HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit Plumbing 1988-11-14
v-
~
i
i
.Jd..-
/dg7~
.
.
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
November 14, 1988
TO:
Ron LeBlanc, City Manager
Greg Winterowd, Planning and Building Director ~v
COUNCIL
TRANSMITTAL
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
SUBJECT:
"
Request to. Connect to City Sewer on Land Outside
City Limits .
THE ISSUE
The Metro Plan strongly discourages the prOV1Slon of urban services in the
absence of annexation to either Eugene or Springfield. Mr. Grant Elkington, who
lives outside the City limits, has requested to connect to the City sewer line
that, runs beneath Diamond Street and serves River Hills Subdivision (see
Attachment A). Mr. Elkington's intent is to build an addition to his home over
the existing septic drainfield.
BACKGROUND DISCUSSION
Policy II-B-7 of the Metro Plan clearly states that annexation is the means by
which key urban services are provided and land converted from "urbanizable" to
"urban" (city) use. Policy II-B-20 specifies that the preferred method of
providing any new urban service is annexation; the second choice is an annexation
agreement. Policy 21 states that:
"C it i es shall not extend water or san i tary sewer servi ce outs i de the
city limits to serve a residence or business without first obtaining
a valid 'triple majority' annexation petition, a consent to annex
agreement, or ~. health hazard annexation."
There are reasons for these policies. The more services that are provided
outside cities, the less reason unincorporated residents will have to annex to
a city, and so pay.for their share of urban services.
The Diamond Street area where Mr. Elkington lives is an "island" -- in that it
is surrounded by incorporated land. It is possible that the option of "island
annexations" will be removed from Oregon statutes. The Courts have recently
disallowed triple majority annexations, and the validity of annexation
agreements has also been called into question.
Mr. Elkington mentions that Mr. Dick Anstine was allowed by the City to connect
to the same sewer 1 ine in 1981 because he wanted to install a swimming pool.
A review of the minutes of the Council meeting (Attachment B) indicates that a
failing septic tank drainfield was the primary reason. The City Council
.
.
, ,
....
approved Anstine's request, and the Boundary Commission should have approved any
extra-t.erritorial service extensions. There is, however, no record of any
Boundary Commission action in this matter.
Discussions with Paula Taylor of the Boundary Commission staff indicate that
they would be unlikely to approve such a connection based on the policies of the
Metro Plan. The Council clearly does not have the sole authority to approve
such an extension.
There appear to be three options:
(I) What usually happens when non-city residents want to receive City
services is that they get together and sign a petition to annex to the
City. A little old-fashioned perhaps, but this method ensures that urban
services are provided in a coordinated and equitable manner.
(2) The less desirable option is to have Mr. Elkington sign an annexation
agreement -- which has questionable validity in the future should the City
seek to annex the area.
(3) Not build the addition, or build the addition and reconstruct the
drainage field.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends Option I. This is the most effective way to ensure that the
cost of the coordinated provision of urban services are shared equally by the
City residents.
COUNCIL ACTION REOUESTEQ
Denial of Mr. Elkington's request, with encouragement to Mr. Elkington to get
together with his neighbors to request annexation to the City.
J
-
.
.
ATTACHMENT A
;(;:'::~~>>.
J\ .r:.
":'.~-
,:.::.... .......~
. ~:::'
j
Nov~mber 8, 1988
To: Springfield City Council
From: Grant Elkington
1287 Diamond
Springfield, OR 97477
503-747-1406
He: Petition to hook on to sewer
I am requesting special permission to hook onto the sewer service
at my home on 1287 Diamond, Springfield.
We have a need to add additional space
remodeled additicn will cover a portion of
our septic tank.
to
the
our home. and the
fi~ld dr3i~s from
We are surrently in an "island" of county property, totally
surrounded by city. The sewer runs down the middle of Diamond
st. to Aspen and there are laterals run into the property line
along this street. One of my neighbors, Mr. Dick .Anstine,
petitioned the council several years ago and received permission
to 'hook up' because of his desire to install a swimming pool in
his yard.
We have investigated the possibility of re-designing and running
additional field drains and find that the combination of the
cost, the total destruction of our existing backyard, and the
fact that sooner or later we will be annexed into the city make
that option .u~d~sirable.
I have spoken with city staff concerning this issue and also
concerning a building permit to make the addition to our house.
They have indicated that the best option for me is to submit this
petition to the City Council for special permission for sewer
hook-up. They indicated that once that permission is granted
they will proceed with assisting me with building permits et.al.
I hope that .'e can have positive ,"nn tim~ly acti')n on this
request.
Respectfully submitted:
dt~~
~r3nt c. Elkington
;. ...~...
.
.
ATTACHMENT B
City of Springfield
Council Meeti ng
April 6, 1981
"N" Streets, Harry Gorham, of 1227 Elm Street, and Ralph Northrup, of 1841
Market Street, spoke to the Council to protest the manner in which trees in
front of their homes in the public right-of-way were pruned. The citizens
indicated that the pruning was very severe in nature and that no advanced
notice was given to the affected property owners. They indicated that
after the pruning had occurred, they had contacted the Public Works Department
to discuss the problem with them. A neighborhood meeting was held with the
Public Horks staff t6 attempt to alleviate this sort of problem in the future.
