Eugene. •Councilor Evans – announced that he went on a League of Oregon Cities trip to meet withofficials in Washington D.C., including the FCC; said that the three asks from the congressionaldelegation were for affordable housing, broadband, and infrastructure and they will continue tolobby congress for local resources. •Mayor Vinis – announced two upcoming events: the Lucy Jones emergency preparedness eventon Friday and the Choosing Kindness Celebration on Sunday. Mayor Vinis adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened a meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency. 2.URA WORK SESSION: Riverfront Urban Renewal Follow-UpPlanning and Development Director Denny Braud, Community Development Director MikeKinnison, and Senior Financial Analyst Maurizio Bottalico gave an update about the RiverfrontUrban Renewal District, including updated district financial capacity and back-up plan.Council Discussion: •Councilor Evans – asked how Williams & Dame would move forward if council did not grant aMUPTE for the riverfront housing and what that would mean for the housing piece of theproposed development. •Councilor Syrett – talked about the staff memo that included information about increased costsfor the quiet zone due to higher construction costs; asked for a more detailed explanation ofwhat is driving these increased costs; asked about the river loans; said she is interested inexploring options for anything the City could do to avoid having to borrow money; said shethinks the steam plant is a project worthy of the City’s support, but not sure at what cost andwould like to dig into that conversation more; supported the City looking for other funds that ATTACHMENT B November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Work Session October 28, 2019 Page 2 could help with affordable housing; asked for a brief recap on financial support or subsidies that the City has provided to recent affordable housing projects, either complete or in progress; mentioned that some of the other projects are still too vague to say they’re important or not important at this point. •Councilor Pryor – said he’d like to understand more about each project’s relationship to otherprojects and to the City’s goals and strategies; said he’s interested in two directions for fundingstrategies: looking at how to do this without an increased tax to Eugene residents and/or what thepreferred methods are for funding these projects that might represent an increase to taxpayers. •Councilor Zelenka – asked for more detail about the additional costs to the projects andwhether 30 percent was a standard contingency fee; said the City has continued to learn thatthe longer construction is delayed, the more expensive it gets; said he thought the redesign ofthe 8th and Hilyard railroad crossing would reduce the costs, but asked why the costs haveincreased; said the steam plant was his number one priority, but wants to know more aboutwhat the 2.8 million dollars would go towards; said he didn’t have enough information aboutthe other projects to make a decision about them; mentioned the importance of parking, butacknowledged how expensive it is. •Councilor Semple – asked about the plaza and how much it would cost to get that piece going,because it’s so intertwined with development of the riverfront park. •Councilor Syrett – agreed that the plaza is an important part of the development; asked whetherthe parking expense was included in the cost of the quiet zone, •Mayor Vinis – asked what would happen with the lower road sections that don’t get built if theback-up infrastructure plan was implemented. •Councilor Yeh – clarified that the parking structure in the picture was not yet part of thefunding strategy. Mayor Vinis adjourned the meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency and convened a meeting of the Eugene City Council. 3.WORK SESSION: Climate Action Plan 2.0 – Buildings Gap Strategies and Update on Northwest Natural Gas Franchise Agreement ProcessIntergovernmental Relations Manager Ethan Nelson and Building Official Mark Whitmill gave anupdate about potential strategies to move closer to the City’s climate goals related to buildings.Council Discussion: •Councilor Zelenka – asked what “funding allocated” meant in the presentation, clarifying that itwould be City funds put forward to promote the increased incentives/program acceleration. •Councilor Syrett – said she is interested in thinking about ways to support EWEB’s incentiveprogram and energy efficiency retrofits; said she’d like to create a mandatory home energyscore program. •Councilor Taylor – asked what a home energy score program would look like and whenbuildings would be scored. •Mayor Vinis – asked if council could attach energy efficient building requirements to MUPTErequirements. •Councilor Syrett – asked if the benchmarking for rental properties would be for any rentalproperty or just apartments; asked if new buildings would or could be required to meet energyefficiency standards; said that if the percentage of new housing being built continues to rise,more of an impact can be made when making requirements for new buildings; said she’d like toknow what the financial commitment is that EWEB has been able to make for electrificationincentives and how the City could support or enhance those programs. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Work Session October 28, 2019 Page 3 •Councilor Taylor – asked why the presentation said regulate expansion of natural gas systeminstead of prohibit; said she thinks council should prohibit natural gas for new buildings. •Councilor Zelenka – talked about regulatory hurtles and intricacies of building code and hownone of these options are uncomplicated. •Councilor Taylor – asked if council would be approving the elements of the Northwest NaturalGas franchise agreement, including the option of no new natural gas infrastructure. •Councilor Evans –asked for more information about Northwest Natural’s recent expansion ofinfrastructure. •Councilor Yeh – asked what a required level of EV readiness would mean; said there seems likea lot of possible improvements or options to expand upon EV readiness into actual chargingstations; said she’d also like to partner with EWEB on electrification and energy efficiencyincentives; said she’d like to explore prohibiting new natural gas installations and what thatwould look like. •Councilor Syrett – talked about the state’s regulation of building codes, including energyefficiency requirements; asked if Representative Wilde’s proposed bills would increase EVcharging standards more than the governor’s current orders. •Councilor Evans – asked if the City could create incentives for new construction to incorporateelectric rather than gas and what would those look like; asked if those incentives would beeasier to do than a direct prohibition on natural gas. •Councilor Zelenka – pointed out that building codes only apply to new construction, but mostenergy used is from existing buildings; said that focusing on existing buildings meeting a higherstandard of energy efficiency at times of rental or sale would move the dial quite a bit morethan new infrastructure; talked about how much effort it takes to get infrastructure EV readyand the big difference it makes in the affordability for future charging station installation; saidthat the state’s adoption of the new commercial and residential energy building code will makeOregon the state with the most energy-efficient building code starting in 2020. •Councilor Yeh – responded to Councilor Zelenka and said that getting conduits EV ready isimportant, but not quite getting us there in terms of having charging stations available.The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beth Forrest City Recorder (Recorded by Elena Domingo) Link to the webcast of this City Council meeting: here. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Meeting October 28, 2019 Page 1 MINUTES Eugene City Council Harris Hall, 125 East 8th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 October 28, 2019 7:30 p.m. Councilors Present: Emily Semple, Betty Taylor, Jennifer Yeh, Greg Evans, Claire Syrett, Chris Pryor Councilors Absent: Alan Zelenka, Mike Clark Mayor Vinis opened the October 28, 2019, meeting of the Eugene City Council. 1.PUBLIC FORUM1.Joel Iboa – conveyed the HRC’s unanimous support for the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.2. Grayson Dempsey – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.3.Cherie Martin – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.4. Jean Schauerman – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.5. Marcella Martin – spoke in opposition to the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.6. Thomas Hiura – sang a song about how it feels to be homeless in Eugene.7. Abraham Likwornik – asked council to prohibit 5G technology in Eugene.8.Barbara Wade – spoke in opposition to 5G technology.9. Joshua Korn – spoke in opposition to 5G technology.10. Sabrina Siegel – spoke in opposition to 5G technology.11. Bekki Bruckner – spoke in opposition to 5G technology.12.Maria Thomas – spoke about the impact of marijuana growers near her house.13. Zachary Vishanoff – talked about establishing a clean zone along the river.14. Doyle Canning – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.15.Bill O’Brien – talked about Hayward Field and Eugene hosting the track and field championships.16.Debby Phillips - spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.17.Rebecca Callison – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.18. David Igl – addressed and spoke against the renaming of Dunn Hall.19.Glenn McIrvin – addressed and spoke against the renaming of Dunn Hall.20. Maya Ward – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.21. Becca Hill – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.22. Betty Grant – asked council to establish a citizen advisory board for climate action.23. Otis Root – asked council if they would permit him to camp on their property per city code.24. Andrea Plesnarski – spoke against Eugene adopting an e-scooter program.25. Matthew Yook – asked council to sign on to a letter to the 4J school board urging climate action.26. Howard Kirkland – asked what the City Council could do about business alarms going off all night.27.Marc Schlossberg – asked council to get rid of minimum parking requirements for development.28. Kim Fairbairn – talked about accountability and lawlessness in our community.29. Michelle Emmons – talked about the negative consequences of illegal camping along the river.30. Mike McFarlane – talked about the negative consequences of illegal camping along the river.31. Tai Pruce-Zimmerman – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.32. Debby McGee – urged council to move forward on climate action goals.33. Betzi Hitz – urged council to move forward on climate action goals.34. Linda Perrine – urged council to move forward on climate action goals.35. Claire Ribaud – urged council to move forward on climate action goals.36. Wayne Martin – made recommendations about implementing the TAC report. ATTACHMENT C November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Meeting October 28, 2019 Page 2 37. Lisa Oxman – asked council what they are doing to assist the unhoused population.38. Tim Morris – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.39. Stephen Sheehan – asked for accountability for the lawlessness in the homeless community.40. Kitty Piercy – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.41.Celine Swenson Harris – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.42. Luke Habberstad – spoke about sustainability issues related to e-scooters.43. Angie Marzano – spoke in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.44. Ken Hand – talked about the detrimental impact of homelessness on local businesses.45. Drix – thanked Sarah for saving his life and congratulated her on the City Manager position.46. Sean Dwyer – talked about the lack of response from council and the need to address poverty.47.Ryan Adkins – spoke against the Safe and Legal Abortion resolution.48.Doug Skoidal – talked about the multitude of problems occurring in the community.49. Amber Roegner – shared concerns about safety and environmental sustainability of e-scooters.50. Eric Jackson – talked about exploring better solutions for the homeless.51. Rebecca Jensen – spoke about the intricacies of safe and legal abortions.52. Stefan Strek – said the city shouldn’t be focused on what people in other states are doing.Council Discussion: •Councilor Evans – asked what is currently in place within city code that would regulate therollout of an e-scooter program. •Councilor Syrett – thanked those who came to speak in favor of the Safe and Legal Abortionresolution, including the Human Rights Commission; thanked NARAL pro-choice advocates forthe concept of the resolution; thanked everyone who shared their stories. •Councilor Pryor - said he looks forward to working with the Eugene Wake Up group onproductive and positive solutions around the issue od homelessness; said poverty is notrecognized enough in homelessness conversations; said there needs to be enforcement aroundillegal and criminal behaviors. •Mayor Vinis – thanked everyone who testified; said she was grateful for those who spoke insupport of the resolution; said she’d also like to work together with the Eugene Wake Upbusiness community; said she was grateful to have more information about e-scooters. 2.CONSENT CALENDARA.Approval of City Council Minutes Approval of City Council MinutesSeptember 16, 2019, Work SessionSeptember 23, 2019, Work SessionSeptember 23, 2019, MeetingSeptember 25, 2019, Work SessionOctober 9, 2019, Work SessionB.Approval of City Council Tentative AgendaC.Appointment of Civilian Review Board Representative to Police Commission MOTION AND VOTE: Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Semple, moved to approve the items on the Consent Calendar. PASSED 6:0. 3.ACTION: A Resolution Declaring the Right to Safe and Legal Abortion and Affirming the City of Eugene’s Commitment to Act in Support of That Right by Authorizing the City to Participate as an Amicus in Forthcoming Federal Lawsuits Challenging Abortion Bans Around the Country November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Meeting October 28, 2019 Page 3 Council Discussion: •Councilor Syrett – thanked the Mayor for putting this resolution on the agenda; spoke to theresolution and the crucial need for equitable access to abortion services; noted that CouncilorZelenka had to leave unexpectedly but asked her to convey his support for the resolution. MOTION: Councilor Syrett, seconded by Councilor Taylor, moved that the City of Eugene adopt a resolution declaring the right to safe and legal abortion and affirming the City of Eugene’s commitment to act in support of that right by authorizing the City to participate as an amicus in forthcoming federal lawsuits challenging abortion bans around the country. Council Discussion: •Councilor Syrett – read portions of the resolution. •Mayor Vinis – shared her support for the resolution; talked about how the lack of access toabortion and reproductive services was traumatic for young women when she was in collegeand does not want to see a move backward. VOTE: PASSED 6:0. The meeting adjourned at 9:25p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beth Forrest City Recorder (Recorded by Elena Domingo) Link to the webcast of this City Council meeting: here. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Work Session October 30, 2019 Page 1 MINUTES Eugene City Council and Eugene Urban Renewal Agency Harris Hall, 125 East 8th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 October 30, 2019 12:00 p.m. Councilors Present: Betty Taylor, Emily Semple, Alan Zelenka, Jennifer Yeh, Greg Evans (via phone), Claire Syrett, Chris Pryor Councilors Absent: Mike Clark Mayor Vinis opened the October 30, 2019, work session of the Eugene City Council. City Manager Pro Tem Sarah Medary thanked partners at Lane County and St. Vincent de Paul for quickly working together to open a warming center. She reminded people that both branch libraries and community centers are open for drop-in warming during the day. 1. WORK SESSION: Downtown Fiber Project UpdateEconomic Development Planner Anne Fifield gave an update about the completion of the downtownfiber project and its positive impacts.Council Discussion: •Councilor Pryor – said he remembers the fiber project vision and initial conversation thatstarted 25 years ago and now the results are being seen; thanked Milo Mecham for hiscontributions to this vision. •Councilor Syrett – said she’s excited to see such success for a project that could have appeared arisky investment when started; said she’s excited to see the employment opportunities andproducts that have come out of this; expressed desire to see the next phase of this projectscoped out, expanding to residential and other areas of the city. •Councilor Zelenka – said this project has been worth the investment of resources, noting thejobs it has created and the revitalization of downtown; talked about this originally being a hub-and-spoke conversation with the downtown as the hub and asked how the City will expand tothe spokes and what the costs will be; asked about potential public-private partnerships; saidhe’d like to see a rate of return on the investment made. •Councilor Semple – said she’s happy to hear how successful the fiber project has been andwould also like to see what it would take to expand the network; talked about the goal ofputting utilities underground, acknowledging how expensive that is; expressed desire to lookfor feasibly opportunities to do so; said she’s interested in keeping the internet publicly ownedto be affordable and available to more people. •Councilor Pryor – talked about the policy decisions around fiber and how they have beenrelatively easy to this point, but they will likely get harder as the City thinks about the ultimategoal of getting high-speed fiber into homes. •Councilor Evans – said he thinks 4J has access to the fiber network right now but wondered ifthere are plans to connect the Bethel School District; said there may be federal dollars tosupport the connection to rural communities, such as a partnership with Junction City. ATTACHMENT D November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Work Session October 30, 2019 Page 2 2.WORK SESSION: Town Square Project UpdateUrban Development Manager Will Dowdy, Matt Koehler from Cameron McCarthy, and FrancescaGambetti from Shiels Obletz Johnsen talked about the town square concept design, the communityvision, and the options for next steps. Mayor adjourned the meeting of the Eugene City Council and convened a meeting of the Eugene Urban Renewal Agency.Council Discussion: •Mayor Vinis – said she enjoyed the video and it was nice to see what the space would look like. •Councilor Zelenka – said he really likes the design, concept, and public involvement that hasoccurred around this project; said he likes that the Saturday Market would have space designedspecifically for the market and that it’s critical the construction gets done during the off-season;asked what would happen with the salmon sculpture from the current fountain and if that couldget incorporated into the new design; asked if the eastern portion of the market was included inthe plan and budget as well. •Councilor Syrett – said she participated in outreach events and that with the excellent publicoutreach received she feels confident that the design reflects input from the pubic as well as thefarmers market and Saturday market boards; said she appreciates many of the project detailsincluding taking out curbs and other accessibility components; said she likes opening the spaceand removing the walls, the improved stage, the fountain concept, the lighting, and keeping thetrees; said she’s ready to approve the recommended motion to advance this design forward. •Councilor Semple – said she also appreciates the great public involvement and hopes it’s amodel for the future; said she appreciates that the farmers and Saturday markets won’t getdisplaced if construction is done during the off-season; said the one critical thing that’s missingis a restroom in the park blocks; said she likes that the trees are being kept, but it feels likethere’s a lot of concrete versus lawn and she’d like to see more lawn; said the proposed pavilionlooks as big as city hall and wonders how that matches up with priorities; voiced concernsabout paying for this project and wondered about phasing the features of the project. •Councilor Yeh – asked how much funding has been identified for this project right now; askedwhat it would mean if council approved the design now in terms of looking at funding later. •Councilor Taylor – asked at what point a contractor is pursued, before or after a public hearing;said she’d prefer to wait until after a public hearing to hire a contractor; said we needrestrooms, places for people to sit including moveable chairs and tables; said she’s not surethere has been enough broad participation; asked why removal of the current fountain is beingproposed; asked how the City can attract money for the project; shared objections to urbanrenewal money because it’s too easy to spend. •Mayor Vinis – clarified that what she’s hearing from staff is that design information would cometo council incrementally and become increasingly specific along the way. •Councilor Pryor – talked about the choice between fast, cheap, and right and said this projectultimately needs to be right; said he’s willing to negotiate around the timeline and the money;said in thinking about the next design steps, it’s a good investment to spend a reasonableamount of money on a contractor now so they’re with us in next steps; said he’s ready to moveto the next step of the thinking and designing process. •Councilor Zelenka – said phasing is an interesting concept, but it costs more and it’s never goingto be cheaper later; said keeping and adding more trees is an important part of the project;shared concerns about integrating the new city hall into the town square plan and asked howthat will work; said that having 10,000 participants weigh-in so far is enough for him to want tomove forward with this project. