HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 4948
~~:::a.
COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 4948
A RESOLUTION ANNEXING LAND TO THE CITY OF
EUGENE (SCHOOL DISTRICT 4-J, A 08-1).
PASSED: 7:0
REJECTED:
OPPOSED:
ABSENT: Pryor
RECUSED:
CONSIDERED: October 13, 2008
RESOLUTION NO. 4948
A RESOLUTION ANNEXING LAND TO THE CITY OF EUGENE
(SCHOOL DISTRICT 4-J, A 08-1).
The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that:
A. An annexation application was submitted by School District 4-J on April 2, 2008
in accordance with the provisions of Section 9.7810(2) of the Eugene Code, 1971, ("EC") for
annexation to the City of Eugene of the following described land:
A portion of Assessor's Map 17-03-16-22, Tax Lot 102 located southeast of
North Coburg Road, and more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto
and depicted on the map attached as Exhibit B hereto.
B. The City's Planning Director has submitted a written recommendation, based on
the criteria at EC 9.7825, that the application be approved.
C. On June 13, 2008 a notice containing a description of the application and the land
proposed to be annexed, the Planning Director's recommendation, and the date and time of the
City Council's consideration of the Planning Director's recommendation, to-wit, July 14, 2008,
was mailed to the applicant and owners and occupants of property within 500 feet of the subject
property. The land is not within the boundaries of a City-recognized neighborhood association.
D. After considering the Planning Director's recommendation, the City Council on
July 14, 2008 moved to defer action until the Council held a public hearing on the application.
E. Pursuant to EC 9.7820(2)(d), notice of the public hearing to be held on September
15, 2008 was mailed to the applicant and owners and occupants of property within 500 feet of
the subject property on August 15, 2008; was published in the Register Guard once each week
for two successive weeks prior to the hearing date, to-wit, on August 29, 2008 and September 5,
2008; and was posted in four public places within the City for two successive weeks prior to the
hearing date on August 29, 2008 and September 5, 2008. One of the po stings was located on the
application site. The land is not within the boundaries of a City-recognized neighborhood
association.
F. After considering the Planning Director's recommendation and the testimony
presented at the public hearing, 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 Recommendation
and Findings attached as Exhibit C, which are adopted in support of this Resolution, it is hereby
Resolution - 1
ordered that the land described on the attached Exhibit A and depicted on 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 automatic rezoning of the land pursuant to EC 9.7820(3) shall be
effective upon the date a copy of this Resolution is filed with the Secretary of the State of
Oregon, which date, pursuant to ORS 222.040, shall not be earlier than November 5, 2008.
The foregoing Resolution adopte~ the 13th day of October, 2008.
_~/ \"CUL-. t}01cL-
City Recor}er
'tJo
Resolution - 2
~.
Exhibit A
LEGAL B]iSClUPTlON J'O:R.J\N.NIX4.11QN PURPOSES
(1'ax~&P 17~93-16-22, TaxlLot 10.2). '
SITUATED in LanoCQuty. State of Ol'elOJil ht the NWihwest,!4 of Scotton 16, ToWll8Wp ,17
South, :Range 3 W~ of., Wiltameue Merklaa am'l! deserlW as follows:
BEING a-portion 9f Pareel2 of Lan(ll' PartitiOll Plat Number 2001-P14S6 as plaf:ted and Jfeeord8d.
March 1, 2001 in 1he LaDd PartitlQn Plat R.eGords ofI.ae C0Wlty, State of OresOllt 1110 perimeter
" boun~ 0fwhiclt poI!tiOl1. is more partieularly desmbe4 as ft?ltows: '
, .
,BEGlNN1NG at 1m .,10 point in the eurrOJat city limits. line oftb.e City efButene.as saitfaalIe.
