HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 5911 02/16/1999
.
.
.
to
f'
ORDINANCE NO. 5911
(SPECIAL) I
WHEREAS, the property to be withdrawn is located within the boundaries of the
Rainbow Water District, and
WHEREAS, the City of Springfield City Council held a public; hearing and first reading
in the Springfield City Council Chambers on February 1, 1999, and a second reading on
February 16, 1999 in accordance with ORS 222.524, for the purpose of hearing any
objections to the withdrawal of the property mentioned from the public service district
mentioned and there having been ~ objections raised.
NOW THEREFORE THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Council of the City of Springfield does hereby determine that the real
property described should be in the best interest of the City of Springfield withdrawn from
the Rainbow Water District in Lane County, Oregon, insofar as the property is located
therein.
Section 2: The Common Council of the City of Springfield does hereby determine
that the following described real property within the boundaries. of the Rainbow Water
District is and shall be upon the effective date of this ordinance withdrawn from the Rainbow
Water District in Lane County, Oregon, said property being described as follows:
I
Township 17 South, Range 3 West, Section 23, part of Tax Lot 1003; as more particularly
I
described in Exhibit A of Attachment 2 of this ordinance, Boundar't Commission Final Order
I
Number. 1043 (C SP 95-43).
ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Sprin~field this 16th day of
February, 1999, by a vote of L for and ~ against. I
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this 16th Iday of February, 1999.
'-jJ~Atv'1vt. ~~
Mayor
~ '
ATTEST. <-,~
City Recorder
REVIEWED & APPROVED
A~~. F~R~ ~
o A T6: :.:l...( \ '\.
OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY
regon
I
Lane Colirlty Local GovernmJnt Boundary Commission
125 East 8th Avenue
North Plaza Level, PSB
Eugene, OR 97401-6807
(541) 682-4425
FAX (541) 682-4099
. I
,-
John A. Kilzhaber, M.D., Governor
ORDINANCE NO. 5911
. January 5,1999
Ms. Julie Wilson, Recorder
City of Springfield
225 5th Street
Springfield, Oregon 97477
Dear Ms. Wilson:
,
I
The enclosed final orders have been enacted by the Lane County Local: Government Boundary
Commission and are forwarded in confonnance with ORS 199.505.
Final Order 1043 (C SP 95 - 43) annexing territory to the City of Springfield
(River Glen Subdivision)
.
Final Order 1102 (C SP 97 - 11) annexing territory to, the City of Springfield
(Callie Court Apartments)
Final Order 1103 (C SP 97 - 18) annexing territory to! the City of Springfield
(River Glen 1 sl/2nd Additions)
Please acknowledge receipt of these final orders
Sincerely.
~e-~
Steven C. Gordon 0V
Executi ve Officer
SCG:pt
Enclosures
cc: Rainbow Water District
Willamalane Park and Recreation District
.
1",' I.CBC: L:\BC\FOI.\PH\199C1\CSP954J FOLDOC
Lasl StJvtd: Dtctmbtr 2R. 199R
Attachment 2
2-1
2
P13100
"
.
.
.
I
ORDINANCE NO. 5911 I
I
LANE COUNTY LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION
. I
FINAL ORDER 1043 ( File C SP 95 - 43 I
( In the Matter of Anrlexing the
I
Approved: April 6, 1995 ( Following Described Territory
Effective: January 4, 1999 ( To the City of Spridgfield
_ Legal Description Attached as Exhibit A -
I
I
WHEREAS, Resolution 95-12 of the City of Springfield was filed on March 7, 1995,
for annexation of the territory described in attached Exhibit A and shown on attached map
Exhibit B to the City of Springfield, in accordance with ORS 199.490(2)(B); and,
. I
WHEREAS, the commission duly published notice of public hearing in accordance
with ORS 199.463 and in accordance with the rules of the commissiorl and ORS 199.452(1),
conducted a public hearing on Apri16, 1995; and, i
I
1
WHEREAS, on the basis of the study of the proposal, whic~ considered economic,
demographic, and sociological trends and physical development of the land, and of the public
hearing, the commission approved the proposal and made the findings ~nd reasons attached as
Exhibit c. i .