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A MINUTES – Eugene City Council Work Session October 30, 2019 Page 3 •Councilor Syrett – mentioned that the stage, fountain, pavilion, and benches all representsponsorship opportunities to contribute to the legacy of the space; said she’s excited to see theenhanced usability and transformation of the space. •Councilor Taylor – asked if any of the proposed motions are related to city hall; said the publicshould be asked if something needs to be done with the parks and wants people to rememberthat the urban renewal money for these projects comes from citizen taxpayers; MOTION: Councilor Taylor, seconded by Councilor Semple, moved to direct the Agency Director to advance the Town Square design based on the proposed Concept Design and return for work sessions in early 2020. Council Discussion: •Councilor Zelenka – mentioned that the staff presentation did not go over information in theagenda packet related to the survey results; said that the results show that a majority of peoplewant to see changes made to the park blocks. VOTE: PASSED 6:1, Councilor Taylor opposed. The meeting adjourned at 1:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beth Forrest City Recorder (Recorded by Elena Domingo) Link to the webcast of this City Council meeting: here. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2A November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2B EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Approval of Tentative Working Agenda Meeting Date: November 25, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 2B Department: City Manager’s Office Staff Contact: Beth Forrest www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5882 ISSUE STATEMENT This is a routine item to approve the City Council Tentative Working Agenda. BACKGROUND On July 31, 2000, the City Council held a process session and discussed the Operating Agreements. Section 2, notes in part that “The City Manager shall recommend monthly to the council which items should be placed on the council agenda. This recommendation shall be placed on the consent calendar at the regular City Council meetings (regular meetings are those meetings held on the second and fourth Monday of each month in the Council Chamber). If the recommendation contained in the consent calendar is approved, the items shall be brought before the council on a future agenda. If there are concerns about an item, the item may be pulled from the consent calendar at the request of any councilor or the Mayor. A vote shall occur to determine if the item should be included as future council business.” Scheduling of this item is in accordance with the Council Operating Agreements. RELATED CITY POLICIES There are no policy issues related to this item. COUNCIL OPTIONS The council may choose to approve, amend or not approve the tentative agenda. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager has no recommendation on this item. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to approve the items on the Tentative Working Agenda. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2B ATTACHMENTS A. Tentative Working Agenda FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Beth Forrest Telephone: 541-682-5882 Staff E-Mail: bforrest@eugene-or.gov Work Session                       Action         Public Hearing              Public Forum        Consent Calendar  Committee Reports/Items of Interest  Ceremonial Matters  Pledge of Allegiance  Updated November 14, 2019 Meeting Location: Harris Hall, 125 East 8th Avenue, unless otherwise noted   November 2019    Date Day Time Title Length Dept. Contact  5:30 pm CAP 2.0 Strategies (Work Session) 90 mins Chelsea Clinton, CS 18‐Nov Monday 7:30 pm Ordinance on Polystyrene (Public Hearing) Ord. on Single‐Use Checkout Bags (Public Hearing) Anna Reid, PDD Anna Reid, PDD Expected absences for 11/18: none 20‐Nov Wednesday 12 pm 2021 Update (Work Session) 45 mins Stephanie Scafa, PW Expected absences for 11/20: Taylor, Evans, Semple, Syrett 25‐Nov Monday 5:30 p.m. Committee Reports and Items of Interest Community Safety Update (Work Session) Update from Municipal Court Presiding Judge (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Kristie Hammitt, CS Judge Greg Gill 7:30 pm Public Forum Resolution Annexing Vacant Property West of 830 Willow Ave. (Consent Calendar) Resolution Annexing Land Located on Spring Boulevard. (Consent Calendar) Resolution Annexing Land Located at 625 Howard Avenue (Consent Calendar) Ordinance on Polystyrene (Action) Ord. on Single‐Use Checkout Bags (Action) Althea Sullivan, PDD Rodney Bohner, PDD Rodney Bohner, PDD Anna Reid, PDD Anna Reid, PDD Expected absences for 11/25: none ATTACHMENT A November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2B 2    27‐Nov Wednesday 12 pm ** NO MEETING SCHEDULED ** Expected absences for 11/27: none     December 2019    ate Day Time Title Length Dept. Contact  9‐Dec Monday 5:30 pm Committee Reports and Items of Interest Town Square (Work Session) 90 mins Will Dowdy, PDD 7:30 p.m. Public Forum Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of FY19 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (Consent Calendar) Approval of Sustainability Commission FY20 Work Plan (Consent Calendar) URA – Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of FY19 URA Annual Financial Report (Action) Supplemental Budget #1 (Public Hearing and Action) URA Supplemental Budget #1 (Public Hearing and Action) Finn Cronin, CS Mark Nystrom, CS Finn Cronin, CS Vicki Silvers, CS Vicki Silvers, CS Expected absences for 12/09: none 11‐Dec Wednesday 12 pm Short‐Term Vacation Rentals (Work Session) Riverfront Urban Renewal Follow‐Up #2 (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Lydia Kaye, PDD Michael Kinnison, PDD Expected absences for 12/11: none   Council Break: December 12 – January 8      January 2020    Date Day Time Title Length Dept. Contact  8‐Jan Wednesday 5:30 pm 2020 State of the City Elena Domingo, CS Expected absences for 1/8: none Hult Center – Soreng Theater 13‐Jan Monday 5:30 pm Committee Reports and Items of Interest Council Process Session (Work Session) 90 mins Beth Forrest, CS November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2B 3    13‐Jan Monday 7:30 pm Election of 2020 Council Officers Public Forum Expected absences for 1/13: none 15‐Jan Wednesday 12 pm CAP 2.0 Action (Work Session) URA Steam Plant Deal Points (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Chelsea Clinton, CS Amanda D’Souza, PDD Expected absences for 1/15: none 21‐Jan Tuesday 5:30 pm Accessory Dwelling Units (Work Session) Library Levy Update (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Alissa Hansen, PDD Will O’Hearn, LRCS 7:30 pm Ordinance on Parks and Rec SDCs (Public Hearing) Carolyn Burke, PW Expected absences for 1/21: none Location: Harris Hall 22‐Jan Wednesday 12 pm River Road‐Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan (Work Session) Transit Tomorrow (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Terri Harding, PDD Rob Inerfeld, PW Expected absences for 1/22: Evans 27‐Jan Monday 5:30 p.m. Committee Reports and Items of Interest TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins 7:30 pm Public Forum Expected absences for 1/27: Vinis 29‐Jan Wednesday 12 pm Urban Reserves (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 60 mins 30 mins Rebecca Gershow, PDD Expected absences for 1/29: Vinis      November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2B 4        February 2020    Date Day Time Title Length Dept. Contact  10‐Feb Monday 5:30 pm Committee Reports and Items of Interest Parks and Rec Bond Levy Update (Work Session) ADUs ‐ Incentives (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Craig Carnagey, PW Michael Kinnison, PDD 7:30 pm Public Forum Expected absences for 2/10: none 12‐Feb Wednesday 12 pm Parks and Rec SDCs Ordinance (Work Session and Poss. Action) Eugene‐Springfield Consolidated Plan (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Carolyn Burke, PW Stephanie Jennings, PDD Expected absences for 2/12: none 18‐Feb Tuesday 5:30 pm TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 7:30 pm TBD (Public Hearing) Expected absences for 2/18: none Location: Harris Hall 19‐Feb Wednesday 12 pm TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Expected absences for 2/19: none 24‐Feb Monday 5:30 p.m. Committee Reports and Items of Interest TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins 7:30 pm Public Forum Expected absences for 2/14: none 26‐Feb Wednesday 12 pm Downtown Activity Zone (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Michael Kinnison, PDD Expected absences for 2/26: none  November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2B 5      March 2020    Date Day Time Title Length Dept. Contact  9‐Mar Monday 5:30 pm Committee Reports and Items of Interest TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins 7:30 pm Public Forum Expected absences for 3/9: none 11‐Mar Wednesday 12 pm TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Expected absences for 3/11: none   Council Break: March 12 – April 8      April 2020    Date Day Time Title Length Dept. Contact  8‐Apr Wednesday 12 pm TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Expected absences for 4/8: none 13‐Apr Monday 5:30 pm Committee Reports and Items of Interest TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins 7:30 pm Public Forum Expected absences for 4/13: none 15‐Apr Wednesday 12 pm TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Expected absences for 4/15: none 20‐Apr Monday 5:30 pm TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2B 6    20‐Apr Monday 7:30 pm TBD (Public Hearing) Expected absences for 4/20: none Location: Harris Hall 22‐Apr Wednesday 12 pm TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Expected absences for 4/22: none 27‐Apr Monday 5:30 p.m. Committee Reports and Items of Interest TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins 7:30 pm Public Forum Adoption of Eugene‐Springfield Consolidated Plan (Action) Stephanie Jennings, PDD Expected absences for 4/27: none 29‐Apr Wednesday 12 pm TBD (Work Session) TBD (Work Session) 45 mins 45 mins Expected absences for 4/29: none       Work Session                       Action                         Public Hearing                             Public Forum                   Consent Calendar    Committee Reports/Items of Interest                    Ceremonial Matters                   Pledge of Allegiance    Approved Work Session Polls to be Scheduled Councilor Date Approved  Update Sign Code for Digital Display Techno logy – follow‐up TBD  Short‐term Vacation Rentals – scheduled 12/11/19  5G/Small Cell – include experience of other cities – follow‐up TBD  Strategies for managing the wild turkey population   Pryor  Taylor  Clark  Pryor  2/14/19  5/23/19  5/20/19  10/17/19  Follow‐Up Work Sessions to be Scheduled   TAC Implementation    Commercial Setbacks     November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2B November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Adoption of a Resolution Annexing Land to the City of Eugene (Assessor’s Map 17-04-23-42, Tax Lot 3900 Located West of 830 Willow Avenue) (City File: Steinhouse, Elizabeth; A 19-7) Meeting Date: November 25, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 2C Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Althea Sullivan www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5485 ISSUE STATEMENT This item is a request to annex an approximately 0.19 acre (8,276 square foot) parcel of vacant land located to the west of 830 Willow Avenue. No public right-of-way is proposed for annexation as part of this request. A vicinity map is provided as Attachment A. The property is zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay. Both the Metro Plan and the applicable refinement plan, the River Road – Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan, designate the subject property for Low Density Residential use. The property is located within the Urban Growth Boundary and is contiguous to other properties in the City limits along the northern property boundary. Annexation will allow for future development consistent with the property’s land-use designation and the Eugene Code. Specific future development plans for the site are not included as part of this annexation application. BACKGROUND To encourage compact urban growth and sequential development within Eugene’s UGB, the Metro Plan provides that, ultimately, all land within the UGB will be annexed into the City and provided with a minimum level of urban services. Approval of annexation requests are based on the criteria at Eugene Code 9.7825 which require that (1) the land proposed to be annexed is within the City’s UGB and is contiguous to the City limits or separated from City limits only by a right-of-way or water body; (2) the proposed annexation is consistent with the applicable policies in the Metro Plan and in any applicable refinement plans; and (3) the proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimal level of key urban facilities and services can be provided in an orderly, efficient and timely manner. Findings demonstrating that the annexation request is consistent with these approval criteria are included as Exhibit C to the attached draft resolution (Attachment B). November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C To provide nearby property owners and residents an opportunity to review and comment on this annexation request, public notice was provided to all owners and occupants of property within 500 feet of the subject property and the affected neighborhood association (River Road Community Organization), consistent with Eugene Code requirements. No testimony has been received to date regarding the proposed annexation of this property. Referral comments were provided by affected agencies, including City of Eugene Public Works, Eugene Springfield Fire Marshal’s Office, and Eugene Water & Electric Board. These referral comments confirm there are no concerns with the proposed annexation and the property can be provided with the minimum level of key urban services consistent with the approval criteria. Additional background information regarding this request, including relevant application materials, is included for reference as Attachment C. A full copy of all materials in the record is also available at the Permit and Information Center located at 99 West 10th Avenue. PREVIOUS COUNCIL DIRECTION None. COUNCIL OPTIONS City Council may consider the following options: 1. Adopt the draft resolution 2. Adopt the draft resolution with specific modifications as determined by the City Council 3. Deny the draft resolution 4. Defer action until after the council holds a public hearing on the proposed annexation CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends that the City Council adopt the draft resolution by finding that the request complies with all applicable approval criteria, and that the annexation be approved. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt the resolution approving the proposed annexation request consistent with the applicable approval criteria. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Draft Annexation Resolution with Exhibits A through C Exhibit A: Map of Annexation Request Exhibit B: Legal Description Exhibit C: Planning Director Findings and Recommendation C. Application Materials for Annexation Request November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Althea Sullivan Telephone: 541-682-5485 Staff E-Mail: ASullivan@eugene-or.gov ^ Caution: This map is based onimprecise source data, subject tochange, and for general reference only. Steinhouse, Elizabeth (A 19-7) Subject PropertyEugene City LimitsTaxlots 0 75 15037.5 Ft WI L L O W A V E GL O R Y D R PARK AVE FI L B E R T A V E NO R T H W E S T E X P R E S S W A Y CAPRICE WAY SUNNYSIDE DR Created on 11/1/2019by City of Eugene Planning Division N Attachment AMap/Tax Lot 17-04-23-42 03900 November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Attachment B Resolution - Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. _____ RESOLUTION ANNEXING LAND TO THE CITY OF EUGENE (ASSESSOR’S MAP 17-04-23-42, TAX LOT 3900 LOCATED WEST OF 830 WILLOW AVENUE). The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A. An annexation application was submitted on September 9, 2019, by Elizabeth Steinhouse in accordance with the provisions of Section 9.7810 of the Eugene Code, 1971 (“EC”), to annex property identified as Assessor’s Map 17-04-23-42, Tax Lot 3900, to the City of Eugene. B. The property proposed to be annexed is depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution. The legal description of the property proposed to be annexed is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. C. The City’s Planning Director has submitted a written recommendation that the application be approved based on the criteria of EC 9.7825. The Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation is attached as Exhibit C. D. A notice dated October 23, 2019, containing a geographical reference to the property, the assessor’s map and tax lot number for the property, a description of the land proposed to be annexed, and the Planning Director’s preliminary recommendation was mailed to the applicant, owners and occupants of properties located within 500 feet of the perimeter of the subject property, and the River Road Community Organization. The notice advised that the City Council would consider the Planning Director’s full recommendation on the proposed annexation on November 25, 2019. E. After considering the Planning Director’s recommendation, the City Council finds that the application should be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. Based on the above findings and the Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation which are attached as Exhibit C and are adopted in support of this Resolution, it is ordered that the land identified as Assessor’s Map 17-04-23-42, Tax Lot 3900, which is depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A, and more particularly described in the attached Exhibit B, is annexed to the City of Eugene. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Attachment B Resolution - Page 2 of 2 Section 2. This Resolution is effective immediately upon its passage by the City Council. The annexation and the automatic rezoning of the land pursuant to EC 9.7820(3) from R-1 Low- Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay to R-1 Low-Density Residential shall become effective in accordance with State law. The foregoing Resolution adopted the ____day of November, 2019. ______________________________________ City Recorder November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C ao C, ;o m z zoo=m m I li tit~ r p o f / vFly-0r =F . i p v on ! €herr Av uaP1oo- rr, m IL n m cn r c (A zp d ~ m= D r 0 lJJ o _ ; rJgU2al jrTilC) C D Z Z o z< W ;L 00 0 0. (DI 1 IL m N Z v (J,rOpmL = ~i_ n z to =4 (n0 SOUTH 70.00 I~ l DOZD nl; a oC-)0rnmc'~n o Z-100 o 0 ;:D 1 ( D c ~ 1Z co m m !r'1 oD ~ DPI ~ ooD 0 ~ - i N ~ 4 (n m ~ v v cC Z m 0 :x (n U) U) On1 -0 0 n'i M c~ m N m-A nzM M- 1 NORTH 70.00' v O Z0 m N w = m 3 ;D ~p 1 d Z N v l A Z Z z~v ~p O moon m O 0 0 P co z ao ;o)g ro Z '7x t. rr,-, 8 CA 10 0IF, - a P, i ~ i Itc). 0 Foil 3 f+l N Dco X 4 M Z A WILLpW AvZw ° o ENUE o s: D o 0 En14j (n N n ~ q o rfl m fp ~ II z (n n ~ r Z ti o n z p -mv c) m ° oc m _o Om ~o ~ ' E x h i b i t A N o v e m b e r 2 5 , 2 0 1 9 , M e e t i n g – I t e m 2 C Certification of Description Pursuant to EC 9.7810(7), Annexation Application Requirements, I hereby certify the metes and bounds description of the real property proposed for annexation closes; and the map outlining the boundary is a true representation of the description. Signature: Surveyor Print Name: 044 4L 1"" Date: W f f Seal: A. RW PWFESM4AL Exhibit B November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF THE ELIZABETH STEINHOUSE PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF EUGENE ASSESSOR'S MAP NO. 17-04-23-42, TAX LOT 3900 September 5, 2019 Beginning at a 2 112" Brass Cap referencing Southwest corner of the Benjamin Davis Donation Land Claim No. 45, Notification No. 2244, Township 17 South, Range 4 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence NORTH 321.03 feet and EAST 991.96 feet to a 518" rebar with a plastic I.D. cap stamp "City of Eugene 1943", said rebar referencing the centerline of the Willow Avenue right-of-way at its northerly terminus; thence along said centerline of Willow Avenue South 08°24'36" West 504.33 feet to a 518" rebar with a plastic I.D. cap "G.E.S. PLS 2280"; thence leaving said centerline bearing WEST 180.19 feet along the southerly line of Caprice Meadows, recorded October 20, 2004, Document No. 2004-081107, Lane County Oregon Deeds and Records and the easterly extension thereof to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said southerly line of Caprice Meadows WEST 119.11 feet to a 112 inch iron pipe in concrete referencing the southwest corner of said Caprice Meadows; thence leaving said south line bearing SOUTH 70.00 feet to a 112 inch iron pipe in concrete; thence EAST 119.11 feet; thence NORTH 70.00 feet returning to the south line of Caprice Meadows and the True Point of Beginning, all in Eugene, Lane County, Oregon. Containing 8,338 Square Feet, more or less IG#STERE PROFESSKWAL A-, Jwww. -Iaw YD L. TOL . November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Exhibit C Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation Annexation Request for Steinhouse, Elizabeth (City File: A 19-7) Application Submitted: September 9, 2019 Applicant: Elizabeth Steinhouse Property Included in Annexation Request: Tax Lot 3900 of Assessor’s Map 17-04-23-42 Zoning: R-1 Low-Density Residential and /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay Location: Vacant property to the west of 830 Willow Avenue Representative: Elizabeth Steinhouse Lead City Staff: Althea Sullivan, City of Eugene Planning Division, 541-682-5485 EVALULATION: Based on the information provided by the applicant, the City has determined that this request complies with Eugene Code (EC) Section 9.7805 Annexation - Applicability. As such, it is subject to review and approval in accordance with the requirements, application criteria and procedures of EC 9.7800 through 9.7835. The applicable approval criteria are presented below in bold typeface with findings and conclusions following each. EC 9.7825(1) The land proposed to be annexed is within the city’s urban growth boundary and is: (a) Contiguous to the city limits; or (b) Separated from the city only by a public right of way or a stream, bay, lake or other body of water. Complies Findings: The annexation area is within the City’s urban growth boundary (UGB) and is contiguous to the City limits along the northern property line, consistent with subsection (a). YES NO EC 9.7825(2) The proposed annexation is consistent with applicable policies in the Metro Plan and in any applicable refinement plans. Complies Findings: Several policies from the Metro Plan provide support for this annexation by encouraging compact urban growth to achieve efficient use of land and urban service provisions within the UGB, including the following policies from the Growth Management section (in italic text): Policy 8. Land within the UGB may be converted from urbanizable to urban only through annexation to a city when it is found that: a. A minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided to the area in an orderly and efficient manner. b. There will be a logical area and time within which to deliver urban services and facilities. Conversion of urbanizable land to urban shall also be consistent with the Metro Plan. (page II-C-4) Policy 10. Annexation to a city through normal processes shall continue to be the highest priority. (page II-C-5). YES NO November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Steinhouse, Elizabeth (A 19-7) November 2019 Page 2 Policy 15. Ultimately, land within the UGB shall be annexed to a city and provided with the required minimum level of urban facilities and services. While the time frame for annexation may vary, annexation should occur as land transitions from urbanizable to urban. (page II-C-5) The following policy from the Residential Element of the Metro Plan is also applicable: Policy A.2 Residentially designated land within the UGB should be zoned consistent with the Metro Plan, and applicable plans and policies; however, existing agricultural zoning may be continued within the area between the city limits and UGB until rezoned for urban uses. The Metro Plan designates the property to be annexed as appropriate for low-density residential use. The River Road - Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan (RR/SC UFP) is the adopted refinement plan for the subject property and designates the area for low density residential use. The property is zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential with a /UL Urbanizable Land overlay. The R-1 zoning is consistent with the Metro Plan and RR/SC UFP designations. The /UL overlay will be automatically removed from the property following annexation approval. With regard to applicable policies of the RR/SC UFP, the subject property is not within a defined subarea. Further, none of the general “Residential Land Use Policies” at Section 2.2 appear to be directly applicable to the subject request. The “Public Facilities and Services Element” policies of the RR/SC UFP are directed at local government; however, the premise of these policies (regarding the provision of urban services) is the assumption that property within the UGB will be annexed. As previously discussed in this subsection, and further detailed under subsection (3) below, the proposed annexation is consistent with Metro Plan growth management policies and can be served by the minimum level of key urban services. The annexation procedures beginning at EC 9.7800 are consistent with State law and therefore, as found throughout this report, the annexation is consistent with State law. Therefore, based on the findings above, the proposal is consistent with the applicable policies of the Metro Plan and RR/SC UFP refinement plan. EC 9.7825(3) The proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services, as defined in the Metro Plan, can be provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner. Complies Findings: Consistent with this criterion, the proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner as detailed below: Wastewater There is an 8-inch public wastewater line within Willow Avenue, which can be extended to the subject property through the parcel to the east. The parcel to the east is currently YES NO November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Steinhouse, Elizabeth (A 19-7) November 2019 Page 3 owned by the same property owner and a private access/ utility easement is recorded on a property line adjustment survey file with the Lane County Surveyors Office on September 20, 2019. Stormwater The public stormwater system does not currently serve the subject property, at the time of future development a proposal that complies with the requirements of the Stormwater Management Manual will need to be provided. Transportation The subject property has access to Willow Avenue over a private access easement on the property to the east. Willow Avenue connects to other public streets allowing access to the transportation system. Comments from Lane County Transportation Planning indicate no concerns with the proposed annexation request. Any redevelopment or new development of the property must demonstrate compliance with the requirements of Lane County Code Chapter 15. A review for compliance with Lane County road requirements will apply at the time of future development. Solid Waste Collection service is provided by private firms. Regional disposal sites and the Short Mountain Landfill are operated by Lane County. Water and Electric EWEB staff note that an easement meeting EWEB’s specifications will be needed for service to be provided to the subject property. Prior to the approval of a structure on the site, the applicant will need to ensure an easement that meets EWEB’s specifications is provided. Public Safety Police protection can be extended to this site upon annexation consistent with service provision through the City. Fire protection will be provided by Eugene Springfield Fire. Emergency medical services are currently provided on a regional basis by the cities of Eugene and Springfield to central Lane County and will continue in the same manner upon annexation. Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation programs are provided on a City-wide basis. The inclusion of the subject property in the City is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the minimum level of this key urban service is met. Planning and Development Services Planning and building permit services are provided for all properties located within the urban growth boundary by the City of Eugene. The Eugene Code, Chapter 9, will provide the required land use controls for future development of the subject property upon November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Steinhouse, Elizabeth (A 19-7) November 2019 Page 4 annexation. Communications A variety of telecommunications providers offer communications services throughout the Eugene/Springfield area. Public Schools The subject property is within Eugene School District 4J and is within the district boundary of River Road Elementary School, Kelly Middle School, and North Eugene High School. As access to schools is evaluated on a district wide basis, the property’s location within the school district is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the minimum level of this key urban service is met. CONCLUSION: Based on the above findings, information submitted to date, and the criteria set forth in EC 9.7825, the proposed annexation is consistent with the applicable approval criteria. A map and legal description showing the area subject to annexation are included in the application file for reference. The effective date is set in accordance with State law. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C A ^_A&_h " ANNEXATION Planning Please complete the following application checklist. Note that additional information may be required upon further review in order to adequately address the applicable criteria for approval. If you have any questions about filling out this application, please contact Planning staff at the Permit and Information Center, phone (541)682-5377, 99 West 10th Avenue, Eugene. List all Assessor's Map and Tax Lot numbers of the property included in the request. Assessor's Map Tax Lot"Zoning Acreage D~f-2 - -3 D OD U L-338's . Property Address:_JQUAilrid 0304'1100 Vf, A WCYd2Css )E1_85 iKS Oq UA(I1Vi_t Plans for Future Development & Permit Number (if applicable):- rG~L,~{ ~ir2 P IAV1 i 5f010 hoMf, Public Service Districts: Name Parks:i A~ rz.k Rnc~iDVt S 21. A2CS l~ Electric:1A.4/2/ bM Water:1A fA q.4124~C?i4i2 Sanitary Sewer n~ YVA IZ-I ~0~12 Fire:c. l Y 2 P6A ~ ke Ot al Gf Schools:Elementary: RI VE2 Middle:High: Other;S z. ~D Filing Fee pErt A filing fee must accompany all applications. The fee varies depending upon the type of application and is adjusted periodically by the City Manager. Check with Planning staff at the Permit and Information Center to determine the required fee or check website at www.euizenel)lanning.org Written Statement (Submit 5 copies) Submit a detailed written statement describing how this request is consistent with all applicable criteria (Section 9.7825 of the Eugene Code). Planning & Development Updated: December 2016 Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail:eugeneplanning@ci.eugene.or.us Page 1 of 4 Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Site Plan Requirements Submit 3 paper copies and 1 digital copy of a site plan, drawn to an engineer's scale on 8 %"x 11" sheet of paper. Site plans shall include the following information: Show the date & north arrow on site plan. Show the Assessor's Map and Tax Lot number(s) on the site plan. Show a vicinity map on the site plan (vicinity map does not need to be to scale). Show city limits & UGB (if applicable) Clearly label the affected territory and any public right of ways to be annexed. Show all adjacent streets, alleys, and accessways, Show all dimensions of existing public utility easements and any other areas restricting use of the parcels, such as conservation areas, slope easements, access easements, etc. K Show the location of all existing structures. Other Application Requirements (Submit 3 paper copies and 1 digital copy of all) Petition for Annexation form listing all owners, including partial owners, •and electors. This form includes the Certification of Electors which must be signed by the Lane County Elections/Voter Registration Department and also includes the Verification (Certification) of Property Owners which must be signed by the Lane County Department of Assessment and Taxation. This form is required even if the land is vacant. Notarized Consent to Annexation form. A legal description of the land proposed for annexation, including any public right of way prepared by a registered land surveyor. Oregon Revised Statues (ORS) 308.225 requires submittal of a closing metes and bounds description or subdivision block and lot number description. Please see example of acceptable legal descriptions contained in the application packet. The legal description must exactly correspond with the map included with the application or the Assessor's map. Summary of Urban Service Provision form. Census Information Sheet. Note: This is not a complete list of requirements. Additional information may be required after further review in order to adequately address the applicable approval criteria. Planning & Development Updated: December 2016 Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail:eugeneplanning@ci.eugene.or.us Page 2 of 4 Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C By signing, the undersigned certifies that he/she has read and understood the submittal requirements outlined, and that he/she understands that omission of any listed item may cause delay in processing the application. I (We), the undersigned, acknowledge that the information supplied in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my (our) knowledge. PROPERTY OWNER OF TAX LOT: xcov Name (print): I(2Iq'Y~~'I J-h_IV koVSL Address: 3(,p&0 51 St 6,2S V (fit j IgVf, Email: (2 65; t"P(j_gV_ City/State/Zip: r7'biCAyA,C, Phone: SN j-q)q_g7eFax: Signature: j (Date: PROPERTY OWNER OF TAX LOT: Name (print): Address:Email: City/State/Zip:Phone: Fax: Signature:Date: PROPERTY OWNER OF TAX LOT: Name (print): Address:Email: City/State/Zip:Phone: Fax: Signature:Date: SURVEYOR: Name (print): Company/Organization: Address: City/State/Zip:Phone: Fax: E-mail: Signature:Date: Planning & Development Updated: December 2016 Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail:eugeneplanning@ci.eugene.or.us Page 3 of 4 Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C REPRESENTATIVE (If different from Surveyor): Name (print): (DF y 6 5t&1 (/t ~10USE Corn nanv/Organization: Address: j(0 i(o 5,,St"i.r s V I'st,) City/State/Zip: ~~Phone: l~~~F'ax: E-mail: qjg lo LA T, vH~l I• CvvL-"- Signature: Date: Attached additional sheets if necessary. Planning & Development Updated: December 2016 Planning Division 99 W. 10TH Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541.682.5377 or E-mail:eugeneplanning@ci.eugene.or.us Page 4 of 4 Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C ANNEXATION OF ELIZABETH STEINHOUSE PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF EUGENE ASSESSOR'S MAP NO 17-04-23-42-3900 CRITERIA CONFORMANCE STATEMENT GENERAL CRITERIA This criteria conformance statement was written to accompany the annexation application for Elizabeth Steinhouse. The subject property contains 8338 sq ft and is zoned R1. 