\p0mt lies. at the mtersection .of the sotRhwest 1me of Parcel 1 fJf said Partition with 1h.
tWrih~eFly extendon of that eertaia Do11kwest lime ofPare81 2 that has a bearing and ~.of
80mb 40. 41' 5"f' West 649.34 F.et as shown qn said '''don Plat, VIhich POINT OJ'
. BEGINNING lies South 49Q IS' 52" East 160.09 Feet from the m.olt westerly comer of saiti
Pareell;
'.., THENCE, leavlug said POINT OF BEGINNING 004 afou! the said OmTent eity limits lhle sf
the City of Eupne, the folloWma two-aunibered eourS~8':. (ll alOng said llorih'eastetly Rt81lsUm
and nCi>>thwest line ofParetl2, SOUTH 410 41' 51" WEST '09.34 FBBT amd (2) a1~ng the we~
line of said Parcel:!, SOurH tnG 51' 20" mST 39'6.04 FBJtr to a pomt on t1ie north IH. of the
''Kfmi~-Wbite T~ots't as dtpict~ on :the survey. by 'fRets B. 'W~er '1hat 'was me.~.as
'.CoU:n.t)' Survey File Ntmiber 63'60 in the om{)€) of the C0U1liy Survoyor oltana Colmty, State of
Oregon; THENCE, leaving sai4 eity limits liDs ad alan, last said ~ lime the' followfng, elle
. numbered course: (3)' SO~ 87Q 59'50" BAST 991.57 PlmT to the i:lortkeast comer of said
"KJnney- White Traots" as said comer is common. with. _ an,m poiat in tho general west tine of
. PBl'co12 of Land Partition Plat Number 92..POI88: as platted atld Rcorded Jamlary 14. 1'92 in the
~and P~tion Plat Records qfLarte CeuatY~ State ofOreson; THENCE wong said pnum- west
line of Parcel 2 the follo., one numbered eo..e: (4) SOUTH S9Q 13' 2S"IAST 559.37 FBIT
to'an angle p~int in saidJUie.; THENCE cQntinuing along said genmil west line and along the
.line that was defined in Case.Number 3~7S6 of the Circult Court oftke Sta~e of~egon fur ~
. COUl1~ the followhtg one. nUmheNd course: (5) NO~TII 01G 53' 31" BAST'1107.81 .FEET;
THENCE, leaving said Jme 8B d~fined in Case Nlmlber 80756, along th~ fo11owlng one
~bered course: (6) NOI.m 8~ 13t 0'" WEST SSO.Sf)'FBBT to the Basterly Northeast Comer
'ofihe Charles H. 'Boprt Donation Land' Claim Number 10' in ToWnship 17 South. Range ] West
of.the WmaDlt~tte Merkfmn; THENCE, leaving"said Donation Land Claim comer, dOll! ..the
fOllowing one numbered e6titse: (7) NORm 890 81' 26" WBST 39.12 FEBT to the ~east
.comer &fP~ll of laid Land Partition Plat NUmber 2001-P1.450; and THENCE a1OO:1.0 eU\
south and southwest linf.S of said Parcell tl1e foRo.1 three numbered courses: (8) sotmI. W
58' 34" WEST 325.00 FEET; (') NORTII 19001' 26" WEST210.92 PRET to a point of_pm
'OU1"VfI;ture to the rif,ht; (to) .along .~~d tangent curve to tho rip11 having a racililS center tltat lies
North OOG 58t 34" East 190.00 Fee~ a QUtral anile of398 42~ 34", a IOIlI chord ofNottlt 690 It'
09" West '7.93 F_t, an.J tfistance of 69.31 FBBTto a pomt oftanlent line; ad (11) along said
ttmgtnt lln.e NOR.TH 4tG 18" 52" WEST 24()'~4 FBBT RETURNING to the 'PO]Jff OF
BEGINNING 'and CONTAINING 31.71 Act:es more or less.
;' .
"
JuLY to t.
'RlXA 8m
i-,J €. e~ I~/ ~I
", 'City Council A~enda pag~ 115" '
~
0,
0'
3
~
~
(0"
::s
i'
-0
~
(0
.....
,>
0)
~n"a~at\O~ ~
. "'" \ ~.,\ s \tlet
eneSCi'OO v'
)
-.
\
\
............ Eugene citY t.irl\\\$.
.......... IJrbSo GlQ'N\h aound8"N
~ proposed .Mne)(atlOO f>J63
cau\\on: \\'1\5 ~p is ~aseO 0(\ .
;n\llt8eiSll r.~~' fAl:lfj{j.,
to cl\anGe. and {-of gel\es$
fef6yancs of\'IY.
,....---~
..r--..
~.
t;2
":S'
-.
[}
N
/---::--"
- .
Exhibit C
. Planning Dir~ctor's Recomm~ndatio~ and Findings .
Eugene School District 4J (File'A 08-1) .
c
, i
I
!