NOW THEREFORE IT IS O.RDERED: That the area described be a part of the City
of Springfield. !
i
ORDERED BY THE LANE COUNTY LOCAL GOVE~MENT BOUNDARY
COMMISSION THIS 6TH DAY OF APRIL, 1995.
I
~ L'~1'Q~A i
John Lively, Chair \ I
4/(, 13'i I
Date
NOTE: The territory is in the Rainbow Water District will remain ,in the district until after
the effective date of the annexation, when it will be withdrawn throagh separate proceedings
by the City of Springfield in accordance with ORS 222. !
Upon the effective date of the annexation, in accordance with ORS :199.510(2)(c), the above
described territory is hereby a part of the Willamalane Park and Recreation District and the
Lane County Metropolitan Wastewater Service District, a county service district organized
under ORS 4S 1, which is part of the City of Springfield. !
dt: LCBC: P:IBC\FOLlPHlJ99S1CSP9S4J.FO
Last S4vtd: Aprl16. 1995
2-2
3
.
.
.
ORDINANCE NO. 5911
EXHIBIT A
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE WM. STEVENS DONATION LAND
I
CLAIM NO. 46IN TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST, ~LLAMETTE MERIDIAN;
THENCE SOUTH 890 53' 00" EAST A DISTANCE OF 1464.4~ FEET; THENCE NORTH
000 13' 30" EAST A DISTANCE OF 39.20 FEET; THENCE NORTH 000 13' 30" EAST A
I
DISTANCE OF 1245.58 FEET; THENCE NORTH 830 35' 48~ EAST A DISTANCE OF
593.19 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 320 32' 09" EAST A DISTANCE OF 133.04 FEET;
I
THENCE SOUTH 260 11' 33" EAST A DISTANCE OF 81.67 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 490
I
30' 46" EAST A DISTANCE OF 122.26 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 510 50' 21" EAST A
I
DISTANCE OF 173.44 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 55032' 35" EAST A DISTANCE OF 221.88
I .
FEET; THENCE SOUTH 590 33' 03" EAST A DISTANCE OF 138.40 FEEr; THENCE
SOUTH 660 24' 29" EAST A DISTANCE OF 135.55 FEEr; TIffiNCE SOUTH 730 01' 05"
EAST A DISTANCE OF 153.66 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73041' 47" EAST A DISTANCE
I
OF 155.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 870 50' 21".EAST A DISTANCE OF 155.03 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 000 18' 20" WEST A DISTANCE OF 974.05 PEEr TO A POINT ON THE
NORTHERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE RELOCATED HAYDEN BRIDGE ROAD, SAID
POINT BEING THIRTY FEET FROM WHEN MEASURED P'ERPENDICULAR TO THE
CENTERLINE THEREOF AND WHICH POINT IS THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE NORTH 890 21' 47" WEST ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY A DISTANCE OF
629.76 FEET; THENCE LEAVING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY NORTH 000 06' 13" EAST A
DISTANCE OF 115.55 FEET; THENCE NORTH 5005' 29" EAST A DISTANCE OF 60.17
FEET; THENCE NORTH 000 01' 20" WEST A DISTANCE OF 102.37 FEET; THENCE
NORTH 870 00' 41" WEST A DISTANCE OF 31.07 FEET; 'NfENCE NORTH 40 44' 59"
EAST A DISTANCE OF 85.58 FEET; THENCE NORTH 30 47' 18" EAST A DISTANCE
OF 60.82 FEEr; THENCE NORTH 30 20' 34" EAST A D[STANCE OF 90.84 FEET;
THENCE NORTH 000 15' 37" EAST A DISTANCE OF 90.15 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50
27' 12" WEST A DISTANCE OF 62.33 FEET; THENCE NORTH 110 15' 24" EAST A
DISTANCE OF 118.07 FEET; THENCE NORTH 75023"46" WEST A DISTANCE OF 45.04
FEET; THENCE NORTH 220 16' 45" EAST A DISTANCE IOF 127.77 FEEr; THENCE
NORTH 27057' 25" EAST A DISTANCE OF 59.50 FEET; THENCE NORTH 26020' 45"
I
EAST A DISTANCE OF 130.89 FEET; THENCE ALONG THE ARC OF A NON-TANGENT
1889.83 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFf, HAVING ~ CENTRAL ANGLE OF 160
59' 44" AND A CHORD BEARING SOUTH 73028' 05- EAS~ 558.52 FEET, A DISTANCE
OF 560.58 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 000 18' 20" WEST A DISTANCE OF 931.64 FEET TO
THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. :
Final Order 1043
C SP 95 - 43
Page 1 of.l
RF.GI:--'TLi:Ei) .,
PROFESSIOi'l.:"i. t. I
LAND SUiNt: ,Cf? .