9.7825 Annexation-Approval Criteria. The city council shall approve, modify and approve, or deny a proposed annexation based on the application's consistency with the following: 1) The land proposed to be annexed is within the city's urban growth boundary and is: a) Contiguous to the city limits; or b) Separated from the city only by a public right of way or a stream, bay, lake or other body of water. Response: The subject property is contiguous to property within the city limits, being Assessor's Map Numbers 17-04-23-42-3203, 17-04-23-42-3204, 17-04-23-42-3205 2) The proposed annexation is consistent with applicable policies in the Metro Plan and in any applicable refinement plans. Response: The Metro Plan Policy 10, page 11-C-4, recognizes annexations through this normal process to be the highest priority. As such. the proposal is consistent with this policy. Metro Plan Policy 8 provides for annexation when a minimum level of key facilities and services can be provided. Please see (3) below for list of key urban services. Metro Plan Policy 15 provides that land within the UGB shall be annexed to a city and provided with the minimum level of urban facilities and services. It further provides that while the timeframe for annexation may vary, annexation should occur as land transitions from urbanizable to urban. The property is within the UGB and therefore, based on this policy, should be annexed. The provision of facilities and services is addressed in the standard (3) below. The property is currently zoned R-1 which is consistent with the assigned site in the Metro Plan. Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Metro Plan Policy 17 is instructional to the City to dissolve special service districts after annexation and to consider intergovernmental agreements with affected special service districts. This policy is solely informational with respect to the applicants proposal & is to be applied at the discretion of the City staff. Metro Plan Policy 19 stipulated the criteria that must be met in order to annex territory to existing service districts within the UGB. This proposal is consistent with Policy 19 in the fact that key urban services are directly available to the property making immediate annexation to the City a possibility and the affected property owners have provided the signed consent to annex agreement with the City of Eugene in accordance with Oregon annexation law. Metro Policy 20 outlines the methodology for extending new urban service to unincorporated areas within the UGB. This proposal is consistent with Policy 20 in the fact that the applicant is requesting annexation to the City of Eugene, which is the highest priority of all the methods outlined in Policy 20 for providing new urban service to the unincorporated areas within the UGB. 3) The proposed annexation will result in a boundary which is the minimum level of key urban facilities and services, as defined in the Metro Plan, can be provided in an orderly efficient, and timely manner. Response: Key urban facilities and services, as defined in the Metro Plan, can be provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner as follows: Wastewater service: Wastewater service is currently available via the 8" main line which lies in Willow Ave Stormwater: There are no public storm facilities on or adjacent to the property. The property can be developed through the use of infiltration facilities for both volume and treatment of stormwater Transportation: Willow Ave connects to Park Ave which connects to Northwest Expressway Solid Waste Management: is currently served by Eweb Water Service: Water is available from the 4" water main located in the front of Assessors map 17-04-23-42-3800 and at the beginning of the access easement on Willow Ave Fire and emergency medical services: According to Rlid, fire protection is currently provided by River Road fire and emergency services. Upon annexation, the City of Eugene will provide services directly to the property so this key urban facility will be met Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Police protection: Police protection will be provided by Eugene, which currently services other properties inside the City. After annexation this property will receive police services on an equal basis with all properties inside the City. City- wide parks and recreation programs: Park services are already provided to this area consistent with the Metro Plan. Maurie Jacobs Park and Emerald Park are in the vicinity of the subject property. Electric Service: Electric service is available through the overhead line located within Willow Ave Land use controls: The subject property is subject to the land use controls of the City of Eugene Communication Facilities: Land line phone service, cellular phone and data service, and cable television are available in the area and can be extended to the subject property Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Consent to Annexation Consent is hereby given to the annexation by the City of Eugene, Oregon of the following described real property: Map and Tax Lot:ddress:L Beginning at a 2112" Brass Cap referencing Southwest comer of the Benjamin Davis Legal Description: Donation Land Claim No. 45, Notification No. 2244, Township 17 South, Range 4 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence NORTH 321.43 feet and EAST 991.86 feet to a 5/8"rebar with a plastic I.D. cap stamp "City of Eugene 1943", said rebar referencing thecenterlineoftheWillowAvenueright-of way at its northerly terminus; thence along said centerline of Willow Avenue South 48°24s6" West 544.33 feet to a 5/8" rebar with a plastic I.D. cap "G.E.S. PLS 2284"; thence leaving said centerline bearing WEST 180.19 feet along the southerly line of caprice Meadows, recorded October 20, 2004,Document No. 2004-081107, Lane County Oregon Deeds and Records and the easterlyextensionthereoftotheTruePointofBeginning; thence continuing along said southerly line of Caprice Meadows WEST 119.11 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pipe in concrete referencing the southwest comer of said Caprice Meadows; thence leaving said southlinebearingSOUTH70.00 feet to a 1/2 inch iron pipe in concrete, thence FAST 119.11feet; thence NORTH 70.00 feet retumino to the south line of Caprice Meadows and theTruePointofBeginning, all in Eugene, Lane County, Oregon.In the corporate limits of said city, which is owned by the undersigned DATED this day of ~I L 2Q. STATE OF OREGON ) County of = ) On this` day of lot -ry pub is in and for the said r I . - 11,L _ . 2Q 1 C" . before me, the undersigned, a and state, personally appeared the within-named, who is known to me to be the identical individual described herein and who executed the samefreelyandvoluntarily. Seal: OFFICIAL STAMP ALEXIS LYNN CALL HANIaTARYPUBLICOREGON 8 Q COMMISSION NO. 585834IVi'p COMMISSION FP:PIRES APRIL 02, 20231 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and sea[ the day and year last above written f f ~ £ 1 1 Notary Public for Oregon My Commission Expires } Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C 0 C') n Fn CD i CD L d A Cl) 2 n n A N 0 L 0 CD CD 0 CD zi f CD o N V ~ Np CD CD CL O O r CD 0 O n fD O 0 CD 0 CS CD CU V mv f' G 0 CAM 1 Z3 o D _ 0 00 O n a CD N CCCD O OZ =Er- 2L m 2.-q d o CD = o CD m n O 0 fD (D N K CD CD ~ Q = CL X ~ a N O oCL EL y D CD N (D N O CL C fT m e ° m o N m CD N = N CD Q y CD CL CD ED 3 N = O CD m to O' pd =CD CD w 0 DCo Co o CD CD S 0n at t:. CD 3 O O N y O ~ y NCD = cn_ O ~ mmCD O m I d m r as 0 cn O1 N y. C CD CD CD CD 0 CD CD U o' p Ln. N C CD ch CD O V 0 CD CD O N m C~ y' CD O CD N A O CD G fS C7 0 1G CD CD c CD a d CD N 0 0 CD to CD C!D CL 0 3 CD CD OD 0 CD Oo V rn tr A w N v~ N C m Cn d (O 0 d CD r I 1`I Z 3 CD C" H CD O D CD C~D N D a' n n o Cpc~D N m O I a CU CD c O r d t m n G S2 G-) oU~' CD G D? CD foil = S In vyj CD p o j : 3N = X 00-0 a 1 =r O C C m v a =CL m O n = CD c n!~ o O S. D CD O f.D O \ a s aye U n' 0 v = o W w 7' CD O O CNO D G O o a g m o o a =3 CD CD fTo O w CD 1 5. O CD 1 n O r Q)0 CD d (D Cn CD 0 o r y. O w w ry.n CD U fn O 0-0 N' O D n~ O Ln. C, W cB 0 m NCL O Incv CDD Sto ~ O y' CDo CLct> N LA. rCDN CD O N O X O C fA N 05 CD 7 CD 0 [v 0 O' O_ _ CD ~ C'1 (D n O' F3 O O 0 CD a D CD X v 0 O O 3 m O Z cn O Z C m x m m Fn I X n D z z m D O Z a b Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Certification of Description Pursuant to EC 9.7810(7), Annexation Application Requirements, I hereby certify the metes and bounds description of the real property proposed for annexation closes; and the map outlining the boundary is a true representation of the description. Signature: Surveyor Print Name: 044 4L 1"" Date: W f f Seal: A. RW PWFESM4AL Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF THE ELIZABETH STEINHOUSE PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF EUGENE ASSESSOR'S MAP NO. 17-04-23-42, TAX LOT 3900 September 5, 2019 Beginning at a 2 112" Brass Cap referencing Southwest corner of the Benjamin Davis Donation Land Claim No. 45, Notification No. 2244, Township 17 South, Range 4 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence NORTH 321.03 feet and EAST 991.96 feet to a 518" rebar with a plastic I.D. cap stamp "City of Eugene 1943", said rebar referencing the centerline of the Willow Avenue right-of-way at its northerly terminus; thence along said centerline of Willow Avenue South 08°24'36" West 504.33 feet to a 518" rebar with a plastic I.D. cap "G.E.S. PLS 2280"; thence leaving said centerline bearing WEST 180.19 feet along the southerly line of Caprice Meadows, recorded October 20, 2004, Document No. 2004-081107, Lane County Oregon Deeds and Records and the easterly extension thereof to the True Point of Beginning; thence continuing along said southerly line of Caprice Meadows WEST 119.11 feet to a 112 inch iron pipe in concrete referencing the southwest corner of said Caprice Meadows; thence leaving said south line bearing SOUTH 70.00 feet to a 112 inch iron pipe in concrete; thence EAST 119.11 feet; thence NORTH 70.00 feet returning to the south line of Caprice Meadows and the True Point of Beginning, all in Eugene, Lane County, Oregon. Containing 8,338 Square Feet, more or less IG#STERE PROFESSKWAL A-, Jwww. -Iaw YD L. TOL . Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Summarv of Urban Service Provision This form is intended as a guide to assist applicants in demonstrating that a minimum level of key urban services can be provided to the area proposed for annexation. Space is provided on this form for you to provide detailed information on service provision. Please add additional pages if necessary to provide details of servicing issues related to the area you are annexing. To assist you in providing this information, some contacts are listed below. For large or difficult to serve properties, you may wish to contact a private land use planning consultant to prepare your application. Property Owner(s) Name: mil z~bxi~ ~f `Vl holk5E, Assessor's Map and Tax Lot Numbers for Properties Proposed for Annexation For example: Map 17-03-19-31, Tax Lot 100) Wastewater All new development must connect to the wastewater (sanitary sewer) system. Is wastewater service available to serve the area proposed for annexation? (For more information, contact the Engineering staff at the City of Eugene Permit and Information Center or call 541-682-8400.) Thee,property(ies) in this annexation request: pr will be served from an existing gravity wastewater line. Location and size of existing wastewater line: i A I L UV Pi'VI ( AV1V - i will be served by an extension of an existing gravity wastewater line. Where will a wastewater line be extended from? When will it be extended? By whom? Stormwater Site plans for all new development must provide for drainage to an approved system consistent with the Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan. City approval for storm drainage will be required as part of the development process. (For more information, contact the Engineering staff at the City of Eugene Permit and Information Center or call 541- 682-8400.) Is the site currently served by an approved stormwater system? no 1 of 4 Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C If yes, location? If no, how will stormwater be handled after development? - Vt~9 i~~ 41 €yLC9 Streets - What existing streets provide access to this site. List existing streets that provide access to this site fr m River Road, the,Nor west Express ay, or Beltline Highway. U2 n Vr1~- Will dedication for additional street right-of-way be required upon further development of this site? Yes No Unknown Will existing streets be extended or new streets constructed upon further development of this site? Yes No Unknown Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services Systems Development revenues generated by new development and Ballot Measure 20-30, which authorized the issuance of $25.3 million in general revenue bonds, will help to fund future City park acquisition and development in this area and throughout the city. Please list the parks and recreation facilities that already exist or are planned in the general vicinity of the property(ies) included in this annexation: PA24f5 iA ifi1 Vf(jmTo,it 6,cUl EC~P2o~~r2tyAft MAW~& ETo(obsPAOIC Id Pea)- Key services, defined by the Metropolitan Plan as parks and recreation programs, will be available to new city residents in this area on an equal basis with residents throughout the city. Public Safety Police services - Police protection can be extended to this site upon annexation consistent with service provision throughout the city. 2 of 4 Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C For River Road/Santa Clara area- Police services - Police protection can be extended to this site upon annexation consistent with service provision throughout the city. Police currently travel along River Road to provide service to areas throughout the River Road and Santa Clara area. Infill annexations and development in this area will increase the efficiency of service delivery to this area. Fire and emergency services (Please indicate which fire district serves subject property.) Santa Clara - Fire protection services are currently provided to the subject p operty by the Santa Clara Rural Fire Protection District. Emergency medical transport (i.e., ambulance) services are currently provided on a regional basis by Eugene, Springfield, and Lane Rural Fire/Rescue to central Lane County, including the River Road and Santa Clara areas. After annexation, this service will continue to be provided by the current provider. All ambulance service providers have mutual aid agreements and provide back-up service into the other providers' areas. Planning and Development Services Planning and building permit services are provided to the area outside the city limits but within the urban growth boundary by the City of Eugene. This service would continue after annexation. EWEB (Eugene Water and Electric Board) currently provides water and electric service in the Eugene area and can provide service to new development in the River Road and Santa Clara area upon annexation. Some properties in northern Eugene receive electric service from EPUD Emerald People's Utility District). Some properties in south Eugene receive electric services from the Lane Electric Cooperative; please note if this is the case for your property. For more information contact EWER, ph. 484- 2411, EPUD, ph. 746-1583 or Lane Electric Co-op, 484-1151. Electric Service - Which electric company will serve this site? foi yOntiR tavld x,11. Q , GAO (ew)'8) Water Service Please provide the size and location of the water main closest to your property. f V vVa+s2 r'S HO~~big -fhkaU9fi a N"Wq+M WtpiN IocPffd on 41 &0 A Solid Waste Solid waste collection service is provided by private firms. Regional disposal sites and the Short Mountain Landfill are operated by Lane County. River Road - Fire and emergency services - Fire protection is currently provided to the subject property by the River Road Water District under contract with the City of Eugene. Upon annexation, fire protection will be provided directly by the City of Eugene Fire & EMS Department. 3 of 4 Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C Natural Gas Northwest Natural Gas can extend service to new development in this area. Communications US West Communications and a variety of other telecommunications providers offer communications services throughout the Eugene/Springfield Area. 4 of 4 Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C City of Eugene Plannif Method of Payment C Cash O Check O Visa/MC Amount Received 5,155.70 RECEIPT DATE 9/9/2019 Customer Information Name Elizabeth Steinhouse Address 3660 Sisters View Ave Eugene, OR 97401 Project 830 Willow City/Government Agency Application Type Modification concurrent Qty Base Fee Discount Total 1 Annexation 1 $ 4,730.00 $ 4,730.00 2 Admin Fee (not included on appeals or other fees) Total Staff Receiving Application ABM Subtotal App Fees $ 4,730.00 Subtotal Other Fees $ - 9% $ 425.70 5,155.70 99 West 10Th Avenue • Eugene, Oregon • 97401 • 541-682-5377 • eugeneplanning.org Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C DUPLICATE RECEIPT DUPLICATE RECEIPT CITY OF EUGENE BUILDING & PERMIT SERVICE 99 LEST 10TH AVE 682-5086 REG-RECEIPT:1-0004158 Sep 09 2019 CASHIER: RMW Annexation Fee $4,730.00 lot 3900 Admin Fee-Auto Calc $425.70 TOTAL DUE: $5,155.70 RECEIVED FROM: ELIZABETH STEINNOUSE Credit: $5,155.70 Total tendered: $5,155.70 Change due: $.00 www.eugene-or.gov/bldgpermittracking Please take our customer survey at: www.surveymonkey.com/s/COEPermitSurvey DUPLICATE RECEIPT DUPLICATE RECEIPT Attachment C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Adoption of a Resolution Annexing Land to the City of Eugene (Assessor’s Map 18-03-16-30; Tax Lot 200; located on Spring Boulevard) (City File: Axline-Hazen; A 19-9) Meeting Date: November 25, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 2D Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Rodney T. Bohner www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5437 ISSUE STATEMENT This item is a request to annex a portion of a vacant property located on the east side of Spring Boulevard, south of 43rd Avenue. The portion of the property to be annexed is approximately .65 acres (28,437 square feet). No public right-of-way is proposed for annexation as part of this request. A vicinity map is provided as Attachment A. The portion of the property proposed to be annexed is zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land overlay and is designated for low density residential use in the Metro Plan. The applicable refinement plan for the property is the South Hills Study. The eastern portion of the subject property is outside the urban growth boundary, is not part of this annexation request and will remain under the jurisdiction of Lane County. The area of annexation is located within the City’s UGB and is contiguous to the City limits along its west property boundary. Annexation will allow for future development consistent with the property’s land use designation and the Eugene Code. Specific plans for future development of the site are not included as part of this annexation application. BACKGROUND To encourage compact urban growth and sequential development within Eugene’s UGB, the Metro Plan provides that ultimately all land within the UGB will be annexed into the City and provided with a minimum level of urban services. Approval of annexation requests are based on the criteria at Eugene Code 9.7825 which require that (1) the land proposed to be annexed is within the City’s UGB and is contiguous to the City limits or separated from City limits only by a right-of-way or water body; (2) the proposed annexation is consistent with the applicable policies in the Metro Plan and in any applicable refinement plans; and (3) the proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimal level of key urban facilities and services can be provided in an orderly, efficient and timely manner. Findings demonstrating that the annexation request is consistent with these approval criteria are included as Exhibit C to the attached draft resolution (Attachment B). To provide nearby property owners and residents an opportunity to review and comment on this annexation request, public notice was provided to all owners and occupants of property within November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D 500 feet of the subject property and the affected neighborhood association (Southeast Neighbors) consistent with Eugene Code requirements. In response to the notice, staff received one letter from Noel and Sandra Turner in support of the annexation (provided as Attachment C). Referral comments were provided by affected agencies including City of Eugene Public Works, Eugene Water & Electric Board, and Lane County Public Works. These referral comments confirm that the property can be provided with the minimum level of key urban services consistent with the approval criteria. Given the findings of compliance, ability for the provision of key urban services, and testimony received, a public hearing is not recommended in this instance. Additional background information regarding this request, including relevant application materials, is included for reference as Attachment D. A full copy of all materials in the record is also available at the Permit and Information Center located at 99 West 10th Avenue. PREVIOUS COUNCIL DIRECTION None. COUNCIL OPTIONS City Council may consider the following options: 1. Adopt the draft resolution 2. Adopt the draft resolution with specific modifications as determined by the City Council 3. Deny the draft resolution 4. Defer action until after the council holds a public hearing on the proposed annexation CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends the City Council adopt the resolution by finding that the request complies with all applicable approval criteria, and that the annexation be approved. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt a resolution approving the proposed annexation request consistent with the applicable approval criteria. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Draft Annexation Resolution with Exhibits A through C Exhibit A: Map of Annexation Request Exhibit B: Legal Description Exhibit C: Planning Director Findings and Recommendation C. Public Testimony Received D. Application Materials for Annexation Request November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Rodney T. Bohner Telephone: 541-682-5437 Staff E-Mail: RBohner@eugene-or.gov ^ Caution: This map is based onimprecise source data, subject tochange, and for general reference only. Axline, Michael & Diane Hazen (A 19-9) SP R I N G B L V D Created on 11/6/2019by City of Eugene Planning Division N Attachment A Map/Tax Lot 18-03-16-30 / 00200 Subject Property Annexation AreaEugene UGBEugene City LimitsTaxlots 0 80 16040FtNovember 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Resolution - Page 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. _____ RESOLUTION ANNEXING LAND TO THE CITY OF EUGENE (ASSESSOR’S MAP 18-03-16-30, PORTION OF TAX LOT 200; LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF SPRING BOULEVARD). The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A.An annexation application was submitted on September 23, 2019, by Michael Axline and Diane Hazen, in accordance with the provisions of Section 9.7810 of the Eugene Code, 1971, (“EC”) to annex property identified as Assessor’s Map 18-03-16-30, portion of Tax Lot 200, to the City of Eugene. B.The property proposed to be annexed is depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution. The legal description of the property proposed to be annexed is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. C.The City’s Planning Director has submitted a written recommendation that the application be approved based on the criteria of EC 9.7825. The Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation is attached as Exhibit C. D.On October 22, 2019 a notice containing a geographical reference to the property, the assessor’s map and tax lot number for the property, a description of the land proposed to be annexed, and the Planning Director’s preliminary recommendation was mailed to the applicant, and owners and occupants of properties located within 500 feet of the perimeter of the subject property. Notice could not be sent to the applicable neighborhood group or community organization officially recognized by the City Council as required by EC 9.7820 because the property proposed to be annexed is not located within an officially recognized neighborhood group or community organization. However, as a courtesy, notice was sent to Southeast Neighbors, the neighborhood organization in which the property will be located upon annexation. The notice advised that the City Council would consider the Planning Director’s full recommendation on the proposed annexation on November 25, 2019. E.After considering the Planning Director’s recommendation, the City Council finds that the application should be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. Based on the above findings and the Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation which are attached as Exhibit C and are adopted in support of this Resolution, it ATTACHMENT B November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Resolution - Page 2 of 2 is ordered that the land identified as Assessor’s Map 18-03-16-30, portion of Tax Lot 200, which is depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A, and more particularly described in the attached Exhibit B, is annexed to the City of Eugene. Section 2. This Resolution is effective immediately upon its passage by the City Council. The annexation and the automatic rezoning of the land pursuant to EC 9.7820(3) from R-1 Low- Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay to R-1 Low-Density Residential shall become effective in accordance with State law. The foregoing Resolution adopted the ____day of November, 2019. ______________________________________ City Recorder November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D EXHIBIT B November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Legal Description of Affected Territory to be Annexed (A Portion of Tax Lot #200) A unit of land being situated in the Southwest ¼ Section 16, Township 18 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, said unit of land being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the iron pipe commonly used as the center of Section 16, Township 18 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence South 01°19'30" West 175.00 feet to an iron pipe set in that survey filed in the office of the Lane County Surveyor, Lane County, Oregon, under no. 14297; thence North 83°14'36" West 487.82 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of this land to be annexed; Thence continuing North 83°14’36" West 162.05 feet to the east line of Spring Boulevard; Thence along the east line of Spring Boulevard, North 08°16'33" East 175.73 feet; Thence leaving the east line of Spring Boulevard, South 83°06'40” East 162.05 feet; Thence South 08°16'33" West 175.35 feet to the point of beginning, all in Lane County, Oregon and containing 28,437 square feet or 0.65 acre(s) of land, more or less. EXHIBIT B November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Axline/Hazen (A 19-9) November 2019 Page 1 EXHIBIT B Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation Annexation Request for Michael Axline and Diane Hazen (City File: A 19-9) Application Submitted: September 23, 2019 Applicant: Michael Axline & Diane Hazen Property Included in Annexation Request: Portion of Tax Lot 200 of Assessor’s Map 18-03-16-30 Zoning: R-1 Low-Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay Location: East side of Spring Boulevard, south of 43rd Avenue Representative: Kent Baker; Roberts Surveying Lead City Staff: Rodney Bohner, City of Eugene Planning Division, 541-682-5437 EVALULATION: Based on the information provided by the applicant, the City has determined that this request complies with Eugene Code (EC) Section 9.7805 Annexation - Applicability. As such, it is subject to review and approval in accordance with the requirements, application criteria and procedures of EC 9.7800 through 9.7835. The applicable approval criteria are presented below in bold typeface with findings and conclusions following each. EC 9.7825(1) The land proposed to be annexed is within the city’s urban growth boundary and is: (a) Contiguous to the city limits; or (b) Separated from the city only by a public right of way or a stream, bay, lake or other body of water. Complies Findings: A portion of the subject tax lot is located within the City’s urban growth boundary (UGB), with a larger portion of the subject tax lot to the east located outside of the UGB. The annexation only includes the area of the subject tax lot within the UGB, while the land area outside the UGB will remain under the jurisdiction of Lane County. The area of annexation is contiguous to the City limits along its west property boundary, consistent with EC 9.7825(1)(a). YES NO EC 9.7825(2) The proposed annexation is consistent with applicable policies in the Metro Plan and in any applicable refinement plans. Complies Findings: Several policies from the Metro Plan provide support for this annexation by encouraging compact urban growth to achieve efficient use of land and urban service provisions within the UGB, including the following policies from the Growth Management section (in italic text): Policy 8. Land within the UGB may be converted from urbanizable to urban only through annexation to a city when it is found that: a.A minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided to the area in an orderly and efficient manner. b.There will be a logical area and time within which to deliver urban services and facilities. Conversion of urbanizable land to urban shall also be consistent with the Metro Plan. (page II-C-4) YES NO November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Axline/Hazen (A 19-9) November 2019 Page 2 Policy 10. Annexation to a city through normal processes shall continue to be the highest priority. (page II-C-5). Policy 15. Ultimately, land within the UGB shall be annexed to a city and provided with the required minimum level of urban facilities and services. While the time frame for annexation may vary, annexation should occur as land transitions from urbanizable to urban. (page II-C-5) The following policy from the Residential Element of the Metro Plan is also applicable: Policy A.2 Residentially designated land within the UGB should be zoned consistent with the Metro Plan, and applicable plans and policies; however, existing agricultural zoning may be continued within the area between the city limits and UGB until rezoned for urban uses. The Metro Plan designates the annexation area as appropriate for low-density residential use. The South Hills Study is the adopted refinement plan for the subject property; however, it does not include a land use diagram or any policies that would serve as approval criteria for the proposed annexation. Consistent with its land use designation in the Metro Plan, the portion of the property to be annexed is currently zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay. The /UL overlay will be automatically removed from the annexed portion of the property following annexation approval. As previously discussed in this subsection, and further detailed under subsection (3) below, the proposed annexation is consistent with Metro Plan growth management policies and can be served by the minimum level of key urban services. The annexation procedures beginning at EC 9.7800 are consistent with State law and therefore, as found throughout this report, the annexation is consistent with State law. Therefore, based on the findings above, the proposal is consiste nt with the applicable policies of the Metro Plan and South Hills Study. EC 9.7825(3) The proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services, as defined in the Metro Plan, can be provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner. Complies Findings: Consistent with this criterion, the proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner as detailed below: Wastewater Public Wastewater lines are available within the right-of-way of Spring Boulevard. A 6- inch pipe is located near the southwest corner of the lot facing Spring Boulevard. There is no lien information in the special assessment database for the subject property. YES NO November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Axline/Hazen (A 19-9) November 2019 Page 3 Stormwater City of Eugene stormwater systems are not available to serve this property. Records show that the soils in the area are mapped as a Type D. Infiltration testing may be required at the time of development to demonstrate adequate percolation rates. There are additional options for complying with stormwater standards which will be further evaluated at the time of future development. All treatment and destination must be approved prior to development. Transportation This property abuts Spring Boulevard, which is within the City of Eugene jurisdiction and is classified as a local street, but lacks curb and gutter, sidewalks, street lights or street trees. Spring Boulevard terminates to the south and connects to East 43rd Avenue to the north which is also a local street. There are multiple routes available from the subject property to access East 30th Avenue (a minor arterial) or West Amazon with connections to downtown and Interstate 5. Access management and street standards will be evaluated at the time of future development. Solid Waste Collection service is provided by private firms. Regional disposal sites and the Short Mountain Landfill are operated by Lane County. Water and Electric EWEB Water staff state no objection to the annexation. EWEB Electric staff also state no objection to the annexation. Water and electric services can be extended to the subject property in accordance with EWEB policies and procedures. Public Safety Police protection can be extended to this site upon annexation consistent with service provision through the City. Fire protection will be provided by Eugene Springfield Fire. Emergency medical services are currently provided on a regional basis by the cities of Eugene and Springfield and will continue in the same manner upon annexation. Parks and Recreation Parks and recreation programs are provided on a City-wide basis. The inclusion of the subject property in the City is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the minimum level of this key urban service is met. Planning and Development Services Planning and building permit services are provided for all properties located within the urban growth boundary by the City of Eugene. The Eugene Code, Chapter 9, will provide the required land use controls for future development of the subject property upon annexation. Communications A variety of telecommunications providers offer communications services throughout the Eugene/Springfield area. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Axline/Hazen (A 19-9) November 2019 Page 4 Public Schools The subject property is within Eugene School District 4J and is within the district boundary of Camas Ridge Elementary School, Spencer Butte Middle School, and South Eugene High School. As access to schools is evaluated on a district-wide basis, the property’s location within the school district is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the minimum level of this key urban service is met. CONCLUSION: Based on the above findings, information submitted to date, and the criteria set forth in EC 9.7825, the proposed annexation is consistent with the applicable approval criteria. A map and legal description showing the area subject to annexation are included in the application file for reference. The effective date is set in accordance with State law. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D ATTACHMENT C November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D ANNEXATION APPROVAL CRITERIA Michael D. Axline & Diane D. Hazen Lane County Assessors Map No. 18-03-1 6-30-00, Tax Lot #200 September 17, 2019 Per Eugene Code (EC) 9.7825, annexations are required to show consistency with certain criteria. Listed below are the criteria from EC and the documentation of consistency with the criteria. (I)The land p roposed to be a nnexedis within t he city's ur ba n growth boundary andis: (a)C o ntiguous to the city limits; or (b)S eparated from the city onlyby a public rightof way or a stream, bay, lake or o ther bodyof water. A small portion of the subject tax lot is located within the City's urban growth boundary (UGB), with a larger portion of the area to the East located outside of the UGB.The annexation only includes the area of the subject tax lot within the UGB, while the land area outside the UGB will remain under the jurisdiction of Lane County. The area of annexation is contiguous to the City limits along a portion of the North property line with an adjacent parcel that is within the city limits, consistent with subsection (a) and the West property line is contiguous at Spring Boulevard and the properties West of Spring are within the city limits, consistent with subsection (b). (2)The proposed annexation isconsistent with applicable policies in the Metro Plan and in a ny applica blerefine me nt plans. Several policies from the Metro Plan provide support for this annexation by encouraging compact urban growth to achieve efficient use of land and urban service provisions within the UGB, including the following policies from the Growth Management section (in italic text): Policy8.LandwithintheUGBmaybeconverted fromurbanizabletourbanonlythroughannexation to a citywhenitis found that (a)A minimumlevel of key urban facilities and services can be provided to the areain an orderly and efficientmanner. (b)Therewillbe a logicalareaandtimewithinwhichtodeliverurbanservicesand facilities. Conversion of urbanizable land to urban shall also be consistent with the Metro Plan. (page 11-C-4). ATTACHMENT D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Policy 1O. Annexationto a citythroughnormalprocessesshallcontinuetobe the highest priority. (page 11-C-5). Policy 15. Ultimately,landwithintheUGBshallbeannexedto a cityand providedwiththerequired minimumlevel of urban facilities and services.While the time frame for annexation mayvary, annexationshouldoccur as landtransitionsfromurbanizabletourban.