682-5488
EVALULATION: '. . "
. Based .on the information provided by the applicant, th~ City has detennined that this req'uest complies with Eugen~
Code (BC) Section 9.7805 Annexation;. Applicability. As such, it is subject to review and approval in accordance with
the requir~rrients, application criteria and procedures ofEC 9.7800 through 9.7835. The applicable approval criteria are
presented below in bold typeface with findings and conclusions following each.
. .
~C ~.7825(1) 'f:be blnd pr~po~e4'!o.~~*Dne~~di~:~itlj]J;l:~he~city~s-:~r~a.~ gfq~hJ~4;n~'ndarY ~n~' is:
. '., ".(a)Colitiguousto.thecitylimits;or. ,..,:::-..,....;. ...".~..>:....... .' ..: ......:. .' '.
. . " " .' .. " . . .. l ...." '. . . ..' '.
. . ....,:'.. ~(~) S.ePt~~~~~'~~~~"~~.~.~~~:~.~.~r.~~..~~~~~jf.~~~t ~fi~~t:.~~.,~~~r~~~::~~~~J~~~~~.o~1ter.::'b~~y.:~~.'. .'.;:'
. . wa er. '. . . ' " '.' '. . ,', .' " . . . . .. '". .'. " '. .." . '.
Com lies '. Findings:' The annexation area is within the City's urban growth boundary,(UGB), and is
[8jYES 0 NO contiguous to the City limits, consistent with subseption (a). As shown on the applicant's map, the
City limits are contiguous with the subject area ofJand along' the eastern, southe~stern ahd~est~m
boundaries of the property. Additionally, the portion of the subject property that prov.ides access
to the site from' Cobur Road is alread annexed.
Et; 9.7825(2) The propose4 annexation is ~oDsjstentw.tb.applic~~le:po1icies in.the.Metr4):P~n and 'in any
a licable refinement lans. . '.' . .' '. .
lies Findings: The proposed annexation area is within the urban growth boundary. Several policies
NO from the Metro Plan generally support thi$ annexation by encouraging compact urban growth to
achhwe efficient use of land and urban service provisions within the UGB, including the
follo'Ying; . : "..
c. Growth Management; Goals,.Findin~ and Policies:
,Policy B.,Land with the UGB may be converte.dfrom '7Il'banizable to urban only through
annexation.to a city when it #found that:
a. A !'2inimum level of key urbanfacilities and services can be provided ~o the area in an
o~derly and effiql.ent manner. .. .' .
b. There will be a logical area and time within which to deliver urban services and facilities.
. Conversion'ofurbanizable land,tD urban shall also be consistent with the Metro Plan.
(page. II-C-4)
Policy J O. Annexation to a city through -normal processes shall continue to be the highest.
priority. (page.II-C-4).
Policy J 6. Ultimaiely. land within the 'UGB shall be annexed to C! city and prOVided with the
required minimum level of urban facilities and servic~. .While ,he til'!'e frame for annexation
mo)1'va1')i, annexation should occur as land traitsitions from urbanizable to urban: (page I/-C-
5) . .'. '.' . . . ' ,. . , ~'" .
Additionally, both the Metro Plan ~nd the applicable refinement pJan, the WilIakenzie Ar~a Plan,
designate the annexation area as appropri.ate for ~ow Density Residential iJs.e. The Metro Plan also
desi . ates the ro e as a Nodal Develo ment Area. In accordance witb EC 9.7820(3 the INn
.Eugene"School District 4J (A 08':')) August 2008, Ptl~e 1
City .COuncil Agenda page'117
, ,
i
Nodal Development Overlay Zone shall be automat~cal1y applied. Ifthe,anne~tion is approvedl
per Be 9.7820(3), the annexation area will be automatically rezoned to R-l/A.OIND, Low Density, (,
Residential and Agricultural with the Nodal Development overlay zone. Additionally, per Be
9.7820(3), the IUL overlay will be automatically removed from the annexation area~ The.