~ L~~" :
~:O~--:1_ ~_~_
~\~ ,:;::;~::1. ATTACH~~T. 2~
fXP;l\!f. 1Z./3119"5-~ I ~~--~--
. ,
ORIHNANCENO. 5911
EXHIBIT B
.
.
4-04 l
1),10 I $( COt"., .
..
.,
A 0
J ....f ~
..
0
:I
23 0
0
.,
-I
'.
..... - ~ p'l\^J fr'~tJ. UI4t\.I'~
/,;t" cir:t.f ~h~eI.I. -l
Z5 ~Z$
c," J
/7- 03- 23
fttrr 01 fr;t~/()1- 100::;
.
Final Order 1043
C SP 95 - 43
Page L of 1
I~---'-- ---------------,
: ATTA~H~ENT 2.4 I
. .
. Findin2s:
,...., ....)0..:..,..,
..:.,..<.
ORDINANC~ NO. 5911
EXHIBIT C
,'.
1. Two proposals-one annexation and one extraterritorial sewer extension-were initiated
with the boundary commission on March 7, 1995. The anne1xation was initiated by
Springfield City Council Resolution 95-12 in accordance ~ith provision of ORS
199.490(2)(B). The City of Springfield requested an extraterritorial sewer in
accordance with ORS 199.464. Both proposals were deemed by staff to constitute valid
filings under OAR 191-06. , i
i
I
2. The City of Springfi~ld requested a delayed effective date of Jan~ary 2, 1998, as allowed
by ORS 199.495(1). The City of Springfield requested a drlayed effective date to
capture the value of development in its tax base. If the annexation was effective Apri16,
1995, (which it would be without the delay) the city's tax base )vould only increase by a
multiple of the existing (undeveloped) assessed value instead: of the developed value
which will be greater. The boundary commission set an effective date of January 4,
1999-the first working. day after the January 1 holiday. ~ extraterritorial sewer
extension was submitted to allow for a sewer line to be extended outside the city limits
d. th . I
an fito e annexatlOn area. :
I
3. The proposed ::I: 14.6 acre annexation and sewer extension inv6lves a portion of one tax
lot (T17S R03W S23 part of tax lot 1003). The area is not contiguous to the City of
Springfield. Low-density residential development is proposed fpr the annexation area.
.
.
4. The land is zoned LDRlUF-10, low-clensity residential with urbanizing fringe overlay, in
Lane County and is designated low-density residential in the M~tropolitan Plan.
i
Provide an impartial forum for resolution of local jurisdictional )questions. Consider the
effects of the boundary change on other units of governments. ORS 199.410(1)(b) and
199.410(3)(c)
I .
The boundary commission held a public hearing on April 6, 1995. Notice of the public
hearing was given in accordance with ORS 199 provisions. All interested parties were
given a reasonable opportunity to be heard. I
Upon the effective date of the annexation, the area will be annexed automatically to the
Lane County Metropolitan Wastewater Service District arid Will~malane Park and
Recreation District in accordance with ORS 199.510(2)(c).