(page 11-C-5). (From the Residential Element of the Metro Plan): PolicyA.3. Provide anadequatesupplyofbuildableresidentiallandwithintheUGBforthe20-year planningperiodatthetimeofPeriodicReview. Policy A.4. Use annexation, provision of adequate public facilities and services, rezoning, redevelopment and infill to meet the 20-year projected housing demand. There is no Refinement Plan for the subject property. (3)The proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services, as defined in the Metro Plan,can be provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner. Consistent with this criterion, the proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided in an orderly and efficient, and timely manner as detailed below: Wastewater: An 8-inch PVC publicwastewater lineexistswithin Spring Boulevard (alocal Cityof Eugene street), just West of the subject property. Stormwater: No public stormwater system serves this property. Records show the soils are mapped as Hydrologic Soil Group Type D. Infiltration testing will be required at the time of development to demonstrate adequate percolation rates; however, there are options for complying with stormwater standards which will be further evaluated at the time of development. Transportation: The property abuts Spring Boulevard to the West. Spring Boulevard is designated as a Local Access Road and is within City of Eugene jurisdiction. Solid Waste: Collection service is provided by private firms. Regional disposal sites and the Short Mountain Landfill are operated by Lane County. Water and Electric: Lane Electric CO-OP serves this area for electricity and has an existing vault at the Northwest corner of the property and transformers along the westerly boundary of the property.Eugene Water and Electric Board provides water to this area and has a water meter at the Southwest corner of the property. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Public Safety: Police protection will be extended to the site upon annexation consistent with service provision through the City. Fire and Emergency Medical Services protection will be provided by the Eugene-Springfield Fire and EMSDepartment. Parks and Recreation: Parks and recreation programs are provided on a City-wide basis.The inclusion of the subject property in the City will be sufficient evidence to demonstrate the minimum level is met for this key urbanservice. Planning and Development Services: Planning and building permit services are provided for all properties located within the UGB by the City of Eugene. The Eugene Code, Chapter 9, will provide the required land use controls for future development of the subject property upon annexation. Communications: A variety of communication service providers offer communication services throughout the Eugene/Springfield area. Public Schools: The subject property is within the Eugene School District 4J and is within the district boundary of Camas Ridge Elementary School, Spencer Butte Middle School and South Eugene High School. As access to schools is evaluated on a district-wide basis,the property's location within the school district is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the minimum level of this key urban service is met. CONCLUSION Based on the above findings and the additional information submitted as well as the criteria set forth in EC 9.7825,the proposed annexation is consistent with all applicable approval criteria. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D Legal Description of Affected Territory to be Annexed (A Portion of Tax Lot #200) A unit of land being situated in the Southwest ¼ Section 16, Township 18 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, said unit of land being more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the iron pipe commonly used as the center of Section 16, Township 18 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence South 01°19'30" West 175.00 feet to an iron pipe set in that survey filed in the office of the Lane County Surveyor, Lane County, Oregon, under no. 14297; thence North 83°14'36" West 487.82 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING of this land to be annexed; Thence continuing North 83°14’36" West 162.05 feet to the east line of Spring Boulevard; Thence along the east line of Spring Boulevard, North 08°16'33" East 175.73 feet; Thence leaving the east line of Spring Boulevard, South 83°06'40” East 162.05 feet; Thence South 08°16'33" West 175.35 feet to the point of beginning, all in Lane County, Oregon and containing 28,437 square feet or 0.65 acre(s) of land, more or less. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 2D November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Adoption of a Resolution Annexing Land to the City of Eugene (Assessor’s Map 17-04-14-42; Tax Lot 6500—located at 625 Howard Avenue) (City File: Burhnam, Jake; A 19-8) Meeting Date: November 25, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 2E Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Rodney T. Bohner www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5437 ISSUE STATEMENT This item is a request to annex a property located at 625 Howard Avenue. The property to be annexed is approximately 1.87 acres and is developed with single-family residence. No public right-of-way is proposed for annexation as part of this request. A vicinity map is provided as Attachment A. The property is zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land overlay. The property is designated for low density residential use in the Metro Plan and the applicable refinement plan, the River Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan. The area of annexation is located within the City’s urban growth boundary and is contiguous to the City limits. Annexation will allow for future development consistent with the property’s land use designation and the Eugene Code. Specific plans for future development of the site are not included as part of this annexation application. BACKGROUND To encourage compact urban growth and sequential development within Eugene’s UGB, the Metro Plan provides that ultimately all land within the UGB will be annexed into the City and provided with a minimum level of urban services. Approval of annexation requests are based on the criteria at Eugene Code 9.7825 which require that (1) the land proposed to be annexed is within the City’s UGB and is contiguous to the City limits or separated from City limits only by a right-of-way or water body; (2) the proposed annexation is consistent with the applicable policies in the Metro Plan and in any applicable refinement plans; and (3) the proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimal level of key urban facilities and services can be provided in an orderly, efficient and timely manner. Findings demonstrating that the annexation request is consistent with these approval criteria are included as Exhibit C to the attached draft resolution (Attachment B). To provide nearby property owners and residents an opportunity to review and comment on this annexation request, public notice was provided to all owners and occupants of property within November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E 500 feet of the subject property and the affected neighborhood association (Santa Clara Community Organization) consistent with Eugene Code requirements. In response to the public notice, staff received one piece of testimony—a letter from Louis Bauer (provided as Attachment C). To summarize, Bauer opposes annexation of the entire property, and proposes that only approximately one-half of the site be annexed and that adjacent property owners be provided an opportunity to purchase parts of the subject property remaining unannexed under Bauer’s plan. As City Council is aware, annexation is often the first step on the part of a property owner in preparing property for development within the City of Eugene. The only question before council with this annexation request is whether the subject property can be included in the city limits, consistent with applicable Eugene Code requirements. Any applicable, subsequent development will require the appropriate land use application, such as a subdividing the property, which will entail a separate public process. Based on this information, staff does not believe a public hearing is warranted. Referral comments were provided by affected agencies including City of Eugene Public Works, Eugene Water & Electric Board, and Lane County Public Works. These referral comments confirm that the property can be provided with the minimum level of key urban services consistent with the approval criteria. Given the findings of compliance, ability for the provision of key urban services, and lack of testimony received pertaining to the substance of the application, a public hearing is not recommended in this instance. Additional background information regarding this request, including relevant application materials, is included for reference as Attachment D. A full copy of all materials in the record is also available at the Permit and Information Center located at 99 West 10th Avenue. PREVIOUS COUNCIL DIRECTION None. COUNCIL OPTIONS City Council may consider the following options: 1. Adopt the draft resolution 2. Adopt the draft resolution with specific modifications as determined by the City Council 3. Deny the draft resolution 4. Defer action until after the council holds a public hearing on the proposed annexation CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends City Council adopt the resolution by finding that the request complies with all applicable approval criteria, and that the annexation be approved. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt a resolution approving the proposed annexation request consistent with the applicable approval criteria. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Draft Annexation Resolution with Exhibits A through C Exhibit A: Map of Annexation Request Exhibit B: Legal Description Exhibit C: Planning Director Findings and Recommendation C. Public Testimony Received D. Application Materials for Annexation Request FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Rodney T. Bohner Telephone: 541-682-5437 Staff E-Mail: RBohner@eugene-or.gov ^ Caution: This map is based onimprecise source data, subject tochange, and for general reference only. Burnham, Jake (A 19-8) GR O V E S T HOWARD AVE OA K D R LA K E D R ELM DR ROSEWOOD AVE Created on 11/6/2019by City of Eugene Planning Division N Attachment A Map/Tax Lot 17-04-14-42-06500 Subject PropertyEugene City LimitsTaxlots 0 50 10025FtNovember 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E RESOLUTION NO. _____ RESOLUTION ANNEXING LAND TO THE CITY OF EUGENE (ASSESSOR’S MAP 17-04-14-42, TAX LOT 6500 LOCATED AT 625 HOWARD AVENUE). The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A.An annexation application was submitted on September 19, 2019, by Jake Burnham, in accordance with the provisions of Section 9.7810 of the Eugene Code, 1971, (“EC”) to annex property identified as Assessor’s Map 17-04-14-42, Tax Lot 6500, to the City of Eugene. B.The property proposed to be annexed is depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution. The legal description of the property proposed to be annexed is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit B. C.The City’s Planning Director has submitted a written recommendation that the application be approved based on the criteria of EC 9.7825. The Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation is attached as Exhibit C. D.On October 22, 2019, a notice containing the street address, the assessor’s map and tax lot number for the property, a description of the land proposed to be annexed, and the Planning Director’s preliminary recommendation was mailed to the applicant, owners and occupants of properties located within 500 feet of the perimeter of the subject property, and the River Road Community Organization. The notice advised that the City Council would consider the Planning Director’s full recommendation on the proposed annexation on November 25, 2019. E.After considering the Planning Director’s recommendation, the City Council finds that the application should be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. Based on the above findings and the Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation which are attached as Exhibit C and are adopted in support of this Resolution, it is ordered that the land identified as Assessor’s Map 17-04-14-42, Tax Lot 6500, which is depicted on the map attached as Exhibit A, and more particularly described in the attached Exhibit B, is annexed to the City of Eugene. Section 2. This Resolution is effective immediately upon its passage by the City Council. The annexation and the automatic rezoning of the land pursuant to EC 9.7820(3) from R-1 Low- November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E ATTACHMENT B Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay to R-1 Low-Density Residential shall become effective in accordance with State law. The foregoing Resolution adopted the ____day of November, 2019. ______________________________________ City Recorder November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E Ex h i b i t A i LA N D AN N E X A T I O N FO R TA X LO T 17 - 0 4 - 1 4 - 4 2 - 6 5 0 0 NW 1 / 4 OF SW 1 / 4 SE C T I O N 14 , T1 7 S , R4 W , f. M . LA N E CO U N T Y , OR E G O N a* H RU B Y DI V I S I O N RU B Y 2 SK I P P E R | I^ Y f IV Y |j - | l Ul U i E S LN _ > 2 £ N^ T H ® EU G E N E HI G H SC H O O L g | SI L V E R w ~ a GR E G J J 1 SU N V l f W _ AR M S T R O N G BU S H N E L L ° LN AN CO C K / d h. I a 1 g KO U R T 7- ^ m , jB O Y C E £ £ £ £ | ma x w e l l H ii L E io n r " OW Q S S Q HA M I L T O N I AV E It £ 2 MA X W E L L I s | s § 24 4 4 i RA S E ft \E . HO W , \* ^ R M / YN A R 1 AT TO N AR D T HO W A R D I AV E . zT * 'i l l KE L L Y a SC H C O L , ® I IE al HA R V E Y OW A R D IC H O O L at ™ gf EM E V LO PA f i K 4? OC O M I BA R R E T T AN TU C K E T 8 % Ij l l zl KE L L Y ME R R Y I CO M M U N I T Y ^ BU I L D I N G w LI N D N E R E AU D E L Au ^ s r g 3 sj § RO S E T T A be n j a m i n SI T E 1R G . I <j LN . a I rL L I " CO R N W A L L y n ~~ r x o HO R N ro j y tu r n I s LO T 4 cC VI C I N T Y MA P v- cG xA o ° > cG v NO SC A L E aR u O 0 It * % % i l l i i i i i i i i i ry O _ O _ O _ O u/ o _ o o _ o ; o o „o o 7 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o D o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o LU o o 5 D O Q_ n a a a a a d o a j a a S8 9 ° 4 4 ' 0 0 " E X 2 1- 7 20 2 . 6 0 a:O x g <X LO T 6 cG V XA LE G E N D 3= LU LO T 7 }o o o° o ° o V O O o 3 O O O o o c o o CI T Y LI M I T S o o o o o o p p D o o o o o c o o o o o o o o o D o o o o o c o o o o o o o tn u- o - Q - Q - Q - o - r AN N E X A T I O N CH A N G E AR E A 0. 8 8 AC R E S 4/ TA X LO T 04 - 1 4 - 4 2 LA N D TO BE AN N E X E D LO T 8 17 65 0 0 o cG o o V * LO lO ° ' Ro i s t e r e d PR O F E S S I O N A LA N D SU R V E Y e LO T 9 o —*L OR E Q O N JU L Y 15 , 20 0 3 KE N T BA K E R #5 9 8 8 5 EX . HO U S E > LO T 10 SC A L E : 1" = 60 ' V RE N E W S : 12 - 3 1 - 2 0 ) 9 ,2 0 2 . 6 0 ' XN 8 9 ° 4 4 ' 0 0 " W A HO W A R D AV E . Q T7 °£ _ o £ o 9 o 9 o TT o _ o o _ o o o o D o o o o o o o o o _o -_ o rx EX H I B I T A No v e m b e r 2 5 , 2 0 1 9 , M e e t i n g - I t e m 2 E Mfhbm!Eftdsjqujpo;! Cfhjoojoh!bu!b!qpjou!592/9!gffu!Opsui!pg!uif!Tpvuixftu!dpsofs!pg!Epobujpo!Mboe!Dmbjn!Op/!59-! Upxotijq!28!Tpvui-!Sbohf!5!Xftu!pg!uif!Xjmmbnfuuf!Nfsjejbo<!uifodf!Tpvui!2627/6!gffu!up!uif! Qpjou!pg!Cfhjoojoh<! 1Uifodf!Tpvui!9:55 Fbtu!313/7!gffu<! Uifodf!Tpvui!516/1!gffu<! 1Uifodf!Opsui!9:55 Xftu!313/7!gffu<! Uifodf!Opsui!516/1!gffu!up!uif!Qpjou!pg!Cfhjoojoh-!jo!Mbof!Dpvouz-!Psfhpo/! EXHIBIT B November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E Planning Director’s Findings and Recommendation Annexation Request for Jake Burnham (City File: A 19-8) Application Submitted: September 19, 2019 Applicant: Jake Burnham Property Included in Annexation Request: Tax Lot 6500 of Assessor’s Map 17-04-14-42 Zoning: R-1 Low-Density Residential with /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay Location: 625 Howard Avenue, west of River Road on south side of Howard Avenue Representative: Anthony Favreau, The Favreau Group Lead City Staff: Rodney Bohner, City of Eugene Planning Division, 541-682-5437 EVALULATION: Based on the information provided by the applicant, the City has determined that this request complies with Eugene Code (EC) Section 9.7805 Annexation - Applicability. As such, it is subject to review and approval in accordance with the requirements, application criteria and procedures of EC 9.7800 through 9.7835. The applicable approval criteria are presented below in bold typeface with findings and conclusions following each. EC 9.7825(1) The land proposed to be annexed is within the city’s urban growth boundary and is: (a) Contiguous to the city limits; or (b) Separated from the city only by a public right of way or a stream, bay, lake or other body of water. Complies Findings: The subject tax lot is partially located within the City’s urban growth boundary (UGB). The annexation only includes the area of the subject tax lot within the UGB. The area of annexation is contiguous to the City limits along its north property boundary, consistent with subsection (1). YES NO EC 9.7825(2) The proposed annexation is consistent with applicable policies in the Metro Plan and in any applicable refinement plans. Complies Findings: Several policies from the Metro Plan provide support for this annexation by encouraging compact urban growth to achieve efficient use of land and urban service provisions within the UGB, including the following policies from the Growth Management section (in italic text): Policy 8. Land within the UGB may be converted from urbanizable to urban only through annexation to a city when it is found that: a.A minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided to the area in an orderly and efficient manner. b.There will be a logical area and time within which to deliver urban services and facilities. Conversion of urbanizable land to urban shall also be consistent with the Metro Plan. (page II-C-4) Policy 10. Annexation to a city through normal processes shall continue to be the highest priority. (page II-C-5). YES NO EXHIBIT C November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E Policy 15. Ultimately, land within the UGB shall be annexed to a city and provided with the required minimum level of urban facilities and services. While the time frame for annexation may vary, annexation should occur as land transitions from urbanizable to urban. (page II-C-5) The following policy from the Residential Element of the Metro Plan is also applicable: Policy A.2 Residentially designated land within the UGB should be zoned consistent with the Metro Plan, and applicable plans and policies; however, existing agricultural zoning may be continued within the area between the city limits and UGB until rezoned for urban uses. The Metro Plan designates the annexation area as appropriate for low-density residential use. The River Road - Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan (RR/SC UFP) is the adopted refinement plan for the subject properties and designates the area for low- density residential use. Consistent with the Metro Plan and RR/SC UFP designation, the property is currently zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential with a /UL Urbanizable Land Overlay. The /UL overlay will be automatically removed from the zoning following annexation approval. With regard to applicable policies of the RR/SC UFP, the subject property is not within a defined subarea. Further, none of the general “Residential Land Use Policies” at Section 2.2 appear to be directly applicable to the subject request. The “Public Facilities and Services Element” policies of the RR/SC UFP are directed at local government; however, the premise of these policies (regarding the provision of urban services) is the assumption that the properties within the UGB will be annexed. As previously discussed in this subsection, and further detailed under subsection (3) below, the proposed annexation is consistent with Metro Plan growth management policies and can be served by the minimum level of key urban services. The annexation procedures beginning at EC 9.7800 are consistent with State law and therefore, as found throughout this report, the annexation is consistent with State law. Therefore, based on the findings above, the proposal is consistent with the applicable policies of the Metro Plan and applicable refinement plan. EC 9.7825(3) The proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services, as defined in the Metro Plan, can be provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner. Complies Findings: Consistent with this criterion, the proposed annexation will result in a boundary in which the minimum level of key urban facilities and services can be provided in an orderly, efficient, and timely manner as detailed below: YES NO November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E Wastewater Public wastewater is available within the right-of-way of Howard Avenue, via 15-inch PVC pipe. An available 6-inch deep connection and 6-inch tee were constructed and plugged during construction of the adjacent sewer lines. The existing structure is connected to the public system. All liens and assessments are paid. Stormwater The nearest public system is a storm drain on the corner of Howard Avenue and Lake Drive—a Lane County maintained system. Soil data indicates poor infiltration rates in the area. The applicant has indicated that stormwater will be treated and retained on- site before directing overflow to the storm drain. A Lane County Public Works facilities permit will be required at time of development approving the discharge and on-site facilities will be evaluated for compliance with the Stormwater Management Manual. All treatment and destination must be approved prior to development. Transportation The subject property is on Howard Avenue, a neighborhood collector under Lane County jurisdiction and fully surrounded by a network of improved and unimproved local streets. Howard Avenue is paved including a bike lane, but is lacking sidewalk, curb and gutter and street trees. It connects to the east with River Road and to the west with Park Avenue. Both streets lead to major highways and major commercial and employment areas. Compliance with access connection standards will be required at the time of future development or land division. Solid Waste Collection service is provided by private firms. Regional disposal sites and the Short Mountain Landfill are operated by Lane County. Water and Electric EWEB Water staff state no objection to the annexation. EWEB Electric staff also state no objection to the annexation. Water and electric services can be extended to the subject property in accordance with EWEB policies and procedures. Public Safety Police protection can be extended to this site upon annexation consistent with service provision through the City. Fire protection will be provided by Eugene Springfield Fire. Emergency medical services are currently provided on a regional basis by the cities of Eugene and Springfield and will continue in the same manner upon annexation. Parks and Recreation Parks and recreation programs are provided on a City-wide basis. The inclusion of the subject property in the City is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the minimum level of this key urban service is met. Planning and Development Services Planning and building permit services are provided for all properties located within the urban growth boundary by the City of Eugene. The Eugene Code, Chapter 9, will provide November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E the required land use controls for future development of the subject property upon annexation. Communications A variety of telecommunications providers offer communications services throughout the Eugene/Springfield area. Public Schools The subject property is within Eugene School District 4J and is within the district boundary of Howard Elementary School, Kelly Middle School, and North Eugene High School. As access to schools is evaluated on a district-wide basis, the property’s location within the school district is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the minimum level of this key urban service is met. CONCLUSION: Based on the above findings, information submitted to date, and the criteria set forth in EC 9.7825, the proposed annexation is consistent with the applicable approval criteria. A map and legal description showing the area subject to annexation are included in the application file for reference. The effective date is set in accordance with State law. November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E •.. w Planning _,BAUER LOUIS CA 19-817-04-14-42-04701 111 BAUER LN EUGENE, OR 97404 �lv���o/�, ���� �P-��J,_f-f-��, �\ A-� ·c see r4r,ma.,;o� "#-I �h" :i.@ -2!S) � �-J . #3 -.J-�, - - /\/OW -- Fo1-7h(' Se>-C'rJ/7-Y � �('?// Joe 1 �2 c?F �(? ,A/t71?�6e11,.hct()I..{ ::;: ;<Jh:7/;'t::TS-e' rh�-r-m r; 13 vrnh�rY} c:, FrP J--r-o /-/t:Jn?("owr;r­ A 'tJ-/3 v-/2� o,7Y--/c:1 � 7rJ pn/a.-r-9'f' ;,-h<J 1 � / r� ,M<:7',.. 'l-1<'s b y � v ,-. c,/20--s· 1 n � r' a--,_,,_. s o F- , a-1--e � 3 Ma.,,,,t--;J:::.. 1,/4,' ;,-.� .,_ fO I;; � n ,1(1 It:> y-m�p,.... ,;___ -(:vi? d_ J-, 4-e r.,v, IS"� 1-1� l?7 rd� 'l (' I--. "c ,, 0 0 V le)..__ ,6 (-' (? r pt11--(!e;,{ t:> "'-9' /v (7 � � 0-h�//l, Cf' 7-d h a K'LJH/-' V .,_ c,, a.$(>. }----('4-,, 7 -.::;i:::-n o r/2 <?r-t,c.,,< " y,.J5 - an n PV '7h e S,; ,rt-h ",. r, Ha/F an ,,{ /-(> ·-�(' / / rh t? /I /t>,__.,,1, <' ,-.;-, /21«1;::::. ATTACHMENT C November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E ATTACHMENT D November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E Mfhbm!Eftdsjqujpo;! Cfhjoojoh!bu!b!qpjou!592/9!gffu!Opsui!pg!uif!Tpvuixftu!dpsofs!pg!Epobujpo!Mboe!Dmbjn!Op/!59-! Upxotijq!28!Tpvui-!Sbohf!5!Xftu!pg!uif!Xjmmbnfuuf!Nfsjejbo<!uifodf!Tpvui!2627/6!gffu!up!uif! Qpjou!pg!Cfhjoojoh<! 1Uifodf!Tpvui!9:55 Fbtu!313/7!gffu<! Uifodf!Tpvui!516/1!gffu<! 1Uifodf!Opsui!9:55 Xftu!313/7!gffu<! Uifodf!Opsui!516/1!gffu!up!uif!Qpjou!pg!Cfhjoojoh-!jo!Mbof!Dpvouz-!Psfhpo/! November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting - Item 2E November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 3 EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Action: An Ordinance Concerning Restrictions on the Use of Polystyrene Containers and Adding Sections 6.874, 6.876, and 6.878 to the Eugene Code, 1971. Meeting Date: November 25, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 3 Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Anna Reid www.eugene‐or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5463 ISSUE STATEMENT Polystyrene carryout items are a common form of single-use plastic and a source of litter. They are manufactured from non-renewable fossil fuels and synthetic chemicals and are very difficult to recycle. These containers are not biodegradable, so once they are in landfills or the natural environment, they persists for hundreds of years. They may break into small pieces, which creates hazards for wildlife and challenges for clean-up efforts. This ordinance is in response to City Council’s directive to draft an ordinance banning polystyrene carryout containers. BACKGROUND Polystyrene carryout items have been banned in various regions all over the globe, and in Oregon cities such as Ashland, Florence, Medford, Milwaukie, Portland and Silverton due to their negative impacts on the environment. During the 2019 Oregon legislative regular session, House Bill 2883, which would have enacted a statewide polystyrene container ban, failed in the Senate. The local polystyrene ordinance being proposed is modeled primarily after the introduced version of HB 2883; however, there are three main differences in the proposed ordinance: 1. The term and definition of the businesses affected is “retail food and beverage establishment,” which is the same one that is used in the local single-use items ordinance. This is aimed to create consistency and clarity for Eugene businesses and members of the public. 2. City departments and retail food and beverage establishments performing work under a City contract are prohibited from using polystyrene containers for prepared food. Proposed language also prohibits the use of polystyrene containers at City facilities, City sponsored events and City permitted events. These regulations are similar to those that were in the City’s 2012 plastic bag ordinance and demonstrates the City’s commitment to modeling the desired behavior. By prohibiting the distribution of polystyrene containers at City sponsored and permitted events, the language incorporates one of the basic elements within the sustainable events framework. For example, the use of polystyrene containers would be prohibited at a 5K race that is sponsored by the City and a City permitted block party would prohibit the distribution of prepared food and beverages in polystyrene containers. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 3 3. The proposed local ordinance allows retail food and beverage establishments to apply for up to a one-year exemption if the ordinance creates an undue hardship. The proposed ordinance aligns with City Council’s sustainable development goal by meeting the community’s present environmental, economic, and social needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. A triple bottom line lens was used to develop the proposed ordinance. The environmental benefits of banning polystyrene containers include mitigating litter, preventing waste, and reducing the impacts associated with the manufacturing and disposal of these items. The proposed ordinance presents negligible financial impacts to retail food and beverage establishments and there are no expected social impacts as there is no consumer fee or deposit. PREVIOUS COUNCIL DIRECTION March 11, 2019 Work Session At the March 11, 2019, work session, staff provided updates regarding the above-referenced state legislative process and provided recommendations to City Council. City Council directed the Intergovernmental Relations Manager to lobby in support of HB 2883, directed staff to draft an ordinance banning polystyrene carryout containers based on the standards within HB 2883 and to wait until House Bill 2883 came to fruition before scheduling a public hearing. A public hearing on this ordinance was held on November 18, 2019. COUNCIL OPTIONS Council may choose to: 1. Adopt the ordinance as proposed. 2. Adopt the ordinance with modifications as determined by the City Council. 3. Take no action on the ordinance at this time. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends Option 1: Adopt the ordinance as proposed. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt An Ordinance Concerning Restrictions on the Use of Polystyrene Containers and Adding Sections 6.874, 6.876, and 6.878 to the Eugene Code, 1971. ATTACHMENTS A. Proposed Ordinance B. House Bill 2883 as introduced FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Anna Reid Telephone: 541-682-5463 Staff E-Mail: areid@eugene-or.gov Ordinance -- Page 1 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING RESTRICTIONS ON THE USE OF POLYSTYRENE CONTAINERS AND ADDING SECTIONS 6.874, 6.876, AND 6.878 TO THE EUGENE CODE, 1971. THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 6.874, 6.876, and 6.878 of the Eugene Code, 1971, are added to provide as follows: 6.874 Polystyrene Container Use - Definitions. For purposes of sections 6.874 to 6.878 of this code, the following words and phrases mean: City sponsored event. Any event organized or sponsored by the city or any department of the city. Polystyrene container. A container that is made, in whole or in part, of a thermoplastic polymer, including, but not limited to, a solid polystyrene plastic or a polystyrene plastic foam, made for the purpose of and ordinarily used once for the purpose of serving, containing, preserving or consuming prepared food before being discarded. Types of polystyrene containers include, but are not limited to cups, bowls, plates, trays, and clamshell containers. Polystyrene containers do not include: (a)A cooler or other container that is made of a polystyrene foam, that is intended for more than one use and that is enclosed by a solid plastic shell; (b)A tray or container used solely to store, ship or otherwise transport an ingredient or food product that is not prepared food; or (c)Polystyrene plastic material that is used solely for packing or protecting items other than prepared food during storage, shipping or other transportation. Prepared food. Food or a beverage that a retail food and beverage establishment prepares on their premises or that another person prepares and provides to the retail food and beverage establishment for sale to the public and that a person may consume immediately or without the need for additional preparation. Prepared food does not include raw meat, fish, or eggs that have not been prepared for immediate consumption. Retail food and beverage establishment. Full service restaurants, limited service restaurants, fast food restaurants, food carts, bars, coffee and tea shops, grocery stores, convenience stores, hotels and motels, caterers, and food service contractors. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 3 ATTACHMENT A Ordinance -- Page 2 of 2 Undue hardship. Circumstances or situations unique to the retail food and beverage establishment, such that there are no reasonable alternatives to polystyrene containers. 6.876 Polystyrene Container Use – Regulations. Except as exempted in section 6.878 of this code: (a)Retail food and beverage establishments shall not use, provide, or make polystyrene containers available to members of the public in the course of selling, offering for sale, serving, or dispensing prepared food to members of the public. (b)No person shall sell, offer for sale, serve or dispense prepared food in a polystyrene container at any city facility, city sponsored event, or city permitted event. (c)City departments may not purchase, acquire, or use polystyrene containers for prepared food. (d)Retail food and beverage establishments under contract with the city may not use polystyrene containers for prepared food in city facilities and while performing under a city contract. 6.878 Polystyrene Container Use - Exemptions. Notwithstanding section 6.876 this code, the city manager or designee may exempt a retail food and beverage establishment from the requirements set forth in section 6.876 of this code for a period of not more than one year upon the retail food and beverage establishment showing, in writing, that this code would create an undue hardship or practical difficulty not generally applicable to other persons in similar circumstances. Requests for exemptions will not be accepted after December 31, 2020. The decision to grant or deny an exemption shall be in writing, and the city manager’s or designee’s decision shall be final. Section 2. The City Recorder, at the request of, or with the consent of the City Attorney, is authorized to administratively 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 November, 2019 _____ day of November, 2019 ____________________________ _____________________________ City Recorder Mayor November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 80th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2019 Regular Session House Bill 2883 Sponsored by Representatives SCHOUTEN, SOLLMAN, MCLAIN; Representatives GOMBERG, GORSEK, HOLVEY, KENY-GUYER, MITCHELL, NERON, NOSSE, POWER, PRUSAK, WILDE, Senators BURDICK, DEMBROW, FAGAN, HASS, MANNING JR, MONNES ANDERSON, RILEY, ROBLAN, STEINER HAYWARD SUMMARY The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor’s brief statement of the essential features of the measure as introduced. Prohibits food vendor from using polystyrene container in selling, offering for sale, serving or dispensing prepared food to public. Allows Department of Environmental Quality to impose civil penalty of not more than $250 per day. Becomes operative January 1, 2020. Takes effect on 91st day following adjournment sine die. A BILL FOR AN ACT Relating to a prohibition on using polystyrene containers for prepared food; and prescribing an ef- fective date. Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon: SECTION 1.(1) As used in this section: (a) “Food vendor” means a business, organization or person that, as a principal or regu- lar activity, sells prepared food or offers prepared food for sale to the public, including, but not limited to, a store, shop or other sales outlet, a restaurant, a grocery store, a super- market, a delicatessen or a cart, truck or other vehicle from which the business, organiza- tion or other person sells prepared food or offers prepared food for sale. (b)(A) “Polystyrene container” means a cup or cup lid, bowl, plate or other container that is: (i) Made of a thermoplastic polymer, including, but not limited to, a solid polystyrene plastic or a polystyrene plastic foam; (ii) Made for the purpose of serving, containing, preserving or consuming prepared food; and (iii) Ordinarily used once for the purpose described in sub-subparagraph (ii) of this sub- paragraph before being discarded. (B) “Polystyrene container” does not include: (i) A cooler or other container that is made of a polystyrene foam, that is intended for more than one use and that is enclosed by a solid plastic shell; (ii) A tray or container used solely to store, ship or otherwise transport an ingredient or food product that is not prepared food; or (iii)Polystyrene plastic material that is used solely for packing or protecting other items during storage, shipping or other transportation. (c)(A) “Prepared food” means food or a beverage that: (i) A food vendor prepares on the food vendor’s premises or that another person prepares and provides to the food vendor for sale to the public; and NOTE:Matter in boldfaced type in an amended section is new; matter [italic and bracketed] is existing law to be omitted. New sections are in boldfaced type. LC 998 November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 3 ATTACHMENT B HB 2883 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 (ii) A person may consume immediately or without the need for further or additional preparation. (B) “Prepared food” does not include raw meat, fish or eggs that have not been prepared for immediate consumption. (2) A food vendor may not use a polystyrene container in selling, offering for sale, serving or dispensing prepared food to a member of the public. SECTION 2.(1) The Department of Environmental Quality may impose a civil penalty on a food vendor for a violation of section 1 of this 2019 Act. Each day a violation occurs con- stitutes a separate violation. (2) A civil penalty imposed under this section may not exceed $250 per day. (3) Civil penalties described in this section shall be imposed in the manner provided in ORS 183.745. (4) All penalties recovered under this section shall be paid into the State Treasury and credited to the General Fund and are available for general governmental expenses. SECTION 3.