Willakenzie Area Plan also identifies this site as a future school site under the Public Facilities
and, Services Element. However, the identification of this property as a future school is not a
mandatory requirement, nor are there any rermement plan policies that would otherwise requjr~
the site to he developt%l'as a school. This section also includes,the following applicable policy
related to 'Urban Transition and Annexation:
Public Facilities ~:od Services Element, ,
1. The City shall provide forimnexation of urbanizable land in a manner 'Consistent with State
,law OJ well as local annexa~ionand growth management policies. .' ,
,As previously discussed.in this subsection, and :further d~tai1ed under subsection (3) below, $e
proposed annexation is c9nsistent VI~th Metro Plan growth management policies and can be served
by the minimum level of key urban servicest consistent with this refinement plan policy. The
annexation procedures b~ginning at BC 9.7800 are consistent with State law and therefore, as
found throughout this report, th~ annexation is ~onsistent with State hiw.' '
, ,
Therefore, based on the fmdings above, the proposal is consi~tent with the applicable policies of
, the Metro Plan and the ,applicable refinement plan. , " .::
,~C'9~7825(3} "::rhe'Jiiopose~'~~1;1I1eiiit;ion\v~i~i~~sultl~ a b;)~naarr'iil',w~fc~ t~e:..ninimum~level oCkey urban
'., 'faciJ~ties'and s~rvices,',aS'de(in~dJ~:tli~:M~trq Plan, c'an;be'"provided in,a~ orderly, efficient, and
~ 'timeIv'nuinner." ;: ',.' " . , ..' ,'::', :'"" ',:,': :,:.:; ": " I,' _ : i '" ".:, ,',
Complies Findings:, The proposed annexation will r.esult in a boundary in whi~ the minimum level of key
,f8!VES 0 NO urban facilities'and services can be provided i~ an orderly, efficient, and timely, manner as detailed' I
below: (,
;
,Wastew,ater, , ,,' . .
Public :wastewater i~ not readily available to the subject property; ho~ever, as noted by the
applicant, a public wastewater extension is planned, as part of an abutting development to the :west
known as the N.orthern Territory subdiv~sion; The applicant correctly notes that the n~arest public
wastewater system' is several hundred feet from ~he subject property. rhe applicant also rightly ,
acknowledges that the timing of the Vfastewater extension by the Northern ~erritory development
is uncertain to-date, which is primarily due to off-si~e public easements that need to be obtained to
facilitate the proposed exte~sion. Therefore, the applicant has also indicated 'that they would ' '
assume costs associated with a public wastewater extension rather than beingrsolely dependent
upon the Northern Territory d~velopment. With these qualifiers, public wastewater'service can be
pr~vided to the subj~t property. : .' (
,....
,
. Storm water
The applicant notes that stormwater'service would ~e provided by the cu~b and gutter .'
improvements within Coburg Roadt al~ough Public Works staff clarifies that development of the
site wou14 likely require a ,hard-pipe ponnection rather than gutter:flow. Theonly'plped systems
located within Coburg Road are c~lvert crassings. Stonnwat~r pipe extensions to the subject'
prop~rty, however, ar.e planned as p~ of the. westerly NorthenfTerritory subdivision, in the form
of culvert intakes to receiyeexisting shall~w' drainage swales on the subject propertY:
'v' The Cltyts stormwater master plan' ide!1tifies the subject property as being within subNbasin CF-
.042 ofthe'Willakenzie ~asin, which generally drains to the 60::inch-oiameter public stonnwaier:,
,system within County'Farm Road via shallow drainage swales on the subject property and the
Northern Territory ~ite to the;'Yest, through culvert crossings under Coburg Road. As identified in (,',',,
the City's master plan, as w~lI and the drainage report prepared by Higa-:-Burkholder Associates
for the Northern Territory subdivi~lon, there ar~ no deficienci~ in the receiving public stormwater
system! ' " .' . '
\ .
Eugene School D;istrict 4J (A 08- ~ J
August 2008 '
Page 2
, ,
City Council ~genda'page 118
"
'.
,."
\...
In terms of on-site stonnwater management, Public Works staff notes that the soil types in the
vicinity appear to be within the hydrological groups C and 0, which 'are typically not suitable for
infiltration. Further, due to the presence of existing and planned EWEB wells in the area,
underground injection facilities (such as drywells), would not be appropriate stormwater
management for development of the property. Otherwise, in-line (or flow-through) facilities such
as swales and basins would likely be the best option for meeting 'polJution reduction requirements,
which will apply at the time of development.
Transportation . .
Public Works staff state that the subject 'property, has,60 feet of frontage on Coburg Road, an
improved minor arterial street. The 60 feet' of frontage is planned for extension of.a new public
street named Shadow View Drive, per the tentatively-approved Northern Territory subdivision.