A sequence of slides were presented to the Council showing the effects of
the pruning that was done. It was suggested that in the future some sort
of notification be given to the affected property owners and an example of such
a presentation was given to the Council. This was in the form of a door
hanger which could be used to indicate whether or not the citizen wished to
do the pruning themselves. The City Manager reported that the Public Works
staff was working on a better procedure to use next year as the pruning season
for this year has ended. He also encouraged property owners to do their
own trirrming and reported it to the Council that these activities were very
labor intensive and costly to the City.
2. CorresDondence f~om Ro~t Thrall, Attorney for McKenzie-Willamette
Memorial Hosoital, Reouesti~g~acation of a Portion of the Northwest Corner
of "G" Street at the Inter~ion of 16th and "G" Streets, and a Sliver of
Mohawk Bou 1 evard Located ,B"etwe~"G" and "I" Streets. Ri cha rd Ens tei n, of
1154 Diamond Street, requested the Council's permission to hook-up to the
City's sewer system. Mr. Enstein reported that his drain field is failing
and that since his property is potentially going to be annexed to the City
of Springfield, he would rather not build a new drain field which would
subsequently not be utilized. The City Manager reported to the Council that
the land in question is an island within the City of Springfield and, thus,
is eligible to be annexed. He reported that the staff is investigating the
annexation issue of this land. Councilor Rennie asked exactly how many
people are living in this island area. City Planner, Dick Johnson, reported
that approximately 1300 people are in the affected Menlo Park area. It Nas
moved by. Councilor Carter, with a second by Councilor Hulett to (1) approve
an exception to the City sewer connection policy because this property is
located in an island surrounded by the City; (2) direct the staff to work
with Mr. Enstein on the details for his sewer connection and the results
involved; and (3) direct the staff to investigate the advantages and . .
disadvantages of annexation of the Menlo Park area. The motion passed unani-
mously.
PERI.1ANENT REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMfmSION - March 18. 1981
It was moved by Councilor Larson, with a second by Councilor Rennie,
to approve the Permanent Report of the Planning Corrmission of March 18, 1981.
The motion passed unanimously.
CORRESPONDENCE AND PETITIONS
1. CorresDondence from Patricia A. Vallerand. Attorney for Verail and
-44-
"
~
. .
,
.
.
.
M E M 0 RAN DUM
City of Springfiela
November 10, 1988
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Greg Winterowa, Planning ana Builaing Director
Cinaie Harmon, Development Permit coorainator~
REQUEST TO CONNECT TO CITY SEWER FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE
URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY
As per your request the following information is proviaea.
We contactea Paula Taylor of L~COG regaraing the possibility of Bounaary
Commission action being requirea for this type of request. Ms. Taylor passea
along the following information to Greg Mott.
If the City of Springfiela chooses to allow connection to the sewer system
through Annexation Agreement/Consent to Annex forms it will requires an extra-
territorial annexation which must be approved by the Boundary Commission. It
is not likely the Bounaary Commission coula approve such a request based on
Metro Plan policy.
The City of Eugene aoes not proviae this option for it's UGB resiaents basea on
the City's interpretation of Plan policy founa in Chapter II of the Metro Plan.
With regara to Mr. Elkin~ton's comments on Mr. Anstine ~ 1154 Diamona Street I
have reviewea the City s recoras. The City Council approvea by motion Mr.
Anstine request to connect to City sewer during the Business from the Auaience
portion of the April 6, 1981 Council meeting (minutes attached). I fina no
record of any Boundary Commission acknowleagment of this approval.
Aaaitionally, the Metro Plan policy's mentionea above haa not been acknowleaged
at the time of this approval.
(
~
.
.
. .
.
.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
SPRINGFIELD CITY COUNCIL HELD MONDAY,
APRIL 6, 1981
The City of Springfield Council met in Regular Session in the Springfield
Utility Board Meeting Room, 250 North "A" Street, Springfield, Oregon, on
Monday, April 6, 1981, at 7:30 p.m., with Mayor John Lively presiding.
ATTENDANCE
Present were Mayor Lively, Council Members Hulett, Rennie, Carter,
Larson, Herring and Eilers. Also present were the City Manager, the Finance
Director-Recorder, the City Attorney, and members of the staff.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor Lively.
I NVOCA TI ON
The invocation was given by Pastor Gerald Conrad, Springfield Lutheran
Church.
MINUTES
It was moved by Councilor Hulett, with a second by Councilor Herring, to
approve the minutes of the regular meeting of March 16, 1981, and the
adjourned meeting of March 23, 1981. The motion passed unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Zone Change Request for Property Located in the Area East of North
42nd Street and West of Hayden Bridqe on the North Side of Marcola Road, from
M-3 Heavy Industrial District to R-l Single Family Residential District. The
City Manager introduced the issue and referred to the March 30,1981, memo
to the Council from Assistant Planner, Sally Sharrard. This memo discusses
changes that are required in order for the City of Springfield to be in
compliance with the Metro Plan. Mr. Burkett indicated that a review was
on-going into properties that were not in compliance and that this zone change
represented the first of a number of zone changes that would be made to come
into compliance. Planning Director, Dick Johnson, used a large map to
illustrate the area in question to the Council. The issue was then opened
to the public and no one appeared to speak for or against the proposed zone
change. There is legislation for this item on the Consent Calendar, and it
was also included as an agenda item under Business from the City Manager.
BUSINESS FROM THE AUDIENCE
l.
Strips.
Petition Regardinq Maintenance and Pruninq of Trees in Parkinq
Kathy and ~le 1 Ewey, of 1345 "L" Street, Judy Bowman, of 13th and
-43-