(1) Section 1 of this 2019 Act becomes operative on January 1, 2020. (2) The Director of the Department of Environmental Quality may adopt rules and take any other action before the operative date specified in subsection (1) of this section that is necessary to enable the director, on and after the operative date specified in subsection (1) of this section, to exercise all of the duties, functions and powers conferred on the director by section 1 of this 2019 Act. SECTION 4.This 2019 Act takes effect on the 91st day after the date on which the 2019 regular session of the Eightieth Legislative Assembly adjourns sine die. [2]November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 3 November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 EUGENE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Action: An Ordinance Concerning Single-Use Checkout Bags, Amending Sections 6.850 and 6.855 of the Eugene Code, 1971, and Repealing Sections 6.860 and 6.865 of that Code. Meeting Date: November 25, 2019 Agenda Item Number: 4 Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Anna Reid www.eugene‐or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 541-682-5463 ISSUE STATEMENT Over the past two decades, single-use plastic bags have been banned and regulated in various regions all over the globe due to their negative impacts on the environment. This ordinance is in response to Oregon Legislature adopting House Bill 2509, which regulates single-use checkout bags statewide and requires local governments to adopt identical definitions, requirements and restrictions. BACKGROUND In 2012, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 20498, which became effective in May 2013, encouraging the use of reusable bags, banning single-use plastic carryout bags, and requiring businesses to charge a five-cent fee for each recyclable carryout paper bag. Exemptions in the 2012 ordinance allowed food providers to distribute single-use plastic bags to customers when providing hot prepared take-out foods and required retail establishments to provide a reusable bag or a recyclable paper bag at no cost to customers using Women, Infants and Children Program vouchers. In June of this year, Oregon Legislature adopted House Bill 2509. In addition to prohibiting retail establishments from providing single-use bags made of plastic, the act prohibits the distribution of single-use bags made of non-recycled paper or any other material. The act does not allow an exemption for restaurants. The act also allows retail establishments to provide recycled paper checkout bags or reusable plastic checkout bags at no cost to customers using WIC vouchers and those using a state-issued electronic benefits transfer card. The act allows local governments the option to require businesses to charge more than a five-cent fee for each recycled paper or reusable plastic checkout bag and to impose a penalty other than the one established in the act, which is a Class D violation subject to a maximum fine of $250. This law goes into effect on January 1, 2020. The proposed ordinance, which aligns with the State’s requirements by further restricting the use of single-use plastic bags also supports City Council’s sustainable development goal by meeting the community’s present environmental, economic and social needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 A triple bottom line lens was used to develop the proposed ordinance. Where House Bill 2509 allows flexibility for local governments in setting fees higher than five cents for each reusable checkout bag provided to customers, the proposed ordinance keeps the fee for customers at the minimum-allowed five-cent fee for each recycled paper or reusable plastic checkout bag. The environmental benefits of banning single-use checkout bags include mitigating litter, preventing waste, and reducing the impacts associated with manufacturing these items. A public hearing on this ordinance was held on November 18, 2019. If City Council votes to adopt the ordinance, it will take effect 31 days later. PREVIOUS COUNCIL DIRECTION October 22, 2012, Meeting On October 22, 2019, City Council adopted Ordinance No. 20498 and it went into effect on May 1, 2013. March 11, 2019, Work Session At the March 11, 2019, work session, staff provided updates regarding the above-referenced State legislative process and provided recommendations to City Council. City Council directed the Intergovernmental Relations Manager to support the inclusion of restaurants into HB 2509, support the removal of the pre-emption of locally adopted ordinances, and support maintaining a five-cent bag fee. Council also directed staff to draft amendments to the current bag ban to include banning single use carryout bags for restaurants and to wait until House Bill 2509 came to fruition before scheduling a public hearing. COUNCIL OPTIONS Council may choose to: 1. Adopt the ordinance as proposed. 2. Take no action on the ordinance at this time. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends Option 1: Adopt the ordinance as proposed. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to adopt An Ordinance Concerning Single-Use Checkout Bags, Amending Sections 6.850 and 6.855 of the Eugene Code, 1971, and Repealing Sections 6.860 and 6.865 of that Code. ATTACHMENTS A. Proposed Ordinance B. House Bill 2509 FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Anna Reid Telephone: 541-682-5463 Staff E-Mail: areid@eugene-or.gov Ordinance - Page 1 of 6 ORDINANCE NO. ______ AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING SINGLE-USE CHECKOUT BAGS, AMENDING SECTIONS 6.850 AND 6.855 OF THE EUGENE CODE, 1971, AND REPEALING SECTIONS 6.860 AND 6.865 OF THAT CODE. The City Council of the City of Eugene finds as follows: A.In 2013, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 20498, regulating plastic bag use in the City of Eugene, banning single-use plastic carryout bags, and requiring a five-cent fee for each recyclable carryout paper bag. B.In 2019, the Oregon Legislature adopted House Bill 2509 which implemented statewide regulation of single-use checkout bags and required local governments to adopt regulations identical to the definitions, requirements, and restrictions in House Bill 2509 (Chapter 434, Oregon Laws 2019). C.The City Council makes the following amendments to Sections 6.850 and 6.855 of the Eugene Code, 1971, and repeals Sections 6.860 and 6.865 of that Code to bring the Code into conformance with the requirements of HB 2509. THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 6.850 and 6.855 of the Eugene Code, 1971, are amended to provide as follows: 6.850 [Plastic Bag Use] Single-Use Checkout Bag - Definitions. For purposes of sections 6.850 to 6.865 of this code, the following words and phrases mean: [ASTM standard. The American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)'s International D-6400. Carryout bag. Any bag that is provided by a retail establishment at the point of sale to a customer for use to transport or carry away purchases, such as merchandise, goods or food, from the retail establishment. "Carryout bag" does not include: (a)Bags used by consumers inside retail establishments to: November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 ATTACHMENT A Ordinance - Page 2 of 6 1. Package bulk items, such as fruit, vegetables, nuts, grains, candy or small hardware items; 2. Contain or wrap frozen foods, meat, fish, whether packaged or not; 3. Contain or wrap flowers, potted plants, or other items where dampness may be a problem; 4. Contain unwrapped prepared foods or bakery goods; or 5. Pharmacy prescription bags; (b) Laundry-dry cleaning bags or bags sold in packages containing multiple bags intended for use as garbage waste, pet waste, or yard waste bags; (c) Product bags. City sponsored event. Any event organized or sponsored by the city or any department of the city. Customer. Any person obtaining goods from a retail establishment or from a vendor. Food provider. Any person in the city that provides prepared food for public consumption on or off its premises and includes, without limitation, any retail establishment, shop, sales outlet, restaurant, grocery store, delicatessen, or catering truck or vehicle. Grocery store. Any retail establishment that sells groceries, fresh, packaged, canned, dry, prepared or frozen food or beverage products and similar items and includes supermarkets, convenience stores, and gasoline stations. Pharmacy. A retail use where the profession of pharmacy by a pharmacist licensed by the state of Oregon's Board of Pharmacy is practiced and where prescription medications are offered for sale. Product bag. Any bag provided to a customer for use within a retail establishment to assist in the collection or transport of products to the point of sale within the retail establishment. A product bag is not a carryout bag. Recyclable paper bag. A paper bag that meets all of the following requirements: (a) Is 100% recyclable and contains a minimum of 40% recycled content; (b) Is capable of composting consistent with the timeline and specifications of the ASTM Standard as defined in this section. Retail establishment. Any store or vendor located within or doing business within the geographical limits of the city that sells or offers for sale goods at retail. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 Ordinance - Page 3 of 6 Reusable bag. A bag made of cloth or other material with handles that is specifically designed and manufactured for long term multiple reuse and meets all of the following requirements: (a) If cloth, is machine washable; or (b) If plastic, has a minimum plastic thickness of 4.0 mils. Vendor. Any retail establishment, shop, restaurant, sales outlet or other commercial establishment located within or doing business within the geographical limits of the city, which provides perishable or nonperishable goods for sale to the public. Single-use plastic carryout bag. Any plastic carryout bag made available by a retail establishment to a customer at the point of sale. It does not include reusable bags, recyclable paper bags, or product bags. Undue hardship. Circumstances or situations unique to the particular retail establishment such that there are no reasonable alternatives to single-use plastic carryout bags or a recyclable paper bag pass-through cannot be collected.] Garment bag. Means a large bag that incorporates a hanger on which garments may be hung to prevent wrinkling during travel or storage. Recycled paper checkout bag. Means a paper bag that contains at least 40 percent post-consumer recycled fiber. Restaurant. Means an establishment where the primary business is the preparation of food or drink: (a) For consumption by the public; (b) In a form or quantity that is consumable then and there, whether or not it is consumed within the confines of the place where prepared; or (c) In consumable form for consumption outside the place where prepared. Retail establishment. Means a store that sells or offers for sale goods at retail and that is not a restaurant. Reusable fabric checkout bag. Means a bag with handles that is specifically designed and manufactured for multiple reuse and is made of cloth or other machine-washable fabric. Reusable plastic checkout bag. Means a bag with handles that is specifically designed and manufactured for multiple reuse and is made of durable plastic that is at least four mils thick. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 Ordinance - Page 4 of 6 Single-use checkout bag. Means a bag made of paper, plastic or any other material that is provided by a retail establishment to a customer at the time of checkout, and that is not a recycled paper checkout bag, a reusable fabric checkout bag or a reusable plastic checkout bag. Single-use checkout bag. Does not mean: (a)A bag that is provided by a retail establishment to a customer at a time other than the time of checkout, including but not limited to bags provided to: 1.Package bulk items such as fruit, vegetables, nuts, grains, greeting cards or small hardware items, including nails, bolts or screws; 2.Contain or wrap frozen food, meat, fish, flowers, a potted plant or another item for the purpose of addressing dampness or sanitation; 3.Contain unwrapped prepared food or a bakery good; or 4.Contain a prescription drug; (b)A newspaper bag, door hanger bag, garment bag, laundry bag or dry cleaning bag; or (c)A bag sold in a package containing multiple bags for uses such as food storage, garbage containment or pet waste collection. 6.855 [Plastic Bag Use] Single-Use Checkout Bag – Regulations and Exemptions. [Except as exempted in section 6.865 of this code: (a)No retail establishment shall provide or make available to a customer a single-use plastic carryout bag; (b)No person shall distribute a single-use plastic carryout bag at any city facility, city managed concession, city sponsored event, or city permitted event.] (1)Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, a retail establishment may not provide: (a) Single-use checkout bags to customers. (b)Recycled paper checkout bags, reusable fabric checkout bags or reusable plastic checkout bags to customers unless the retail establishment charges not less than five cents for each recycled paper checkout bag, reusable fabric checkout bag or reusable plastic checkout bag. (2)A retail establishment may provide: (a)Reusable fabric checkout bags at no cost to customers as a promotion on 12 or fewer days in a calendar year. (b) Recycled paper checkout bags or reusable plastic checkout bags at no cost to customers who: 1.Use a voucher issued under the Women, Infants and Children Program established under ORS 413.500. 2.Use an electronic benefits transfer card issued by the Department of Human Services. November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 Ordinance - Page 5 of 6 (3)Except as provided in subsection (4) of this section, a restaurant may not provide: (a) Single-use checkout bags to customers. (b)Reusable plastic checkout bags to customers unless the restaurant charges not less than five cents for each reusable plastic checkout bag. (4)A restaurant may provide: (a)Recycled paper checkout bags at no cost to customers. (b)Reusable plastic checkout bags at no cost to customers who use an electronic benefits transfer card issued by the Department of Human Services. Section 2. Sections 6.860 and 6.865 of the Eugene Code, 1971, are repealed. [6.860 Plastic Bag Use - Cost Pass-Through. When a retail establishment makes a recyclable paper bag available to a customer at the point of sale pursuant to section 6.865(b) of this code, the retail establishment shall: (a)Charge the customer a reasonable pass-through cost of not less than 5 cents per recyclable paper bag provided to the customer; and (b)Indicate on the customer's transaction receipts the total amount of the recyclable paper bag pass-through charge. 6.865 Plastic Bag Use - Exemptions. Notwithstanding sections 6.855 and 6.860 of this code: (a)Single-use plastic carryout bags may be distributed to customers by food providers for the purpose of safeguarding public health and safety during the transportation of hot prepared take-out foods and prepared liquids intended for consumption away from the food provider's premises. (b)Retail establishments may distribute product bags and make reusable bags available to customers whether through sale or otherwise. (c)A retail establishment shall provide a reusable bag or a recyclable paper bag at no cost at the point of sale upon the request of a customer who uses a voucher issued under the Women, Infants and Children Program established in the Oregon Health Authority under ORS 413.500. (d)Vendors at retail fairs such as a farmers' market or holiday fair are not subject to indicating on the customer's transaction receipt the total amount of the recyclable paper bag pass through charge required in section 6.860(b) of this code. (e)The city manager or the designee may exempt a retail establishment from the requirement set forth in sections 6.855-6.860 of this code for a period of not more than one year upon the retail establishment showing, in writing, that this code would create an undue hardship or practical difficulty not generally applicable to other persons in similar circumstances. The decision to grant or deny an exemption shall be in writing, and the city manager’s or designee’s decision shall be final.] November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 Ordinance - Page 6 of 6 Section 3. The City Recorder, at the request of, or with the consent of the City Attorney, is authorized to administratively 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 November, 2019 day of November, 2019 __________ City Recorder Mayor November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 ATTACHMENT B November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 4 Item 5: Action on A Resolution Calling for a Statewide Addiction Recovery Continuum of Care Resolution -- Page 1 of 2 November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 5 RESOLUTION NO. _______ A RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A STATEWIDE ADDICTION RECOVERY CONTINUUM OF CARE. The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A. Oregon law now defines substance use disorder and alcoholism to be a chronic disease. B. These statutory definitions are designed to improve access to multiple systems of care and a lifetime of support. C. Substance use disorder and alcoholism are treatable conditions, as exemplified by the millions of people who identify as in recovery. D. According to data compiled by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) for 2017, Oregon has the 4th highest rate of substance use disorder rate in the country. E. According to data compiled by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) for 2017, Oregon ranks 50th in access to addiction treatment. F. According to a 2006 EcoNorthwest analysis, untreated substance abuse disorder in Oregon represents economic costs of $5.9 billion annually. G. Two-thirds of Oregonians have a friend or family member who suffers from addiction. H. Five Oregonians die each day in alcohol-related deaths and one to two Oregonians die each day from drug-overdoses. I. More than 2100 people die each year in Oregon from untreated addiction. J. The legislature has tasked the Alcohol and Drug Policy Commission with producing a strategic plan to address alcohol and drug abuse prevention and treatment service delivery in the state of Oregon. K. Oregon will be the first state to measure a “recovery rate,” a metric which can be used to track the success of the Alcohol and Drug Policy Commission’s strategic plan. Resolution -- Page 2 of 2 November 25, 2019, Meeting – Item 5 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. The Eugene City Council supports Governor Brown’s May, 2018 executive order on addiction as a public health crisis. Section 2. The Eugene City Council is closely monitoring the work of the Oregon Alcohol and Drug Policy Commission. Section 3. The Eugene City Council will continue to advocate to state and federal elected leaders to develop and implement a new, comprehensive statewide addiction recovery continuum-of-care, and to provide adequate funding for same. Section 4. This Resolution is effective immediately upon its passage by the City Council. The foregoing Resolution adopted the ____ day of __________________, 2019. ________________________ City Recorder