This future street area (the 60 feet of width abutting the Northern Territory subdivision) was
previously annexed (LCBC FO 1294, effective 11/20/06) and is rightly excluded from the present
, annexation request.
)
Comments from Lane County Transportation Planning staff indicate that the portion of Coburg
Road abutting this application is under County jurisdiction for maintenanCe. It is functionally .
classified as an Urban Minor Arterial Road in the County's Transportation System Plan. The road
, is it three lane, 49-foot wide road at this location with curbs, gutters, sidewalks and bike lanes on
both sides. The road is maintained by Lane County; however staff confiqns that this road section
is annexed into the City limits.' . ,
,.,.
'. ~'.
Lane County referral comments confirm support for the annexation request and include additional
comments related to future development of the property, which are provided at the end of this
report as informational items for the benefit of the applicant.
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
Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) Water staff state that there is an existing 12-inch
ductile iron water main on the west ,side of Coburg Road and an existing 8-i~ch ductile iron water
main on the east side of Grand Cayman Drive. EWEB Water staff believe that adequate water
serv.ice can be made available.at the time of development-and therefore has no objection to the
annexation. EWEB Electric staff state that there are existing EWEB electric facilities surrounding
this site and that EWEB Electric has no objection to the proposed annexation request.
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 the City of Eugene Fire Department.
. Emergency medical services are currently provided on a regional basis by the cities of Eugen~ and .
Springfield to central Lane County and will continue in the same manner upon annexation.
.. Parks and Recreation '
A minimum level of park service can be provided to the proposal area as prescribed in the Metro'
Plan. Additionally, the subject property is within the park service area for Crescent Park, a
developed neighborhood park, and Striker Field, an undeveloped community .park.
Planning and'Development Services
Planning arid building pennit 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 developme~t of the subject property upon annexation.
Eugene School District 4J (A 08-1)
August 2008,
Page)
'. ..,
Qity COlincil Agenda page 119" ' .
Comm'.lnications
Qwest communications and a variety of other telecommunications providers offer,
communications services throughout the Eugene/Springfield area.
Public Schools
The subject property is within Eugene .school District 4J and is with in the district boundary of
Gilham Element School Cal Youn Middle school, and Sheldon Hi School.'
CONCLUSION:
Based on the above findings, information sub~itted to date, and the criteria set forth in BC 9.7825, the proposed
annexation is found to be 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
In. , .
INFORMATION:
+ :Upon approval ofthe(annex8;tion, the anneXation area will be automatically rezoned to split zoned R-l/AGIND
Low Density Residential and Agricultural with the Nodal Development Overlay. The Metro Plan designates this
property as Low Density Residential. Rezoning consistent with the Metro Plan designation may be required before
development can occur. Please contact the Permit Infonnation Center, Planner-on-Duty at 682-S377 for more
infonnation. ' .
'. The applicant may be required to annex into the Metropolitan Wastewater Special Service District. In order to
, receive wastewater treatment servlCet the property owner will need to submit an annexation request to Lane
County, with a $5,560 fee, based on acreage, for processing the annexation to the special district. Please contact
Stephanie Schulz, -Lane County Public Works, at 682-3958 for more information.
. Lane County Transportation Planning staff recommends that~ for the portion of Co burg Road fronting the subject
property, the City request for the road surrender according tg the Intergovernmental Agreement between the City
,and the County. In the absence of the City requesting this road section to be surrendered, any future development
on the property shall be subject to Lane Code' (LC) C~apter 15 including traffic impact analysis (TIA) (LC 15.697)
when a development proposal adds more than 100 peak hout trips. The TlA shall determine road'improvement
requirements, including, but not limited to, minimum requirements for driveway access to new development,
dedication and improvement requirements (LC 15.105). The' applicant should contact Transportation Planning for
"a scope of the TIA well ahead ofrefeeral for development. Transportation Planning will provide detailed
, comments on t~e referral based on the TIA findings. Please contact Shashi Bajracharya, Lane County
Transportation Planning Division, at 682-6932 fqr more information.
. For infonnation regarding EWEB requirements at the time of development, please contact Jay Bozievich, EWEB
Water, at 684-4759 arid Rich Deluna, EWEB Electric, at 341-8522. . ,
. Approval of this annexation does not relieve the applicant from complying with applicable codes and statutory
requirements.
,'\
. Eugene School District 4J (A 08-1)
August 2008
Page 4
City Council Agenda pa'ge 120
....
I
\.,
(
I,
(