I
I
The Rainbow Water District will provide water and fire services to the annexation area
. I
until the effective date of the annexation. After the annexation effective date, the City
of Springfield will withdraw this area from the water distri~t in accordance with ORS
222.
Final Order 1043
C SP 95 - 43
Page 1 of 3
5.
6.
7.
2-5
.
.
.
ORDINANCE NO. 5911
'". "-_;~;'.j.'~.','f'"
.",' .
8.
These proposals are consistent with this standard.
Consider the orderly detennination and adjustment of local government boundaries to best
meet the needs of Lane County and Oregon. Consider alterrlative solutions where
intergovernmental options are identified and make decisions based I on the most effective
long-range option among identified alternatives. ORS 199.410(1), 199.410(2), and
. I
199.410(3)(a) and (e) j
I
I
9. The proposed annexation is not contiguous to the Springfield citY limits. Annexation to
the City of Springfield has been identified in the acknowled'ged Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area yeneral Plan as the preferred method fo~ providing urban level
services to a new developing area (implementing policy #20a, page ll-B-7).
,
I
10. The proposed annexation meets the criteria for noncontiguous ~nnexations in boundary
commission law and the Metropolitan Plan. i
11. Annexation to an existing city is the method for extending urbah services to urbanizable
land in the boundary commission's policy administrative rule, implementing policies (1),
(2), (5) and (7) (OAR 191~ Division 30). Delaying the effective date of annexation does
not change the fact that this property is being annexed by this action.
I
12. The proposed annexation is the means of boundary change outlined in both the
Metropolitan Plan and boundary commission administrative rules for ultimately serving
this territory. !
13.. Both proposals are consistent with boundary commission policies and this standard.
Make boundary commission delenninations whil:h are consis1en1lwith acknowledged local
comprehensive plans. Assure an adequate quality and quantity of ]?ublic services required in
the comprehensive plan to meet existing and future growth. For kajor boundary changes,
there must be assurance that the proposed unit of government is II financially viable. ORS
199.410(l)(d), 199.410(3)(b) and (d)
I
14. The annexation and sewer extension are within the urbani growth boundary of the
acknowledged Metropolitan Area General Plan (LCDC actioh in 1982 and subsequent
amendments). . I
15. The Metropolitan Area General Plan recognizes annexation rl the Ci:Y of Springfield as
the desired option for servicing newly developing areas I within the urban growth
boundary east of 1-5. The city interprets a delayed effective I date annexation and sewer
extension to fulfill this Metropolitan Plan policy direction. I
16. The current zoning is consistent with the Metropolitan Area deneral Plan.
,
Final Order 1043
C SP 95 - 43
. Page 2 of 3
2-6
.
.
.
.' . '~~i,:f~."'-jt.~,.,...,:.
. .
ORDINANCE NO. 5911
17. The City of Springfield has indicated that the required slervices as outlined in
Metropolitan Plan policy 117, p. II-B-4, are either available or can be provided in a
timely manner. I
18. Both proposals are consistent with this standard. i
I
I
I
Consider the comprehensive plan 's economic, demographic, and ;sociological trends and
projections and its environmental policies, pertinent to the proposal. I ORS 199.410(3)(d) and
199.462(1) i .
!
19. Both proposals are consistent with the Metropolitan Plan. The! urban growth boundary,
.
land uses, and policies in the Metropolitan Plan were developed to meet the future needs
I
of the metropolitan' community. I
!
20. Both proposals are consistent with this standard.
Reasons:
I
I
1. The annexation and sewer proposals are supported by the City of Springfield and the
property owners.
2. Both proposals are consistent'with the LCDC acknowledged M~tropolitan Plan.
3. The services required in the Metropolitan Plan are either available or can be provided in
a timely manner when needed.
4.
Both proposals are consistent with boundary commission admirtistrative rule policies.
I
I
I
cie: LCBC: P:\BClFOLIEXClJ99SICSP9S4J.EXC
Last Saved: June 26, 1995
Final Order 1043
C SP 95 - 43
Page 3 of 3
2-7